Maverick Pre-employment physical test..Is it discriminatory to women?

Discussion in 'Maverick Transportation' started by Mickey53, Aug 28, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mickey53

    Mickey53 Active Member

    I was "kicked"out from the Maverick "bootcamp" yesterday for not being able to lift a box of heavy weight up over my head. This test was given after I had to dead lift other heavy crates up from the floor and placed on a table and back to the floor again. I also had to dead lift even more heavy weights from the floor in a squat position up to my waist and back to the floor.

    Next was the over head lift from chest high, by the time i got to this overhead lift my muscles were fatigued and shaking. I could not after two attempts lift this heavy box straight up over my head and lock my elbows. I was pulled aside, red-flagged, and send home. Just like that, no questions asked.

    I am a 150 lb 53 year old woman. I was hired for temperate controlled division. Do they realize that it is not imperative for this particular job I was pre-hired to do to lift heavy weight up over your head? If I have to break down pallets occasionally, that is pretty much the extent of the physical aspect of the job?

    I am physically fit by the way...I have excellent heart health, heart rate, aerobic health, I am a runner and a ski instructor in winter. I just don't have strong arms? Lol This is ridiculous.

    I drag my butt down to AR from PA on a 36 hour Greyhound bus tour from hell, I go through hoops and bounds to free myself to get there, (including declining other employment) I get somewhat of a surprise in what the recruiter told me about TCD and what is the truth?
    TCD, I was told gets home every two to three weeks. When I got there it turned out to be every 18 to 21 days. Does 18 days sound like two weeks? Hmmm? Anyways, after this shock, I wanted to transfer to Flatbed Division which would give me the home time (three weekends a month) but i do realize my personal physical limitations, i know i could not do that job. Therefore, I regrouped, relaxed, talked with my husband, and decided to continue and devote a one year trial period for Maverick, for adjustment to the new lifestyle of living on the road.

    I am an honest straight up person. I have many years experience as an owner operator teamed with my husband, as well as other solo jobs. I have logged 200 to 300 thousand violation ,accident free, safe miles. Hell, I have never even been lost ever! This was all over ten years ago. I have since been operating my own school bus and recently tri-axle water tankers in the gas and oil well fields. So I had to go through the student driver program at Maverick. But thats ok, I'm easy to get along with and never refuse quality training and education.

    I'm not tootin my own horn but....WTF? I couldn't lift a heavy box over my head? This sounds like a story my hungry attorney cousin who just passed his bar exam would love to tackle and possibly make a name for himself? Lol. Or do you think maybe my Uncle the top notch experienced litigator would be better suited to spank Maverick for unfair, discriminatory hiring practices?

    There are many professional drivers you are missing out on and I am extremely upset over this...Shame on Maverick.

    Sent from my iPhone using TF Forum
  2. Spartan718

    Spartan718 Well-Known Member

    That is standard practice for Flatbed drivers. In the beginning you said you were there for Reefers and than you said you changed to Flatbed for the hometime. You even admitted that you know flatbedding is far more physical. So the fact that you couldn't perform the tests shows that you may not be able to do the job. Strapping, chaining, and tarping is physically challenging. They want to be sure you will have the ability to properly secure the whole load. And your cousin is a perfect example of what is wrong with this country, don't get what you want so you file a law suit against the company that wanted to hire you. It is not their fault you cannot do the job. That is part of why it is so hard to get a job now days and why companies are reluctant to give people a chance, for fear of being dragged through litigation if they feel you can't do the job that they offer you the chance to try.
  3. Mickey53

    Mickey53 Active Member

    Spartan if you really took the time to read my thread you would see that I declined to go flatbed because I know my physical limitations.
    Please don't make half assed comments without reading and comprehending the post? That could be what's wrong with this country...people blowing off without knowing what they are blowing off about?

    Sent from my iPhone using TF Forum
    MexicoTrucker likes this.
  4. Spartan718

    Spartan718 Well-Known Member

    I do apologize, I re-read your post and see that you "regrouped" and decided to stay with the reefer fleet. I got confused, I am just tired of reading stories complaining about people not getting jobs they can't do and then suing over it. I do agree with you, that does seem a little questionable, the test should simulate the job you will perform.
    MexicoTrucker likes this.
  5. Mickey53

    Mickey53 Active Member

    I also apologize for the heated return. I am at the airport waiting for my flight home and still extremely upset over this situation...... controlling my temper in this extremely stressful situation is very difficult. Thanks!

    Sent from my iPhone using TF Forum
  6. Tazz

    Tazz Infidel Supporter

    How could it possibly discrimination? They offered you the attempt to pass the physical requiremnts they are perfectly free and legal to demand of any employee.

    A company can set their requirements however they wish. You were giving the opportunity to test. You did not pass.

    A lot of companies are instituting lifting, and stress into their pre-employment screening. With the myriad of things that any driver may be requested to move,load, unload, restack they want to assure themselves new emloyees are capable of meeting them.

    I would suggest if you apply somewhere else asking what their physical requirements are. Barr-Nunn and Hornady both have standards above basic DOT. Big G does not. Those are the only ones I can advise on.
  7. Mike

    Mike Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Did the recruiter give any indication of what to expect regarding the physical requirements?
  8. Spartan718

    Spartan718 Well-Known Member

    I do also agree with Tazz, that the opportunity was given and if you don't meet company standards tough. I don't think it is discrimination, if a guy went for the position and the same thing happened I don't think he would saying he discriminated agaisnt. PO'ed yes, but not threatening a discrimination lawsuit
  9. Mickey53

    Mickey53 Active Member

    So you are saying because I am a woman I'm whining and should suck it up and take it like a man? Laughable...thanks for lifting my mood! Haha!

    Sent from my iPhone using TF Forum
  10. Mickey53

    Mickey53 Active Member

    And this attitude is part of the reason woman do not enter the industry...

    Sent from my iPhone using TF Forum
  11. Mike

    Mike Well-Known Member Staff Member

    I think the important thing is whether the member was advised of this fitness test or not.

    Pulling a reefer, you may end up lumping some heavy boxes. Palletizing floor loads of meat come to mind as those 80 pound boxes of meat get heavy after a while.

    I don't see discrimination, but I do see a problem if you are not made aware of these requirements before you arrive for orientation.
    rigjockey and Racer X 69 like this.
  12. Mickey53

    Mickey53 Active Member

    I am not going to bring litigation against Maverick. That was said in extreme anger.
    My gripe is not that it is unfair to females...?

    I never said discrimination because I am a woman.

    My gripe is that the test is the same for TCD as well as, flatbed divisions. I am a fit person and have recently lumped loads without a problem. I am disputing being fit enough for the TCD division and being sent home? As I said, I am a runner, ski instructor, hiker, and otherwise fit person. I dead lifted the boxes. I just could not fully lift over my head. Not cool.

    Sent from my iPhone using TF Forum
  13. Spartan718

    Spartan718 Well-Known Member

    I am just saying I don't think it is discrimination. I worked in EMS for about 10 years and have seen woman lift better than some men. I have had many female partners who could lift better then some guys I have worked with. I think the difference lies in determination, the women in industries are are traditionally a "boys club" have to work harder and prove themselves everyday. I understand you frustration, and I am not trying to be chauvinistic. I am just saying that women can do just about anything they set their minds to do. You just didn't meet Maverick's criteria and is doesn't mean they bumped you because you are a woman. I personally think it is cool when woman try to "break tradition" My wife is in finance and it is tough out there for women in the Financial World" , I often have to give her pep talks, when she feel the board is being unfair.
  14. Mickey53

    Mickey53 Active Member

    Back on the ground...I am however, wondering just how many woman could pass the physical test? My point being it may be discriminating toward woman because Mavericks standards for strength are set too high for TCD? And no, I was told there would be heavy lifting of boxes from the ground to trailer level. Which I did pass. I actually practiced this at home. I was not told I would have to lift an awkward heavy box wrists forward, from my chest over my head. I would have prepped for this as well? Or I could have asked to do it first before I was fatigued?

    Sent from my iPhone using TF Forum
  15. Mike

    Mike Well-Known Member Staff Member

    If you were told that the test required lifting up to trailer level, and then required to do more, I would talk to somebody about it if you still wanted the job.
  16. Duck

    Duck Quack Supporter

    I'm most certainly "not qualified" for a job modeling womens lingerie for Victoria's Secret.

    But if I applied & they had security drag me out to the street because I'm a 220 lb male with a beer belly, would I be able to sue for discrimination?

    Why not? :headscratch:

    I think I'd make a pretty good lingerie model!

    View attachment 17654
    View attachment 17654
  17. Mike

    Mike Well-Known Member Staff Member

    I have sent a link to this thread to the Public Relations department of Maverick Transportation. Hoping they will provide their side of the story about this.
    rigjockey likes this.
  18. butter

    butter Well-Known Member

    How much weight are we talking about? (i'm sure you can answer this without jeopardizing anything)
  19. Mickey53

    Mickey53 Active Member

    I am home. I had 1184 miles to cool myself down. I am not sure how much weight was in the box? I guess I should have asked? But at this point it does not matter..
    Anyhow, home and just want to put this nightmare behind me...I can only say that because of a silly box lift they sent home a professional driver dedicated to improving the image of the industry. I am honest, cheerful, friendly, customer orientated, responsible, safe,and fit! They sent me packing because of a stupid (biased-I believe) box lift? Well then they do not deserve to have a driver such as myself represent their company. I am over it. I will move on to greener pastures. Thanks everyone for all your opinions and replies...they all are valued. I especially like the Victoria's Secret model...Ha ha!
    Racer X 69 likes this.
  20. Copperhead

    Copperhead Well-Known Member

    Wouldn't surprise me if anything Maverick did was discriminatory to anyone. They were part of the driving force behind getting the govt to mandate EOBR's, right along with Schneider, Knight, JB Hunt, U.S Xpress, and USA Trucking, by forming a benign looking organization that the name would give warm fuzzies to some.... The Alliance for Driver Safety and Security. That organization had, as its main purpose, to lobby government to mandate EOBR's. It succeeded.

    I use an EOBR. I like it. But to mandate them... no. And for a batch of carriers to go whining and crying to the govt, much like a little child that goes crying to mommy because Johnny won't share a toy, is pretty sad. They just didn't like it that they were using EOBR's and didn't want to plan their freight more efficiently so they could compete with carriers that didn't. Instead of using EOBR's, planning and running freight efficiently, and minding their own business like the carrier I am with.

    That is a group of carriers I will never have my truck running for. I am sure they are happy with that as well. But when I grew up, I knew to put away childish things. They never did.
    Tim and Duck like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page