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 Discussions
God bless this widow for standing up to UPS
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="pretzel_man" data-source="post: 705894" data-attributes="member: 927"><p>I'm often amazed at this board. So many people believe their perspective is the only possible one and refuse to see facts stating the opposite. In fact, when presented with opposing information, they assume the other poster is the one with the jaded view. </p><p></p><p>Its funny, but this is the exact behavior they claim UPS management uses. </p><p></p><p>In one thread, people will complain that UPS is improperly pushing safety issues stating that "If you work at UPS and aren't smart enough to know there are UPS VEHICLES in the yard as you are walking around........"</p><p></p><p>In another, they complain that UPS is horrible because they are looking for a "gag order" in an accident settlement. The same people that complain management is brainwashed, only see a single side of a story. Even in a serious one where someone has died.</p><p></p><p>I find the use of the phrase "gag order" interesting. The following is the definition of a gag order: "A restrictive court order that prohibits all or some participants <strong>in a trial</strong> from speaking about a case or that stops publications and broadcasting stations from reporting on certain aspects of a case." From what I've been reading, it seems to be generally used to prohibit discussion of a case while a trial is going on.</p><p></p><p>I believe UPS is looking for a "confidential settlement agreement". Here are reasons why a defendant would want one: "A confidentiality agreement will usually be requested by a defendant. The defendant may wish to be able to publicly deny wrongdoing, and may be concerned that a large settlement will overshadow any protestations of innocence. The defendant may wish to avoid creating a precedent which might inspire other potential plaintiffs to make similar claims in the hope of achieving a similar settlement. A celebrity defendant might fear that lawsuits based upon false accusations might follow from public knowledge of a substantial settlement, or may hope that a confidentiality agreement will help facilitate recovery from career damage caused by high profile litigation."</p><p></p><p>My point is that I don't know the case details. People here do not either. But, because UPS wants some protection, the company is automatically wrong. Show me facts (not opinions) to the contrary and I will speak against the company. This is not what many on the opposite side are willing to do.</p><p></p><p>P-Man</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pretzel_man, post: 705894, member: 927"] I'm often amazed at this board. So many people believe their perspective is the only possible one and refuse to see facts stating the opposite. In fact, when presented with opposing information, they assume the other poster is the one with the jaded view. Its funny, but this is the exact behavior they claim UPS management uses. In one thread, people will complain that UPS is improperly pushing safety issues stating that "If you work at UPS and aren't smart enough to know there are UPS VEHICLES in the yard as you are walking around........" In another, they complain that UPS is horrible because they are looking for a "gag order" in an accident settlement. The same people that complain management is brainwashed, only see a single side of a story. Even in a serious one where someone has died. I find the use of the phrase "gag order" interesting. The following is the definition of a gag order: "A restrictive court order that prohibits all or some participants [B]in a trial[/B] from speaking about a case or that stops publications and broadcasting stations from reporting on certain aspects of a case." From what I've been reading, it seems to be generally used to prohibit discussion of a case while a trial is going on. I believe UPS is looking for a "confidential settlement agreement". Here are reasons why a defendant would want one: "A confidentiality agreement will usually be requested by a defendant. The defendant may wish to be able to publicly deny wrongdoing, and may be concerned that a large settlement will overshadow any protestations of innocence. The defendant may wish to avoid creating a precedent which might inspire other potential plaintiffs to make similar claims in the hope of achieving a similar settlement. A celebrity defendant might fear that lawsuits based upon false accusations might follow from public knowledge of a substantial settlement, or may hope that a confidentiality agreement will help facilitate recovery from career damage caused by high profile litigation." My point is that I don't know the case details. People here do not either. But, because UPS wants some protection, the company is automatically wrong. Show me facts (not opinions) to the contrary and I will speak against the company. This is not what many on the opposite side are willing to do. P-Man [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
God bless this widow for standing up to UPS
Top