The claims stemmed from Swift’s alleged policy requiring drivers to stay in the immediate vicinity of their trucks if they were carrying high-value loads and were in a high-theft area. The drivers alleged that they were entitled to be paid for that time because they were working, even though their status was off-duty.
Swift moved for summary judgment, saying only a very few of its loads were high value and that trips were planned so ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
Learn About Bloomberg Law
AI-powered legal analytics, workflow tools and premium legal & business news.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools.