Blog

Facing driver shortage, trucking industry looks to fill jobs quickly

December 16, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

If you’re looking for headlines, look no further than the U.S. trucking industry. Monday’s segment detailing the shortage of truck drivers in the U.S. sparked one of the more interesting conversations among our team in recent weeks, and it took some reading-between-the-lines to get to the heart of what this shortage could mean for pedestrian drivers.

Earlier in November, National Public Radio uncovered that the trucking industry is facing a drought of nearly 48,000 drivers in the next year or so, based on industry-collected data. Such a drastic dip led some industry experts to predict bad news for the economy and consumers. From our perspective it could be pedestrian drivers that ultimately feel the hurt of such a drought.

NPR’s latest segment, which aired Monday morning, followed up on the November report by looking at ways the trucking industry is dealing with such a major shortfall. The gist: desperate times call for desperate measures. NPR started looking into major trucking schools like the APEX CDL Institute in Kansas City, which is apparently cranking out drivers at a rapid-fire rate. One can’t help wonder if the industry is moving too swiftly for its own good.

And here’s the portion that piqued our curiosity: NPR interviewed an Army retiree named Wayne Berry. Berry got wind of the need for truck drivers from a friend so he reached out to someone at APEX CDL. Based on what Berry says, a person at APEX decided to offer him a job on the spot.

“…they were like, ‘Yeah, we’ll take you.’ So I have a pre-hire letter from this company,” Berry told NPR, saying that the company had committed to hiring him before he knew how to drive a truck. More surprising, the head of APEX did little to quell the notion that hiring untested drivers was anything less than a good idea.

“Anybody will hire him,” said Jeff Steinberg, head of APEX CDL school. “I would have recruiters get in knife fights for him out in the parking lot to try to get him to come to work for them.”

Talk like that isn’t necessarily comforting. Berry might be an isolated case, but such candor had us raising our flags. The trucking industry has taken heat for lax standards in the past. It’s perhaps not a stretch to suggest that Berry’s situation is part of a bigger issue that could have legal implications in the future.

Drive training protocols have come under heavy criticism in the past for failing to adequately prepare drivers, and for its relatively lax standards. Even a newly conceived transportation bill, set to go into effect January 1, is looking to curb some audacious proposals, like allowing teen drivers to get behind the wheel of a big rig. Safety advocates may have won that battle, but there are other safety battles on the horizon.

That’s not to say there hasn’t been something positive coming about from the trucking shortfall. In fact, the NPR report detailed some examples of how trucking companies are trying new methods to retain its core of experienced drivers— bumping pay and getting them back home on a more regular basis, for example.

What remains to be seen is whether companies can fill a 48,000 gap without cutting corners, as Berry and Steinberg (unwittingly or not) may have subtly implied. Let’s hope that’s not the case. We’d love to hear your thoughts on trucking and other transportation safety issues. Drop us a line or feel free to leave a comment below.

Donate to Rep. Reaves-Harris’ Coat Drive

December 16, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

Our good friend and state representative Pamela Reaves-Harris has been sponsoring a holiday coat drive since November, and the people of Illinois’ 10^th District are about to reap the benefits of her good work. Starting tomorrow, Rep. Reaves-Harris and her team will be distributing all donated coats to adults and children at the Major Adams Community Committee (125 N. Hoyne Ave. Chicago) between 5–7pm.

Rep. Reaves-Harris’ team has been working with local organizations and volunteers, including Button and Zipper, a city-wide coat drive organization, to gather as many coats as possible. Chicago winters can be some of harshest and grueling winter’s in the Midwest. It’s an especially difficult time for homeless, destitute families, or those who can’t afford a warm coat.

All coats should be gently-used or new, clean and in good condition. There’s still time to donate. If you have a spare coat lying around, or need a coat, this is a great opportunity to make sure it gets put to good use. You can drop off coats at the Major Adams Community Committee or at Rep. Reaves-Harris’ District office (115 N. Damen Chicago).

For more info, you can contact Rep. Reaves-Harris’ district office at 312-877-5074 or visit her website.

Madigan’s 2015 Safe Shopping Guide highlights digital safety practices

December 3, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

One of the things we look forward to each holiday season is the Illinois Attorney General’s Safe Shopping Guide. Among the things detailed by Lisa Madigan and her staff is a host of information about various products that could cause, or have caused, havoc for consumers. But this year’s list contained a relatively new angle with respect to consumer safety, one that focused primarily on the smallest and most impressionable consumers: your kids. We found it to be one of the more insightful reports in recent memory, if only because the newest generation of children has never known a world without the Internet. The 2015 Guide sheds a little light on what to be aware of, should you be in the market for an iPad, smartphone or the like.

The new offering, “Creating a Positive Digital Culture in Your Home,” made sure to include useful tips on how to promote a safe learning environment for the tech savvy generation that is digesting more information via smartphone and tablet than ever before. If you’re considering buying devices for your kids this holiday season, this is the list for you.

This year’s guide provides a how-to list of points that stresses the importance of establishing age-appropriate limits on these devices so parents can monitor what their kids are accessing online. As Madigan states early on, recent studies show that an increasing number of children are left to use mobile and Internet-accessible on their own. Nearly 88% of American teens, ages 13–18, own or have access to a mobile phone; 73% of teens have smartphones. Even more remarkable, most of them started using mobile devices in their first year of life, according to statistics gathered by the AG’s office. The responsibility of having access to the Internet 24/7 is a responsibility many of us take for granted.

As a result, kids are exposed to the dangers of the Internet at increasingly younger ages. Madigan proposes a list of ten things that parents should take note of during the holiday season. Especially interesting, and worth pointing out, is bullet point number 6, the “use agreement.” Establishing those boundaries early on is a great way to hold you and your kids accountable in the future.

Top Ten:

Maintain open communication with your child about technology and the appropriate uses of it.
Make sure your child knows they cannot be anonymous on the Internet.
Talk to your child about what should never be posted online and the dangers of posting too much information.
Explain that posting online is just like writing in permanent marker – it cannot be erased.
Engage your child in continuous conversations about how to behave online.
Complete a “use agreement” with your child and talk about respecting others online. Establish and enforce household rules for technology usage.
Discuss why strong passwords are important, how to create them and the need to keep them private. Obtain all passwords for devices and apps.
Stay informed on your child’s Internet habits, review their user history and observe their social media activity. Know who their friends and followers are. (Taking it one step further, my wife and I don’t allow our children to erase their history. There’s consequences if we catch them doing so.)
Be aware of changes in your child’s behavior that may indicate cyberbullying.
Never threaten to take away your child’s phone or Internet access. This could prevent them from approaching you in the future about online problems.

Turning the dial up to 11:

(Bonus) 11. And in an ode to the Old West, we require our three boys to hand in their pistols/devices before they head off to bed, keeping distractions to a minimum.

Read the complete safety guide here.

VIDEO: An insurance representative called. What do I do?

November 23, 2015 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

In this edition of “60 seconds with Levinson and Stefani,” Ken talks the importance of contacting a lawyer before speaking to an insurance company representative. As we’ve talked about before, insurance companies are loath to part with their money. One of the ways they can avoid doling out settlement checks is by taking advantage of what you may not necessarily know.

In the days after a crash, odds are you’re going to receive a phone call from an insurance rep, and it’s probably not a call you’re prepared to take. Why? Because no matter how nice the rep sounds on the other line, they’re banking on innocent missteps to protect their company from further liability. It’s a tactic as old as time. Unfortunately, it’s a tactic that keeps working.

How do they do it? There are any number of ways insurance companies may try to employ said tactics, the end goal of which is to lock you in a statement that could come back to haunt you during a potential trial. They may ask tricky questions about your driving habits, or if you were on the phone while you were driving, for example. They could ask about your health history and what types of medication you take. If you’re willing to answer, they’re willing to put it on the record.

As Ken states, a lawyer should be one of your first calls in the aftermath of a crash to help you avoid these types of situations. A lawyer can also advise you on the proper course of action and protect your legal rights. Contacting a lawyer immediately will save you time, money and, ultimately, lots of anxiety.

How Takata became a dirty word

November 19, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

It started in the early 2000s. That’s when Takata started tinkering with ammonium nitrate, a chemical compound used to inflate its airbags, one of the company’s most lucrative endeavors. The Japanese manufacturer favored the chemical compound over other options, even as the compound came into question because of its vulnerability to changing temperatures and moisture. It’s been pointed out that Takata knew about the liabilities since 2004.

Years and several lawsuits later, Takata is finding out how damaging that decision has become. Clients like Mitsubishi, Toyota, Honda and other automakers are distancing themselves from what has turned into the biggest automotive safety recall in history. On November 3, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration administered the largest civil penalty in its existence against Takata. The grand total comes out to $200 million, a total that Takata may not be able to overcome.

The NHTSA, a division of the U.S. Department of Transportation, announced that it had issued two orders designed to protect drivers and travelers from Takata airbag inflators, the culprit that utilizes the phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate propellant to inflate its airbags. The propellant reportedly causes explosive ruptures that have been linked to at least eight deaths and hundreds of injuries.

Takata must now face the consequences for violating the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and cease production of inflators that use phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate propellant. The NHTSA is going the extra mile by seeking an independent monitor to keep tabs on Takata and its operations, an oversight period that will last for five years. (The NHTSA is currently seeking qualified candidates to apply for the position.)

The U.S. has ordered automakers to replace Takata airbags in 19 million vehicles, a process that could take as long as four years. But as auto partners begin shunning Takata parts in an effort to protect their reputation, consumers may be the ones who suffer the consequences. If Takata goes under as a result of the penalties and loss of business (airbags account for 40% of its business), there’s questions as to who/what will be responsible for replacing the defective airbags.

The NHTSA has come out with a list of cars and trucks from 12 different automakers deemed Priority One for replacement of Takata airbag inflators. The list includes makes from BMW, Fiat-Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Suburu and Toyota. Takata’s partners continue to bail out, consumers continue to sue and a federal agency continues to monitor operations. That will easily turn your company into a dirty word.

Complete list of recalled vehicles is below (Source: NHTSA). Do you own of one of these cars? Do you have questions about your legal recourse? Give us a call.

Automaker	Model	Model Year

BMW	328i	2000
	M3	2001-2006
	M5	2002-2003
	323i	2000
	325Ci	2002-2006
	330Ci	2002-2006
	325iT	2002-2003
	325XiT	2002-2003
	325i	2001-2006
	325Xi	2001-2005
	330i	2001-2006
	330Xi	2001-2005
	525i	2002-200
	530i	2002-2003
	540i	2002-2003
	X5 3.0i	2003-2004
	X5 4.4i	2003-2004

Automaker	Model	Model Year

FCA (Chrysler)	Chrysler Aspen	2007-2008
	Chrysler 300	2005-2010
	Chrysler 300C	2005-2010
	Chrysler SRT8	2005-2010
	Dodge Challenger	2008-2010
	Dodge Charger	2006-2010
	Dodge Dakota	2005-2011
	Dodge Durango	2004-2008
	Dodge Magnum	2005-2008
	Dodge Ram 1500	2003-2009
	Dodge Ram 2500	2003-2009
	Dodge Ram 3500	2003-2009
	Dodge Ram 4500	2008-2010
	Dodge Ram 5500	2008-2010

Automaker	Model	Model Year

Daimler Trucks North America	Sterling Bullet 4500	2008-2009
	Sterling Bullet 5500	2008-2009

Automaker	Model	Model Year

Daimler Vans USA LLC	Dodge Sprinter 2500	2007-2008
	Dodge Sprinter 3500	2007-2008
	Freightliner Sprinter 2500	2007-2008
	Freightliner Sprinter 3500	2007-2008

Automaker	Model	Model Year

Ford	Ranger	2004-2006
	GT	2005-2006
	Mustang	2005-2014

Automaker	Model	Model Year

General Motors (GM)	Chevrolet Silverado 2500	2007-2008
	Chevrolet Silverado 3500	2007-2008
	GMC Sierra 2500	2007-2008
	GMC Sierra 3500	2007-2008
	Pontiac Vibe	2003-2007
	Saab 9-2x	2005

Automaker	Model	Model Year

Honda	Accord	2001-2007
	Civic	2001-2005
	Civic Hybrid	2003-2005
	Civic CNGNEW	2001-2004
	CR-V	2002-2006
	Element	2003-2011
	Odyssey	2002-2004
	Pilot	2003-2008
	Ridgeline	2006
	Acura CL	2003
	Acura TL	2002-2003
	Acura MDX	2003-2006
	Acura RL	2005

Automaker	Model	Model Year

Mazda	B-Series Truck	2004-2006
	Mazda6	2003-2008
	Mazda Mazdaspeed6	2006-2007
	MPV	2004-2005
	RX-8	2004-2008

Automaker	Model	Model Year

Mitsubishi	Lancer	2004-2006
	Lancer Evolution	2004-2006
	Lancer Sportback	2004
	Mitsubishi Raider	2006-2009

Automaker	Model	Model Year

Nissan	Nissan Maxima	2001-2003
	Nissan Sentra	2002-2006
	Nissan Pathfinder	2002-2004
	Infiniti I30	2001
	Infiniti FX35	2003-2005
	Infiniti FX45	2003-2005
	Infiniti I35	2002-2004
	Infiniti M35	2006
	Infiniti M45	2006
	Infiniti QX4	2002-2003

Automaker	Model	Model Year

Subaru	Baja	2003-2005
	Impreza	2004-2005
	Legacy	2003-2005
	Outback	2003-2005

Automaker	Model	Model Year

Toyota	Corolla	2003-2007
	Corolla Matrix	2003-2007
	Rav4	2004-2005
	Sequoia	2002-2007
	Tundra	2003-2006
	Lexus SC	2002-2007

Understanding the role of punitive damages in big verdicts

November 16, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

A 61-year-old man from Springfield might be $21.5 million richer because of an injury he suffered on a cruise ship in May of 2011. And just like that the debate over big jury verdicts is once again in the news.

If you haven’t heard, here’s the summary: James Hausman and his wife were aboard the Holland America Cruise Line when a sliding door slammed against Hausman’s temple, causing him to momentarily lose balance. What looks relatively innocuous on security cameras turns out to be much more severe. He later experienced seizures, memory loss and vertigo. Hausman filed a lawsuit against the cruise line for negligence, and a jury felt there was enough evidence to award $5 million for future and past pain and suffering, and $16.5 million in punitive damages, a judgment the cruise line is now appealing and calling excessive.

Like the infamous McDonalds coffee incident before it, this case has all the drama of a made-for-TV movie, drumming up public ire while giving legal analysts a chance to shed light on what the verdict actually means, and how it relates to the larger goals of tort law. Dan Abrams, the legal analyst for Good Morning America, called the verdict “nuts,” saying these types of cases are partly why the American public distrusts the legal system, even though he agreed that Hausman deserved to recover damages. It would be wrong, though, to overlook just how important punitive damages are in situations like this, and why trial lawyers seek big numbers in personal injury cases at all. Abrams may be right to a degree about public perception, but it’s hard to criticize the jury’s decision without having been in the room to hear the facts and assess the credibility of the witnesses.

ABC Breaking News | Latest News Videos

Thanks to a security camera, we’re able to see the extent of what happened to Hausman. It’s not necessarily jarring, which, unfortunately, leads to somewhat cynical conclusions. As the story and video began circulating on social media, commenters predictably had lots to say.

“As many times as I got hit by a sliding door or elevator door, I never thought to sue someone for millions. Great idea I guess 🙂 21.5 million is ridiculous,” said one commenter.

“So he gets his head stuck in a door—guess he didn’t have very good reflexes to stop it to start out with. So sick of this sue happy society,” said another.

That people associate such a huge sum with the individual is the problem trial lawyers have had to contend with since the beginning. On top of it, these types of cases are almost always a battle of David vs. Goliath, where corporate defense attorneys are given limitless financial resources.

Really, the role of punitive damages is one of contextual significance and a matter of public safety. During the case, the plaintiff attorney Rick Friedman uncovered that nearly 34 incidents involving sliding doors had occurred on the Holland America cruise line dating back three years. Executives did little to rectify the situation and it finally came back to haunt them. A jury found enough reason to punish Holland America for failing to protect Hausman and other passengers by choosing to ignore an ongoing problem. When Friedman laid out his settlement demands (which the cruise line balked at since the case eventually went to trial) it wasn’t to make one man richer, but to make a large corporation think twice about its decision-making. Since this has all happened, you can be sure Holland America is taking a harder look at every single sliding door and other safety hazards on its ships. Taking $21.5 million out of the coffers is bound to have an impact.

And therein lies the power of punitive damages. You’ll often hear personal injury lawyers use the word negligence. That’s a word that puts large corporations on their heels because it implies a willingness to neglect an ongoing problem. If it proves to be true, then continuous neglect turns into a matter of public safety. All this is to say that the role of punitive damages in personal injury cases is to send a message. Hausman may reap the monetary benefits of this particular message, but it’s worth pointing out that his wife said she’d give it all back if it meant her husband could function normally again. We hear that a lot with our clients, too. Unlike big companies/corporations, money is always the least of their problems.