Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Fired for job abandonment
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Inthegame" data-source="post: 3229542" data-attributes="member: 37112"><p>The key to that position is whether or not the OP was instructed to continue a work assignment. Subsequent posts indicate the OP was given an assignment he chose to ignore.</p><p>Leaving work after being instructed to stay, pretty much sums up job abandonment.</p><p>Experience. (Another syntactically null response I refer to as poetry.)</p><p>So you base your argument on "facts presented" yet root for one side in the labor v capital struggle. You might ponder on that awhile.</p><p>The difference between your theoretical case study and what "some forum dwellers" you deride here, is your lunch room argument has no consequence. You can win every time in a forum war. Put yourself on the hot seat at a JAC and see how convincing your theories are.</p><p>These "dwellers" respond only to protect others from making poor decisions that have real impacts.</p><p>Good for you but remember, you're shooting with blanks while the guys you're arguing with aren't.</p><p>There are several tests to establish past practice and most are difficult to prove without realms of witness statements to the act. Not necessary in this case. I'd simply argue the OP was given unclear directions and mistakenly under the impression he was released from further assignments. It should be relatively easy to get statements showing the PT sup did this in the past. Depending on the history and believability of the OP, rtw and backpay would be awarded.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Inthegame, post: 3229542, member: 37112"] The key to that position is whether or not the OP was instructed to continue a work assignment. Subsequent posts indicate the OP was given an assignment he chose to ignore. Leaving work after being instructed to stay, pretty much sums up job abandonment. Experience. (Another syntactically null response I refer to as poetry.) So you base your argument on "facts presented" yet root for one side in the labor v capital struggle. You might ponder on that awhile. The difference between your theoretical case study and what "some forum dwellers" you deride here, is your lunch room argument has no consequence. You can win every time in a forum war. Put yourself on the hot seat at a JAC and see how convincing your theories are. These "dwellers" respond only to protect others from making poor decisions that have real impacts. Good for you but remember, you're shooting with blanks while the guys you're arguing with aren't. There are several tests to establish past practice and most are difficult to prove without realms of witness statements to the act. Not necessary in this case. I'd simply argue the OP was given unclear directions and mistakenly under the impression he was released from further assignments. It should be relatively easy to get statements showing the PT sup did this in the past. Depending on the history and believability of the OP, rtw and backpay would be awarded. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Fired for job abandonment
Top