The drunkenness of a cunning tractor driver had to be dealt with by the Constitutional Court

He did not pass the “extra” driver’s license and was able to get a job

The Constitutional Court (CC) of Russia decided to prohibit fines for an employer who let a tractor driver deprived of the right to drive vehicles for the “steering wheel”. This cannot be done, provided that the company did not know that the employee had already been fined.

As it became known to MK, the story happened in the Zelenograd administrative district of the capital in April 2020. Then, by decision of the state inspector of technical supervision of the traffic police department of Zelenograd, a fine of 100 thousand rubles was imposed on the local State Budgetary Institution “Roads” for allowing a citizen to drive a loading and unloading machine. During the consideration of the case, it turned out that the driver was brought to court twice for driving while intoxicated. As a result, he was disqualified for a year and a half. This also deprived him of the right to drive self-propelled machines, which include loading and unloading vehicles. And since, in accordance with the Code of Administrative Offenses, the enterprise where he works should be responsible for the admission of such a driver to driving, the State Budgetary Institution suffered. However, it turned out that the violator, having handed over his driver’s license, retained the rights of a tractor driver, which allowed him to get a job at Avtodor. However, the Moscow City Court did not consider this a sufficient reason to cancel the decision of the traffic police.

Then the road workers turned to the Constitutional Court with a request to recognize the provisions of the Code of Administrative Offenses that lay responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of an employee as inconsistent with the Constitution. The court did not agree with this, but ruled that it was unfair to apply these provisions in relation to Avtodor. The driver’s license of a tractor driver-machinist is sufficient for admission to the equipment, and they are not required to find out the entire “automobile” biography of the candidate at the transport enterprise. Therefore, the case was sent for retrial.