A case in point is the state of California, where employers, in general, are prohibited from making deductions from an employee’s wages for damages caused by the employee’s negligence. This rule is based on the idea that losses caused by an employee’s negligence are a normal cost of doing business and should be borne by the employer. An opinion letter issued by the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE), the state agency that enforces wage orders, illustrates this point. In that case, an employee negligently drove a company vehicle into a stationary object, and the employer wanted to deduct from the employee’s paycheck the costs of the damage. The DLSE ruled that the employer could not make deductions to compensate for damage caused by an employee’s negligence. Such deductions, the DLSE explained, could only be made if the damage was caused by a dishonest or willful act of the employee, or by an employee’s “gross negligence.” The term “gross negligence” was defined as negligence “which is aggravated, reckless, and flagrant” and refers to a state of mind “that exercise(s) so slight a degree of care as to exhibit a conscious indifference or ‘I don’t care attitude’ concerning the ultimate consequences of (one’s) actions.” The DSLE stated further that “it is a very rare action which will be found to be grossly negligent” and indicated that the accident described by the employer did not equate to gross negligence. The DLSE also warned that an employer who makes a deduction based on gross negligence does so “at its own risk,” and in the event the employee is not guilty of gross negligence, the employee would be entitled to recover not only the amount of wages withheld, but also penalties for the employer’s failure to pay wages. In New York, an employer may only make paycheck deductions “for the benefit of the employee.” Aside from those required by law, deductions are limited to those that are expressly authorized in writing by the employee. Even with an authorization, permissible deductions are very limited and specifically defined, and these deductions can amount to no more than, in the aggregate, 10 percent of the gross wages due to the employee for a particular payroll period. Examples of specifically prohibited deductions under New York law include deductions for “spoilage or breakage” of company property. In the state of Oregon, if an employee is negligent and damages company property, the employer cannot deduct the value of the property from the employee’s paycheck. However, disciplinary action may be taken and the employer could pursue reimbursement for damages through the courts. Wisconsin is another state that restricts employee wage deductions. Wisconsin Statute Section 103.455 states: “An employer generally may not make a deduction from wages for defective or faulty workmanship, lost or stolen property, or damage to property unless the employee authorizes the deduction in writing.” One fleet manager at a NAFA FMI workshop told of an experience with a company driver living in Wisconsin who allowed an unauthorized individual to drive her company vehicle that was involved in an at-fault accident. When the company attempted to collect for the cost to repair the vehicle, the employee hired an attorney who cited Wisconsin statute 103.455. The statute states that a deduction of wages could lawfully be done in only three ways: the employee provides written authorization; the employee agrees that the damage was due to his or her negligence; or the employee is required to pay for damage as a result of adjudication by a court or judge. The company could not meet any of the three criteria. Similarly, North Carolina’s Wage and Hour Act states that an employer may only withhold a portion of an employee’s wages only when it is required to do so by law or if it has written authorization from the employee. All authorizations must be in writing, signed on or before the pay period for which the deduction is being made, show the date of signing, and state the reason for the deduction. However, the Act does not prohibit an employer from filing a lawsuit to recover money owed. Typically, the lawsuit is filed in magistrate court, but, based on past cases, employees are often “judgment-proof.” The message with this editorial is that it is prudent for all fleet managers to have their fleet policy guidelines reviewed by corporate counsel to determine if any provisions violate state laws governing wage deductions for damage to company-provided vehicles. Let me know what you think. mike.antich@bobit.com
You May Be Violating State Law By Deducting Driver Wages to Pay for Vehicle Damage
Many nationally dispersed fleets include a provision in their fleet policy guidelines stating that drivers are financially liable for damage to their company-provided vehicle if it was caused by negligence. However, many fleet managers are unaware that this practice is illegal in some states.
More Blog Posts
Fleets Want Trust Restored with Suppliers
During this period of ongoing supply constraints, the trust that fleet managers had with OEMs, upfitters, and dealers has been strained. Fleet managers say they have had too many experiences over the past three years coping with erroneous information, adjusting to multiple price increases, and feeling betrayed by inadequate transparency from suppliers.
Read More →Scheduled Replacement Cycles Are Becoming a Distant Memory
The ongoing difficulty in sourcing replacement vehicles is forcing companies to extend the service lives of vehicles that are unable to be replaced, which, inevitably, increases unscheduled maintenance expenses.
Read More →Fleet Simplification is the Antidote to Asset Variability
Fleet simplification identifies asset functions to uncover commonality among the equipment and assets. Simplification increases operational efficiency as end-users become accustomed to the controls, displays, and operation of less diverse units.
Read More →The Dangers of Static Fleet Policies
A fleet policy is a living document, flexible enough to adapt to evolving business priorities, developing industry trends, and changing industry best practices and standards.
Read More →Short-Term vs. Long-Term Cost Reductions
Corporate procurement staff are often driven by short-term, immediate cost reductions. However, a longer perspective to soft cost savings is critical because fixating on short-term results will hurt a company in the long run.
Read More →Uptick in Unscheduled Maintenance Increasing Vehicle Downtime
Fleet data analysis can identify recurring downtime issues. It’s important to determine the root causes of downtime so procedures can be developed to minimize such problems.
Read More →Eliminate Needless Curb Weight to Maximize ICE & EV Efficiencies
Vehicle weight relates directly to fuel economy. In today’s era of electrification, there is also a direct correlation between vehicle weight and battery range.
Read More →Tech Dependence Risks Dumbing Down Fleet Manager Expertise
The line between creative thinking and problem solving and doing what the data indicates is thin. To lead in fleet management, you need to balance understanding the fundamentals and embracing what smart technology offers.
Read More →Leverage the Synergy of Safe Driving to Achieve Sustainability and Cost Goals
Safe driving, emission reductions, and cost containment can all be achieved at the same time.
Read More →The Playbook for Fleet Manager Success
There are many paths to success — most of them involve being flexible, open-minded, and willing to learn.
Read More →









