- 38 -
discretion, * * * fire * * * Lessor’s [TLC’s] employees”. Id. at
160. The Court in Transport Labor I found that TLC retained the
sole and absolute authority to terminate each driver-employee’s
employment with TLC. Id. at 164. The record in the instant case
established: (1) If a trucking company client no longer wanted
or needed the services of a particular driver-employee, TLC did
not continue leasing such driver-employee to that trucking
company client but instead attempted to lease such
driver-employee to another trucking company client; and (2) TLC
also reassigned to another trucking company client any
driver-employee who no longer wished to work with a particular
trucking company client to which TLC had assigned such
driver-employee. Id. at 169-170. In Transport Labor I,
petitioner failed to show that the totality of the facts and
circumstances with respect to the termination of each driver-
employee’s employment was inconsistent with the exclusive lease
agreement.
With respect to petitioner’s assertion that the Court in
Transport Labor I “gave too much weight” to the TLC driver
handbook and the driver contract, not only does that assertion
ignore that the Court is “the trier of the facts, the judge of
the credibility of witnesses and of the weight of the evidence,
and the drawer of appropriate inferences”, Hamm v. Commissioner,
325 F.2d 934, 938 (8th Cir. 1963), affg. T.C. Memo. 1961-347, it
Page: Previous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011