Swift to Pay $7.5M to Settle Unpaid Wages Lawsuit

Truck drivers suing Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona for unpaid wages since 2010 have requested preliminary approval of a settlement offered by the defendants in the amount of $7.5 million.

About 11,000 drivers are involved in the suit which has dragged on in the court system for several years.

Plaintiffs John Burnell and Gilbert Saucillo filed their initial legal claim in 2010 against Swift in San Bernardino Superior Court. The unpaid wages lawsuit—which alleges violation of California State law—claims the defendant failed to ensure meal and rest breaks as well as pay for the time drivers must invest in non-driving but necessary job-related tasks.

The lead complainants took the action to the ninth district after a federal judge denied class certification in 2016. The concerns which fed the denial were that the class claims were unwieldy and unmanageable. By having too much range, the allegations were too difficult to be litigated on a large scale.

The federal judge also had trouble with how the plaintiffs presented their denial of meal and rest break claims. According to Law360, they had difficulty coming to common agreement as to how Swift interfered.

Had they set a driving schedule that didn’t allow for them? Had they just not scheduled them? The magistrate failed to see a consistent pattern of evidence that showed actively interfering with drivers taking breaks or being paid full wages.

A Difficult Outlook

The seeming uncertainty of the unpaid wages lawsuit future determined the lead complainants desire to bring the litigation to an end with the proposed settlement. Much of that uncertainty resides with another ninth circuit case.

This case—currently pending—is set to debate whether the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act trumps local California labor law in terms of meal and rest breaks, according to Law360.

The Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act

According to Truckstop.com, the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act was initiated by the federal government to improve the flow of interstate commerce by creating a consistent base of regulations governing truckers and other movers of goods that move between the boundaries of several states within a 24 hour period. It is purportedly supposed to prevent states from creating and enforcing laws which interfere with transportation services.

This is not to say that truck driving companies are exempt from the need to provide meal and rest breaks. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has established its own set of mandatory meal and rest break rules which are a companion to the F4A.

A Logical Conclusion

The lead plaintiffs believe this $7.5 million settlement is a logical and reasonable conclusion given the tenuous outlook for so many issues affecting it.

The Swift Transportation Co. lawsuit is Case No. 5:10-cv-00809 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Join a Free Trucker Overtime Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you have worked as a contract truck driver and believe your carrier has failed to pay you minimum wage or overtime, or otherwise might not have honored a contract with you, you may qualify to file a truck driver lawsuit or class action lawsuit.

Learn More