Werner Trucking Werner treating a driver, and their family who was near death in an unprofessional manner, refusing to pay any benefits whatsoever. Omaha Nebraska

you know all i have to say is your an a*s hole and  no nothing about trucking or united states dot regs

man if you going to commant on something like this why dont you know what the f**k your talking about

ps to the wife of the driver i am sad and sick at what happend

Working for any of these training companies has become a safety issue. People like C.L. Werner are billionaires and made their money cheating drivers out of their final pay checks and collections on driving schools trainee failures.  Officials with the Omaha Press Club say they will honor trucking executive C.L. Werner as the next "Face on the Barroom Floor." Werner will be saluted with a roast and toast on Sept. 8. Not only are they billionaires they own the president and congress. Unlike these others who feel this is a cover up; it is a "pattern or pracrice" with self insured trucking companies to deny all claims. Just like stealing your last paycheck and filing DAC reports to blacklist experienced drivers who do not keep their "code of silence" on illegal activity. Knowing that these training companies have a history, and when the EEOC filed a complaint against one of them; Judge Reade acknowledged 146 female trainee drivers "variously suffered physical, mental and/or emotional abuse at the hands of their male trainer co-drivers and lead drivers." Additionally the Judge said there was evidence of male drivers crawling into women's bunks uninvited, ordering women off trucks and tossing their belongings out of cabs, and of male drivers punching, kicking, grabbing, fondling and "raping" female drivers. At truck stops some of these trainers brag about holding down and raping female trainees; others just claim it is a "pass or fail" option in training. I have even talked with trainers who claim they prefer the male trainees because they are less likely to tell. You see all work comp claims are denied; so are all sexual harassment claims denied, all OSHA STAA claims are denied, all repairs on trailers denied, all deaths from accidents denied. I would not call what is slapped in the publics face as a cover up. It is corporate policy that deals with the government with lobbyists money.

I just started with warner and I will be on the lookout for any problem like the one you guys are talking about. I wish that lady all the luck in the world.

Steve offered: "First of all, as this driver's 'fiance', you have no legal standing in this, nor do you have a legal right to obtain any information about him or the case, unless you have a signed and notorized power of attorney."

She was listed on his application as the person to contact in the case of emergency. That gives her the right to be in the loop by default and was she was legally and clearly authorized by the man himself on that application for employment to be informed. It appears there was some confusion as to the events, or deception as the case may be, but she had the right to certain information as to his whereabouts at all times, and from appearances, that information was not related as it should have been to her.

She was contacted SIXTEEN days after the incident occurred, and then only to find out what to do with the man's personal items. I find that completely callous. I think she has EVERY right to be upset here.

Steve Offered: "Unless you have such a power of attorney, the hospital, Werner, and the detective would be in violation of the law discussing anything with you."

Werner was not exempt from divulging any information that they were aware of, and in fact had an obligation under the law to notify her the minute they were aware of his being beaten, hospitalized, and/or his whereabouts, ESPECIALLY given the fact that she had been calling them on a daily basis, looking for him, and as the designated person of contact. The hospital and the detective were not held to the same legal standards, because his wishes were obviously not communicated to them.

For all practical purposes on that application, a legal document in definition by the way, she was listed as "next of kin".

Steve Offered: "Second, nobody knows what provoked the beating. As a former OTR truck driver, I can tell you that tension is high out there and it only takes a certain look or comment to set someone off. I know this first hand, as I have been in that situation."

While what you say may be true, it is an irrelevant issue as to WHY he was attacked, at least UNTIL such a point and time that there is evidence to suggest in any way that the attack was in some way provoked by something he may or may not have done. The issue was that he was attacked apparently while he was performing an on-duty task related to his job. If he was on-duty and performing a task related to his job, his injuries are required to be covered under Worker's Compensation rules.

An immediate denial was unjust, and without any legal merit, and an Attorney fresh from passing the bar exam could effect a legal overturn of that decision.

Steve Offered: "Third, as far as the workmans comp issue goes, there are many factors involved. The first is whether he was actually an employee, or whether he was leased on to them."

I see nothing to suggest that he was a contractor. She presented him as an employee of the company. If there was ANY conversation at all about Worker's Compensation, then he must have been an employee of the company.

Steve Offered: There are many holes in this story, and I fail to see the rip off here on the part of Werner. Did someone at Werner beat your fiance? I don't see the rip off here."

First of all, let's try to understand that the woman is extremely distraught at the moment. She has quite a bit on her plate, and of course would not be expected to fill in all the gaps. She is angry, and I consider her anger to be rather well placed. For 16 days, she had no idea where her fiance was, and she was entitled to at least a minimal amount of information by Werner Enterprises. This is the year 2008, and not the Victorian era. Even people that live together with no marital bonds are and should be considered family.

Given the fact, and I have no reason not to take her at her word, that she was listed on his application as the person to contact in case of emergency, she should have been contacted immediately, and not 16 days after the fact for a completely different purpose. Surely you can see that something is lacking there, can't you?

The fact that he was in a hospital under an assumed name bothers me greatly, and I fail to understand why that was done, and safety concerns just doesn't cut it in my book, but she obviously has not been privy to why that was done either. It's almost as if they did not WANT her to be able to locate him for some reason. And if they had legal concerns about releasing information to her, what about other family? Did they not have a right to know where he was and what had happened to him? They certainly had an obligation to let SOMEONE know something, and I refer to the fact that she was listed on the application to be notified person in such an event. Their marital or any other connection status does not matter. He clearly listed her as the person to be notified.

I work for a company that is so legally aware, it is not funny, but I know full and well that they would not allow something like this to happen. They would inform someone immediately and it would absolutely be the person listed on the application as the designated contact. I do not list my wife as that person, because I don't want her to have to deal with alone, the emotional blast that would occur if she were contacted in the event of my death or severe injury. I list my father. He can then handle the situation as he sees fit to let everyone else in the family know of the circumstance, and to be there with them to deal with those emotions.

Steve, you may not be aware of Werner's reputation, but that company is crap, and everything surrounding this incident and the way it went down, as presented of course, smells of a cover-up and an obscuring of events for the sole purpose of reducing any liability for this man's medical expenses, both now and in the future.

To treat this woman as she has been treated is absolutely wrong, and she should not have been denied access to a minimal amount of information, in order to have had opportunity to be at his side early on after it happened. I'd be VERY angry as well.

This is more than a "rip-off". This is a complete travesty and a denial of responsibility that the Government has forced upon businesses that employ people to work for them, because of similar treatment like this of people in cases where people are fine and dandy while they are able to work, and thrown away when something happens to disrupt that.

And you fail to see it? I'm a former employer myself, and I see the problem with no reservation whatsoever.

I'll reserve further comment.

First of all, as this driver's "fiance", you have no legal standing in this, nor do you have a legal right to obtain any information about him or the case, unless you have a signed and notorized power of attorney.

Unless you have such a power of attorney, the hospital, Werner, and the detective would be in violation of the law discussing anything with you.

Second, nobody knows what provoked the beating. As a former OTR truck driver, I can tell you that tension is high out there and it only takes a certain look or comment to set someone off. I know this first hand, as I have been in that situation.

Third, as far as the workmans comp issue goes, there are many factors involved.

The first is whether he was actually an employee, or whether he was leased on to them.

The second is whether he was ON DUTY at the time. This is very important. What did his log say? I know Werner runs electronic logs and GPS. They knew exactly where he was, and what his duty status was.

FYI...ALL major truckstops have security cameras / digital recordings of all fuel islands and all common areas around the building. The attack would have been recorded if it was on the truck stop property. I know this for a fact.

There are many holes in this story, and I fail to see the rip off here on the part of Werner.

Did someone at Werner beat your fiance? I don't see the rip off here.

First of all, I am very sorry to read a story like this. I hope and pray that your fiance will recover, at least enough to be able to see justice from any of this.

I'm equally saddened to see a company the size of Werner turn their back in the way you describe on a man who worked for them for as long as you stated he did. It speaks volumes about them, but based on the track record of that company, I'm not surprised in the least to read of such a thing being done by Werner Enterprises. They run a close second to another large company for the most complaints that can be found online against them.

If it can be demonstrated to a conclusive degree that the assault that occurred to your fiance did happen at any point and time that he was fueling the truck, then you have Werner Enterprises by the gonads.

Fueling the truck is widely accepted by all, including the Federal Government (per the FMCSR's) as a job duty of a driver, and it is to be recorded as on-duty, not-driving time in the logbook. That being the case, from the time he departed the truck's cab environment to fuel, to going in to pay for that fuel, and right up to the point and time he returns to that cab, he is on-duty, and therefore considered performing a task related to his job.

Werner had no basis for denying Worker's Compensation benefits, and no court would find otherwise. All you have to do is to hire a competent Attorney to go after them.

I do have some advice for you, and a tidbit of info that an Attorney can subpoena for proof that he was where he was, and to pinpoint times, dates, etc.

Subpoena the fuel purchase record at the truck stop and any records related to the transaction through Werner Enterprises, the fuel card provider (for God's sake...keep that card just as it is and do not give it to a soul except an Attorney AFTER you have signed a representation agreement contract). If by chance your fiance had used HIS fuel card to authorize the pump to purchase the fuel before he was attacked, Werner is nailed to the wall with no argument under the sun that could be offered against the fact that he was indeed working at the time he was attacked.

Even if he did not have time to use his fuel card to turn on the pump before he was attacked, information could be discovered as to where the truck was parked when the driver was attacked. Again, if it was without question and witnessed to be on the fuel island, ditto the above. Werner has no wiggle room at all.

Werner is required under Federal law to have their fuel transactions records on file for no less than six months after the date of purchase. So don't wait...get a good Attorney on the case ASAP!!!

Take care of that man...and God be with both of you.

And to Werner Enterprises...you should be totally ashamed, and I received a great deal of pleasure in offering a little insight into how to legally FORCE your company to do what is right. You carry the insurance for cases like this, and this is a case where it should have not been even in doubt as to whether the man was covered or not.

I hope they clean your clock.