Re-Raise
Well-Known Member
To an extent, I agree. As drivers we must be held to a higher standard and we must continually strive to avoid accidents.
The problem is this. As a management person with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight and from behind the safety and comfort of a desk, you will always be able to second-guess any action that I did or do not take and you will always be able to fabricate a reason why a particular accident may have been theoretically "avoidable" on my part.
You speak of the "credibility" of the process. The process has no credibility when we "charge" a driver with an "avoidable" accident for hitting a dog running loose on a public road. The process has no credibility when we "charge" a driver with an "avoidable" accident when he is legally parked and away from the vehicle and another motorist hits the package car. The process has no credibility when we "charge" a driver with an "avoidable" accident for scratching a package car in the AM when the decision has been made to park the cars so close as to be touching one another due to building overcrowding.
You have every right to place high expectations upon us. But you do not have the right to expect us to take those expectations seriously when they are ridiculous, arbitrary, and totally divorced from reality.
The reality of the current system....is that those who are charged with determining the "avoidabliity" of a given accident are often less concerned with finding the truth and more concerned with simply generating paperwork in order to justify and perpetuate their own jobs.
I have to tell you, I completely agree with every post you make.
Your experiences at UPS and your perception of them are exactly the same as mine.