Employee call costs company 5.2 mil

June 9, 2008 by
Filed under: Security and law, Special Report 


A lot of companies give employees cell phones to use on the job. But if they aren’t careful, they might end up paying a lot more than the monthly bill. For one company, the price tag topped $5 million — and it almost cost one woman her life.

A woman was driving on a busy Georgia Interstate. She was also speeding and talking on her company-issued cell phone.

She rear-ended the car in front of her, pushing it into a ditch on the side of the road. The driver of that car was badly injured and had to have her left arm amputated.

She sued the woman who caused the accident — and her employer. Why? She said the company was to blame for its employee’s reckless driving. The company settled the case for $5.2 million.

Why did the company have to pay so much? Because the phone was provided by the company, and the woman was making a work-related call at the time of the accident.

Use ‘em wisely

The lesson for HR: Companies can be liable for accidents employees cause while they’re doing their jobs. That means if they’re on the road making business calls or sending e-mails from the BlackBerry you gave them, you might be on the hook if something bad happens.

A solid policy governing the use of company-owned electronics can stop these problems from happening — and take the heat off of the company if an employee decides not to listen and causes an accident.

Some keys to a successful policy:

  1. Prohibit talking, texting and e-mailing while behind the wheel.
  2. Remind employees — and their bosses — that they aren’t expected to make calls and do other work while driving.
  3. If you give employees phones, also provide hands-free headsets.

Cite: Ford v. McGrogan

Tags: , , ,

Comments

17 Comments on Employee call costs company 5.2 mil

  1. Michael Moore on Tue, 11th Mar 2008 9:57 am

    2. This is a manageable problem if employees use common sense and employers adopt a policy. Many states have laws governing cell phone use while driving. No employer issued or subsidized phone should lack a hands-free feature.

  2. Edward Dunn on Tue, 3rd Jun 2008 4:58 pm

    3. Just another example of a legal system more concerned with making money than the administration of justice. Tort reform is long overdue.

  3. Rita Lynn on Tue, 10th Jun 2008 2:09 pm

    4. Common sense? Did you say common sense? Just drive down the interstate and look into vehicles you will see lots of “common sense”.

    The judges should use common sense when hearing these cases.

  4. David Howard on Tue, 10th Jun 2008 3:10 pm

    5. I agree with Michael this is a manageable problem but regardless we are at the mercy of the legal system. I for one plan to re-address with our employees. Safety First!

  5. Julie Stertzbach on Tue, 10th Jun 2008 3:21 pm

    6. Would be interesting to see what the outcome would be if it was a personal cell phone, but doing company business???

  6. K. Hamm on Tue, 10th Jun 2008 5:46 pm

    7. If sense were common, more people would have it. And unwritten policies aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. Make the policy and enforcve it. You cannot trust your employees to simply take a suggestion or say someone in authority verbally told them. Especially if the lawyers are incolved.

  7. Fred Mendoza on Thu, 12th Jun 2008 3:23 pm

    8. Common sense is hard to find. I saw a woman making a right hand turn while holding a drink on her left hand and using the same hand to turn the wheel. Of course her other hand was used to hold the cell phone while she talked away. Yes prohibiting cell phone use while driving is a good ideal, I wonder why most states do not enforce the cell phone ideal as they did with the seat belt? Starting with company-sponsored cell phones is a good place to start.

  8. Nancy Neale, SPHR on Thu, 12th Jun 2008 4:11 pm

    9. I fully agree with K. Hamm. Policies must be in writing or there is no policy. Enforcement must be done or there is no need for a policy and there is a total waste of paper.

  9. Michelle on Fri, 13th Jun 2008 7:56 pm

    10. After reading this article, my boss and I decided to revise our cell phone/driving policy. We held an all employee meeting to discuss. BTW, there have been cases where a person was using their personal cell phone and had an accident. It even happened after-hours. The injured was able to create a case against the company because the person was conducting company business on the call. If you do a little research, you can find all kinds of cases. Scary!

  10. Carchuleta on Wed, 18th Jun 2008 1:21 pm

    11. Most states now have a law that cell phones must not be used while operating a motor vehicle. After the law was passed. While driving home one night myself and another vehicile were run off the road by a lady using a cell phone crossed a double yellow line and was oblivious to anyone else but the person she was talking to. She then proceeded to run a red light almost causing an accident. I have a hands free phone in my car so I pulled over and called the State Trooper never did find out if they caught up to her. This is a serious problem where I live.

  11. Johna on Tue, 19th Aug 2008 2:31 pm

    12. It isn’t the use of the hands that causes accidents. Its the non use of the brain. While talking on a cell phone the mind is concentrating on the conversation not on driving a vehicle. Hands free phones are no safer than regular phones since the distraction is still there. In fact, I think the hands free type are worse because you can’t see that the person behind the wheel is preoccupied with a call. At least when someone is on a hand held phone, it is visible. The answer is to outlaw use of any device that takes a drivers mind off driving or to create cars that drive them selves.

  12. Rita Lynn on Tue, 19th Aug 2008 3:37 pm

    13. In that case we would have to outlaw kids, pets and husbands in the car! LOL

  13. DWA on Tue, 5th May 2009 10:57 am

    14. Responsibility and accountability, anyone? It’s not the company’s fault. A, everyone speeds. B. Money doesn’t bring back the victim’s arm. C. Does Georgia state law prohibit cell phone use while driving? D. I find it reasonable that every time someone is behind the wheel, they drive responsibly and in control and will take steps to ensure that they are alert and aware of what’s going on around them. Now, I feel I can pay attention and talk on a cell phone while driver, however I know others that can’t and I am sure that they probably see themselves like I see myself (meaning I probably stink at it too). The victim could blame the employee for speeding, however it’s hard to show that the cell phone led to her negligence. The employer did not encourage the speeding, but did for the cell phone use.

    I personally don’t feel that companies should be responsible for something they could reasonably expect from an employee, that they would have enough common sense to know how to drive responsibly and not do anything that would hinder them from doing so. I also feel that if there was a policy, the employee still would have driven while talking on the cell phone. A policy doesn’t bring the victim’s arm back.

  14. Steve on Tue, 19th May 2009 2:10 pm

    15. Just about every municipality has a “distracted driving” law on the books. Some put cell phone usage under this umbrella. I’m not sure how many folks have been ticketed for it though. Personally I think there is too much said on this particular subject.

    I know of many accidents caused from drivers looking for a particular CD or changing CDs or tapes while driving. There is also eating, drinking coffee, trying to set an address in your GPS, etc. I’ve even seen women putting on their makeup while driving down the interstate too. Let’s face it, some folks don’t think and some just can’t drive.

    I have had a cell phone from their beginning and I use my cell phone while driving. I mostly use hands free but there are times that I can’t. Is a law about no cell phone and driving going to make me stop? NO! I am on call 24/7 and when the phone rings I answer with hands free or not.

  15. RWA on Tue, 19th May 2009 2:14 pm

    16. Instead of “Don’t drink and drive” how about “think and drive”? HA

  16. HRVegas on Tue, 19th May 2009 4:52 pm

    17. What if you have an employee running late and they call you to inform you they will be tardy? Would that be a work related call if they caused an accident or is it negligence on their part for being tardy and the call would not be necessary if they arrived to work on time? Nevada does not have a law requiring hands free phones. They should but I see an awful lot of loopholes in this. I welcome your comments.

  17. RWA on Wed, 20th May 2009 8:58 am

    18. HRVegas, simple answer: They are not on the clock yet, as they have not arrived at work nor started “working”. In that case the company is off the hook. However, if he calls in and then they start talking about work related things, then it may be more questionable.