What to do?

[TAB]

single guy in his 20s, has a MBA from UCLA...   in this econ, that degree is only useful as toilet paper and he knows it.  What I'm hung up on, is its not a moving violation.  If it was... they were prewarned about them in the handbook and paper worked they signed at the time of hiring.  The check would already be made out and 1st thing monday morning he would be getting it.


No where does it say a non moving violation ticket will get you fired( but I can think of a few parking tickets that would)

reguardless the hand book/ paper work is going to be edited to fix it and it will be brought up in on monday morning meeting.

[TAB]

Now that this is public he has to be fired or put through a corrective training course.  This information is too easy to discover.  So, if there is an accident that is no fault of you or your employees and it comes out you did not remove or train the offender you'll pay hell in court.  There is a very good chance this information posted on the board could be used to form the tipping point that throws reason out.  

Bottom line, if there is a future accident failure to remove the employee...or put him through a corrective driving course...opens you up to additional liability and a "pattern" that, though it may not actually exist, will be shown in court against you.

Sux, but that's how it is.  Spend money on training one and you'll need to do it for the next one or create a written policy for termination that did not exist in this time period or that was modified after this incident. 

Now, training can be tailored to your needs and does not have to be a "big box" provider.  There are a lot of mom and pop guys who come onsite...employee cost for non-productive time is higher than the mom and pop stopping by.  A good friend, now deceased, used to train oilfield personnel for all sorts of exposure, including automotive.  You may want to start in the oilfield world because those guys are very mobile and can tailor an effective program that may cover you simply with giving the employees study materials to take home and then come in and take a 15 minute test.  Sounds like a sham perhaps...but will be as good as gold in a future court case.

if he stays he will be going thru traffic school and/or he will be a ride along employee only.  that was already determeined.

[Solus]

TAB,

The NMA, National Motorists Association, protects the rights of motorists and they are staunchly against Red Light Cameras.

They have shown that the companies who run the cameras are often given the ability to adjust the timing of the red lights and they do so to maximize violations by reducing the length of the yellow light, making it very easy to enter the intersection on the red.

This practice does much to INCREASE accidents along with ticket revenue.

You might want to check out there take on Red Light Cameras here http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/objections

And anyone might want to check them out overall here  http://www.motorists.org/

Lots of info on how speed limits are set in violation of highway engineering standards, again to increase revenue while sacrificing safety.  Some Legal defense advice/assistance available also.

[Solus]

BTW, the reason it is a fine instead of a ticket is because it may not hold up in court.  The defendant cannot possibly question the witness to his "alleged" offense.   

[tombogan03884]

If you have an "Employee Handbook" you are supposed to have a documented disciplinary policy. If it is not stated that running a red light is grounds for firing then you have to go through the process.
Since he's an OK worker, I would say nothing more than 3 days off and no more driving.

[Sponsor]

[fullautovalmet76]

If I were the employee I think I would be looking for a job even I'm not terminated. Now I have a boss who has a hard-on for me, and nothing I do from here will ever be right.

TAB, no offense, but I can see where this is heading. You want to fire him, so go ahead and fire him and get it over with.

[kmitch200]

thats actually a big no-no.  I could go to court and fight the claim, saying I was not the driver, but here is the catch, I have to turn over the person that was, which inturn since he was on the clock it will get kicked back to me.
Its not a cheap fine, its $572.

CA laws sure are strange.
How does turning in the driver kick it back to you? Isn't that the REASON for turning in the actual driver in the first place?
If he commits an armed robbery while on the clock is that yours too? Doesn't make any sense....but a LOT in CA doesn't make any sense.

If he is an OK worker and it's going to cost you a buttload more money to replace him, document, punish, improve the employee and move on.

[tombogan03884]

I don't know how Ca is, but when my Dad was hauling gas vehicle violations , plates, tires etc, were on the company.
Traffic violations, speeding, rail road tracks etc were on the driver.

[Big Frank]

He should pay the fine if he wants to keep his job.

[Solus]

He should pay the fine if he wants to keep his job.

or fight it which should be, but may not be, his right.  That is also why it is not a "ticket" ...no law broken, no right to a trial.