Posted on 03/06/2014 11:10:52 AM PST by nickcarraway
Calgary residents are throwing their support behind a local school bus driver who was fired for picking up a group of students in her own SUV.
Kendra Lindon was fired by First Student Canada after she picked up six junior high students in her own vehicle last month, after discovering that her bus wouldn’t start.
There weren't enough seat belts for two of her passengers, but Lindon said, at the time, she was more concerned about the students waiting in the extreme cold. The temperature that morning was in the minus 20s. She also said she wasn't sure a replacement bus for the kids would ever come.
Kendra Lindon picked up the kids in her own vehicle because she was concerned about them waiting in the extreme cold.
"I wasn't thinking about the policies, I was strictly thinking about the kids," she told CTV Calgary. CTV Calgary asked its viewers in a poll whether Kindon should have been fired for her actions. Of the more than 4,000 votes, 90 per cent said they didn't support the punishment.
On a CTV Calgary article detailing Lindon’s case, readers had mixed views of her actions.
“If that was my son waiting for his bus, I would have loved that his bus driver would care about his safety that much that went out of her way and picked him up in her personal car !! come on people !” a reader named Mimi said.
A reader named Marc said: “Shame on her, some kids had no seatbelts, she did not trust her own company. Very poor judgement on her part.”
And another reader named Carole wrote: “I think it's a little harsh firing her. A warning would of been enough, her heart was in the right place...I believe she should get her job back.”
From its Ohio headquarters, First Student spokesperson Jen Biddinger said it is against company policy to discuss personnel matters. Biddinger also said the company takes safety, "very seriously, and our practices are designed to uphold this most important value."
But one Calgary employment law firm said that if Lindon was never made aware of the company policy prohibiting her actions, then there are no legal grounds to fire her for violating it.
"It's not only a bad practice, but it seems in this case you have a situation where you have someone who's trying to be a Good Samaritan and keep these kids warm and safe who's now been penalized," lawyer Jeff Kahane said.
For her part, Lindon said that she was acting more like a concerned parent than a bus driver at the time.
Kahane said that this also raises questions about whether her termination was appropriate.
"There is an argument that she wasn't even acting in the course of her employment, but the question is: What are the details of that contract?" he said.
Lindon said that if First Student asked her to return to work she'd happily oblige.
"If they phoned me and said 'We would love to have you back, please come drive for us again?,' Yes, I'd be all over it," she said.
I am saying that there is a reason why school transportation companies use official vehicles.
Don’t you see that?
I was giving a hypothetical reason why children should not get in private vehicles.
I was not saying this person was a pervert. Sorry if you misunderstood.
From its Ohio headquarters, First Student spokesperson Jen Biddinger said it is against company policy to discuss personnel matters. Biddinger also said the company takes safety, "very seriously, and our practices are designed to uphold this most important value."The “safety” which ”the company takes very seriously” clearly relates to the security of the company from liability and is not identical to the safety of the children it contracted to transport.Let’s get serious - the danger of riding in an SUV vs a school bus, and even of riding without a seat belt in an SUV, is actually de minims. Everyone who has ever driven anywhere without being in a truck or school bus has demonstrated that they are willing to bet their lives on it. And anyone over the age of about 70 who drove when they were 16 drove a vehicle which wasn’t equipped with seat belts.
Even the 1959 Mercedes-Benz 190SL I bought used in 1962 did not come equipped with seat belts. I certainly did install seat belts - but only because they kept me secure in the driver’s seat in normal operation. The reality is that no one would ride in a sedan or coupe if they understood the violence of an automobile collision, and actually thought it likely that they would be in a crash. With or without seat belts.
The conclusion is that seat belts provide only a nice-to-have increase in safety, the absence of which does not compare with the risk of exposing children to -20F (!!) temperatures substantially longer than the children’s parents expect and have decided to accept.
Just taking what you wrote as how it reads.
For goodness sake what kind of mind automatically thinks perv when the kids are freezing out and the promised bus will not come.
Lawsuit scared.
What you wrote is what we read. Duh?
The driver cant use a private car for security reasons, but I hate to see the driver fired for going the extra mile and getting the kids to school.
I can agree with both sides of this one.
Again, I am sorry if I wasn’t clear enough.
Let’s say she just got fired and decided to drive the kids into the ocean? Is that better?
Say she sabotaged the school bus so it wasn’t coming.
How do you know when she shows up at the bus stop to take your kid that she isn’t unauthorized? Yeah, she could go crazy with the official bus.
But someone showing up in her private vehicle is a big sign that something could be very wrong.
Again, there is a reason why children should be taught only to get into official vehicles.
There was certainly no malice intended and I could see either a firing or some other pumishment.
As was mentioned above, what if there was an accident? Who pays for medical bills, or God forbid funerals, when an employee is not using a company vehicle for company business?
Does her insurance cover her vehicle’s use as transport-for-hire?
Does the company’s insurance cover non-company vehicles?
I doubt it.
Yeah it’s fear, fear, fear. The kids all knew her, who cares. We got to treat everyone like strangers all the time.
But calling her a perv was really over the top and seems to indicate from whence you came.
Do you really not understand that I was speaking hypothetically?
I have said so numerous times. At a certain point I have to assume that it is you, not me.
What you call “fear” normal people call “common sense.”
It is easy for you to find fault with the company. It is not your business on the line from the negligent actions of an employee. If she had had an accident, the business (and her personally) would be open to liability.
Real liability.
You may wish the world were different, but it’s not. Choices and actions have consequences.
Yes, fear wields a giant hammer today.
Instead of trying to take the hammer away, people cower.
I.e. the “real” liability is a manmade construct. We should WORK to make it otherwise. Anything less would indeed violate “COMMON SENSE.”
Wow, what a bizarre coincidence to read this story.
For some reason, last night my husband and were talking about “days gone by” and he told me about a time when he was kid, the bus driver came around to all the bus stops and piled the kids in his pick-up truck to take them to school. It was a cold winter day, apparently the bus wouldn’t start, so... the guy did the best he could do about his job.
What is this gibberish supposed to mean?
Let's talk specifics. Say your son or daughter was picked up by their school bus driver in her private vehicle.
There is an accident, and your daughter suffers a horrible head injury. This will require expensive care for the rest of her life.
What are you going to do? Do you think you have not been harmed?
Will you not look for an insurance company or some responsible party to make right the wrong that has been done against you?
Or will you go on public charity to help pay for this expensive care?
In this case neither the employee's insurance nor the company's insurance covers the use of her vehicle to do company business. Will you just shrug your shoulders and pay all the bills yourself?
Will you sue the bus company anyway and maybe put it out of business?
It is easy to spurt nonsense like "the 'real' liabilty is a manmade construct."
It is hard to say what you mean in a specific case.
True, except for the other drivers on the road who make risky maneuvers to avoid getting stuck behind one.
What if God vanished from the world and ceased to provide?
That is what your argument adds up to.
Her act was an act of love. God backs that up, BUT there is a catch. It has to be done for God’s sake.
Indeed the sinful world will punish that. And you seem to be behind this punishment with your mocking.
So, if your daughter was crippled, you would have no response
That’s good to know
Sometimes there is a better answer to tragedy (when it does happen) than sue, sue, sue selfishly.
But it’s sure good to know that you can gin up mortal excuses to sue, sue, sue selfishly (because ohhhh it’s not really for yourself, or so you fool yourself to say, but actually it’s because of the burden you fear).
Somehow the world didn’t cave in before impersonal insurance companies ran the whole place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.