My husband was driving the bosses car to making a delivery. The breaks went out and he totaled the car. The car was fully covered and his boss wants him to pay the $1000 deductable. His boss wants to deduct from his paycheck every other week about $50-$75, can his boss do that?

Not without getting a Judgment against your husband OR your husband's permission - he can't just begin to deduct the money. Do you have an affidavit that the cause was that the brakes failed?

However, if you are in an "employment at will" State your husband can be terminated for just about anything at any time. If he would be terminated for refusing to pay for the damages you would have a heck of a claim for unemployment insurance but, still, it would be a hassle.

Do you have an umbrella insurance policy that might cover this?

To disagree slightly with Judy... the husband may have signed something when he was hired stating that he agreed to take financial responsibility for any damages that happen to company property while in his control. I have a company laptop, and signed a form that clearly states that I will have to pay the company back if it gets stolen, damaged, etc. while in my care. If the husband signed a similar agreement, which he might have if driving company vehicles was likely in his job, then the company is merely offering him a convenient way of paying off something that he has already agreed to. In that case, I don't think that they would need to officially garnish wages, would they?

I don't think the company can collect from an employee for an event out of the employee's control - in this case an accident due to faulty brakes. This isn't a laptop that an employee loses or doesn't safeguard and it's stolen.

Employer is lucky the employee isn't suing him for injuries.

Many employment contracts are also unenforceable or, in fact, illegal in some aspects but serve their purpose - the employee thinks they ARE both legal and enforceable.

Anyway, I don't think such an agreement in this case is enforceable. If what OP says is correct the damage was due to the fault or negligence of the employer.

I also see this as one of those "You can't collect damages if you're a passenger in my car and I'm in an accident" deals. Totally unenforceable. In this instance the employee has no control over how hard (or where) the employer will push to collect damages from a third party or the insurance company. If the employer "knows" the employee will pay there is no incentive to pursue the mechanic who should have seen the defective brakes - or whatever the scenario is.

But we're back to employment at will. Again.

Hello PLF:

No, he can't do that. But, as explained, if your hubby doesn't agree to pay, he'll lose his job. I don't know how much he needs the job. I don't know if he can get another one right away. I don't know your circumstances...

However, if it was me, I'd refuse. If pressed for it, I'd quit. He'll deduct the amount from my last paycheck, and I'll sue him for it in small claims court. I'll win.

I would do it because I hate to be cheated, and I WON'T work for a guy who cheats me. Besides, I'm just not a fellow who will sit still for something like that. But, I can get another job easily. I have savings to cover me for a few weeks. MY circumstances are different than yours...

excon

Not knowing more about the accident (were the brakes actually faulty, did the driver possible drive over something that cut a line, is the driver just saying that to cover themselves, etc.), if the accident had been caused by the employee, would the company then have grounds to take it out of the employee's pay? Although I guess, in that case, they'd be suing him for all the damages that they get hit with because of the accident.

I see it as human error, a mistake, and I find the employer WAY out of line trying to subtract that from the employee's pay. Of course, we are on the legal board, not the moral board, and so -

Example: One of my employees was serving process. Person (who was avoiding) says server was "hammering" on front picture window, which shattered. Server (my employee) says he was standing at front door when a chair came through the picture window, shattering it. He called me immediately, the Police were called. Only two witnesses - my guy and the homeowner.

My employees are TOLD they are responsible for damage to people's personal property in the event they are overly enthusiastic - process service is not an excuse to be rude or ignorant or play Police Officer. They are also responsible for their own legal fees if they are asked to leave a property and do not do so and the Police are called. The Police cared nothing about the damage and never even looked at the window (which I thought was obviously broken out, not in) but were interested in a ticket for trespassing.

I submitted the cost of the window to my insurance company and I paid the deductible. I also paid for the Attorney on the trespass charge (there was no trespass but it had to be defended).

I also asked OP if a certified mechanic had made the statement that the brakes failed or if this is simply conjecture.

Either way - forcing the employee to pay takes all the incentive out of the employer pursing other means of collecting so I find the contract unenforceable.

Again - legal vs moral.

As a person who has driven a company vechile for one company or another for over 20 years, In all cases I have had to sign where I would pay the deductable in case of accident. This is a very common and almost customary agreement all employees who drive company vechiles do.

You pay no matter who is at fault, no matter what the cause of the accident is?

Hmmmm -

If it is the other persons fault but the company insurance has to pay, yep I have to pay the deductable, get it back if the other persons insurance has to pay.

I have personal experience with an employer deducting costs of damages from vehicle accidents out of my wages. I discovered quite by accident that it is illegal for an employer to deduct anything from any employee wages other than taxes, authorized benefit premiums or retirement funding. It doesn't matter how many releases or acknowledgements the employee signs giving the employer permission to do so, it is illegal for the employer to deduct anything other than as already stated. That applies to deductions for anything,whether it be for auto accidents, register shortages, or anything else, it is illegal for an employer to make those deductions from employee wages. If an employer does deduct anything other than taxes, benefits or retirement, they are subject to repayment of up to four times the amount of the wages plus penalties and interest. At least that's the way it is in the state of Texas. Other states may assign different values to repayment, penalties and interest, but it is illegal in every state and employees are entitled to recourse under law to recover those wages.

I know this for a fact because I quite by accident discovered that my previous employer had deducted $6,000.000 from my wages for an accident that only cost $500.00 in repairs. I took them to small claims court to recover the difference between the $6,000.00 the clipped me for and the actual $500.00 worth of damages. Imagine my surprise when the county judge started reading their lawyers that riot act and invited them to use his chambers to make a settlement with me if I was willing to discuss it. He informed them that the three inch stack of releases I had signed giving them permission to do so were not worth the paper they were written on. No one can sign away their rights. I walked out of the court house a couple of hours later with almost a full year's wages in my pocket, thank you very much Mr. Crooked employer. Trucking companies are the world's worst about deducting huge sums from driver wages. They do it all the time and get away with it because employees are not aware of the law and that they have rights that they cannot sign away no matter how many waivers or releases are signed.

I agree, excon. The risk of employee mistakes is a cost of doing business. Deducting anything from employee wages is transferring the risks associated with being in business without transferring any of the benefits.