Is Your Company Liable in a Distracted Driving Accident?
It is well known that cell phone use while driving is a leading cause of accidents. In fact, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation, cell phone distractions cause 600,000 crashes and 3,000 deaths each year.[1] In addition, on-the-job crashes are very expensive for employers with average costs of $24,500 per crash, $150,000 per injury, and $3.6 million per fatality.[2]
An often overlooked aspect of distracted driving is a company’s liability when an employee causes an accident. Under the legal doctrine of vicarious liability, an employer is liable for actions of an employee if the employee was acting under the purview of his or her employment at the time of an accident.[3] In other words, if your employee causes injury to someone due to negligent conduct (i.e. distracted driving), the victim can sue your company directly for damages. ZoomSafer has written an excellent white paper delving further into the details of this issue and outlining the steps companies need to take to protect themselves from liability.
As discussed in the white paper, in the past ten years a wide variety of cases have resulted in companies paying restitution to victims injured by the negligent driving of an employee distracted by a cell phone. With settlements and verdicts ranging from $1.5 to $21 million[4] employees who use cell phones while driving are a costly risk for your company. Here are a few examples:
- Tiburzi v. Holmes Transport Inc. (2009) – $18 million judgment: The plaintiff was left in a permanent vegetative state from brain injuries caused by a collision with an 18-wheel truck driven by an employee of the defendant. During the trial, the judge found that at the time of the accident the truck driver had flipped open his cell phone and was checking for text messages. Holmes Transport was found vicariously liable for the plaintiff’s injuries and ordered to pay $18 million in restitution. Trials are still underway for three other people killed in the accident.[5]
- Bustos v. Leiva & Dyke Industries (2001) – $21 million judgment: An elderly woman was seriously injured after a collision with a truck driven by an employee of Dyke Industries. Though he claimed he was not distracted, the employee’s cell phone records proved he was using his cell phone at the time of the accident. Because the employee was working at the time of the accident, and in a company truck, Dyke Industries was held vicariously liable and subsequently settled for $16.2 million.[6]
- Smith v. Beers Skansksa, Inc. (2005) – $5 million settlement: The plaintiff was injured when a truck driven by an employee of Beers Skansksa, Inc. collided with his car. At the time of the crash, the employee was dialing his cell phone and checking his voicemail. Because the employee was on-duty and using a work-issued cell phone, Beers Skansksa, Inc. was held vicariously liable. The case settled for $5 million just before it was set to go to trial.[7]
To address this problem, many companies have instituted paper policies outlining acceptable cell phone use by employees. However, having a paper policy does not prevent a company from being held liable in the event of an accident, as seen in the case of Ford v. McGrogan & International Paper. In 2008, an employee of International Paper rear-ended another car while using a cell phone. The victim, whose arm had to be amputated, sued International Paper. Even though the company had a cell phone policy in place, management recognized they would likely be held vicariously responsible for the accident because the policy had not been enforced. They settled for $5.2 million dollars.[8]
Paper policies are inherently difficult to implement as their success relies on self-enforcement from employees. Fleet management technologies, such as mobile computers, enable companies to directly manage an employee’s cell phone or computer use while driving. Mobile computers can be programmed to disable functionality and display a blank screen while a vehicle is in motion. Once the vehicle is stopped, two-way messaging and cell phone capabilities allow drivers to communicate with the office safely and efficiently. These technologies eliminate the possibility of an employee using a company cell phone or mobile computer while driving and are one of the few ways to protect your company from liability in the case of an accident.
Click here to read the whitepaper by ZoomSafer.
[1] Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
[2] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) & Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
[3] “Distracted Driving: Understanding Your Business Risk and Liability.” ZoomSafer. http://zoomsafer.com/Portals/43/Whitepapers/Distracted%20Driving%20Corporate%20White%20Paper%20FINAL.pdf. January 2010.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[...] Fleet Beat,” Mentor Engineering’s blog for fleet professionals, recently recommended ZoomSafer’s white paper,” Distracted Driving:Understanding [...]
There are so many texting apps on the market coming up these days, but after trying a few of them, I think Text’nDrive is a superior product than the one mentioned in this article. It’s easy to use, works on both iPhone and BlackBerry, and they keep us informed on the latest texting laws in the U.S. and Canada (http://www.textndrive.com/textingwhiledriving.php). Good job folks!