Harassment: UPS just doesn’t get it WORMA

Cezanne

Well-Known Member
I agree. And don't get me wrong the management person sounds like a pig who probably should have gotten canned. Every managment person I've seen who continously acts this way eventually gets theirselves fired.

With that said its very unusal for someone to pursue a sexual harrassment case for vulger joking around of this type. The comments made sound ugly in print but are actually good examples of good natured joking around that I have often heard in operations. Especially inside operations.
there is a good chance the grievant has heard this type of joking before from co-workers, friends and family and decided to not be offended.This guy decided to pursue his sexual harrassment case for some other reason then sensistivity towards language. Its an example of what I've told my sups over the years. Accountability is a two way street. You will hold your team accountable for the job they do and they will hold you accountable for your fairness and professionalism.
Agree with you Tie, more than likely it was a young part time sup involved with this. Any full time management employee would I hope have enough brains if not class to indudge in such behavior. There is a clear standard of what a constitutes a hostile work environment , if be true this incident crosses the line. With age and yes wisdom comes the fact that there is always two sides of the tale, must of been some doubt to the story considering the sup was not terminated on the spot, which is from my limited point of view is a standard of policy.
 

tieguy

Banned
wrong... all involved are full-time sups with at least 15 years of service with company.

without defending them I am curious as to the circumstances. And when you post here with something like this you have to be prepared to undergo some scrutiny.

I assume the grievant heard this type of vulger joking around before from friends or was the person somewhat sheltered from this trucking company type language prior to being hired by ups?

Are you the grievant? I'm asking because you seem pretty passionate about spreading this seedy information.

Were there accountability / personality issues that also contributed to this lawsuit?
 

enigma54

New Member
Agree with you Tie, more than likely it was a young part time sup involved with this. Any full time management employee would I hope have enough brains if not class to indudge in such behavior. There is a clear standard of what a constitutes a hostile work environment , if be true this incident crosses the line. With age and yes wisdom comes the fact that there is always two sides of the tale, must of been some doubt to the story considering the sup was not terminated on the spot, which is from my limited point of view is a standard of policy.

without defending them I am curious as to the circumstances. And when you post here with something like this you have to be prepared to undergo some scrutiny.

I assume the grievant heard this type of vulger joking around before from friends or was the person somewhat sheltered from this trucking company type language prior to being hired by ups?

Are you the grievant? I'm asking because you seem pretty passionate about spreading this seedy information.

Were there accountability / personality issues that also contributed to this lawsuit?[/QUOTE

I am neither passionate nor spreading seedy information. Simply correcting statement made by Cezanne when it was assumed it was a young part-time sup responsible. If you read newspaper article and MCAD ruling, manager involved is a full-timer and not young as described by Cezanne. He has been in his professional position long enough to have" the brains if not class to know not to indulge in such behavior".
It is a mystery why this guy is still around,especially after the MCAD ruled in favor of the greivant.
 

tieguy

Banned
It is a mystery why this guy is still around,especially after the MCAD ruled in favor of the greivant.[/QUOTE]


Anything is possible. The newspaper article itself was really nothing more then a local slam job. The wording clearly shows the reporter got caught up in the hype of the case.

The ruling itself is actually not that impressive. 50,000 dollars in damages in a liberal state like massachusetts is almost a token judgement.
UPS's reluctance to fully cooperate with the macd may have been a bigger reason for the ruling.

There is a big difference between losing a ruling in a liberal venue and having the grounds to discharge the supervisor. Again I think any supervisor who acts like this will soon find himself out the door.

Would you or the "chosen one" care to comment on the relationship questions I previously asked about?



 

enigma54

New Member
Sorry, I'm not knowledgeable on the relationiship between the parties. I CAN say that either this sup didn't know his audience well enough or was so arrogant to believe he could behave in this manner with no repercussions. Like you said , if he truly is guilty he will eventually be shown the door. And remember the charges were made only to the MCAD - this was not a lawsuit or class action suit where possibly the judgement could be much higher.
 

tieguy

Banned
Sorry, I'm not knowledgeable on the relationiship between the parties. I CAN say that either this sup didn't know his audience well enough or was so arrogant to believe he could behave in this manner with no repercussions. Like you said , if he truly is guilty he will eventually be shown the door. And remember the charges were made only to the MCAD - this was not a lawsuit or class action suit where possibly the judgement could be much higher.

still a pittance relative to what it could have been.

the sup will keep his job while the appeals process takes place and possibly to prevent the appearance of admitting guilt which could ignite the lawsuit.

There is more here then the sup not knowing his audience. A guy filing a sexual harrassment suit against another guy has to be almost unheard of.

I wonder if sobo's lawyer chose macd because he thought his odds of a win were greater.

I wonder if our single issue member "the chosen one" will reappear to answer some questions?
 

tieguy

Banned
what is very interesting is if the roles were reversed, the hourly person would be gone within a few minutes of the offending actions. and the union would be very limited in getting the guys job back, if they could even do it at all.

d

Danny you southern gentlemen may not engage in this type of dialogue but up here in the northeast I see this type of language and joking around all the time from both sides of the fence with sexual harrassment charges rarely if ever brought up.
 

dannyboy

From the promised LAND
The comments made sound ugly in print but are actually good examples of good natured joking around that I have often heard in operations. Especially inside operations.
there is a good chance the grievant has heard this type of joking before from co-workers, friends and family and decided to not be offended.This guy decided to pursue his sexual harrassment case for some other reason then sensistivity towards language. Its an example of what I've told my sups over the years. Accountability is a two way street. You will hold your team accountable for the job they do and they will hold you accountable for your fairness and professionalism.

well what happens when the salty mouthed individual is asked by an offended employee not to use that type of language in their presence?

while not a prude, i do find it an indication of a serious lack of verbal skills, or a lack of knowledge of the english language.

while not always to be the case for people using crude language, they are simply trying to use the shock factor those words used to elicit. the shock factor is long gone, as the words have been over used, and now simply show the lack of intelligence of the speaker.

and in this time of the homosexual openness and promotion, yes, i do think it is past time for people of the same sex to be able to file sexual harassment charges against another employee.

case in point. i have a nephew that was a senior in high school. he was very good in three sports, so good that he was being recruited by colleges for all three sports. while in his senior year, he was forced to take a music class to round out his education. he was also forced to sit next to a young man that continually harassed him sexually, ie blowing kisses, graphic sexual gestures, and the list goes on and on. he attempted to get the teacher to move him to another section of the room, to no avail. the teacher thought it funny.

bottom line, he took the matter into his own hands after some extreme sexual harassment, and as a result, lost a great deal of the colleges that were trying to recruit him.

so why did it have to get to that point? if it had been a minority claiming harassment, or if the gay boy had claimed harassment, they would have been all over chris. but because the shoe was on the other foot.......

people have a right to an education and a workplace free of sexual harassment, regardless of whom dishes it out.

d
 

Dustyroads

Well-Known Member
Danny you southern gentlemen may not engage in this type of dialogue but up here in the northeast I see this type of language and joking around all the time from both sides of the fence with sexual harrassment charges rarely if ever brought up.

If such "language and joking" are commonplace up there, I would think that all of your employees need some training in the rules with regard to sexual harrassment in the workplace. As we can see from this case, allowing such behavior to exist in the workplace by turning one's head or simply writing it off as business as usual, results in the company and individuals working for the company being placed in a position of liability for damages where this type of behavior is allowed, encouraged, or ignored.
 
D

Dis-organized Labor

Guest
If such "language and joking" are commonplace up there, I would think that all of your employees need some training in the rules with regard to sexual harrassment in the workplace. As we can see from this case, allowing such behavior to exist in the workplace by turning one's head or simply writing it off as business as usual, results in the company and individuals working for the company being placed in a position of liability for damages where this type of behavior is allowed, encouraged, or ignored.

I have to agree with you as well. People know when they are saying something offensive, stepping over the line. They do it for some power trip, to get a stir out of one of the listeners, or just do not care about anyone. But, they still know they're being offensive. I won't get into what the Policy Book says because the days of it really meaning anything are long gone. I think we all have some sort of internal policy that says something like: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". It's as simple as that. Also, UPS is not some midnight garage operation. We're supposed to be a respected, professional organization that acts that way. I realize there are problem Centers all over the system, but the "system" is supposed to take care of itself.
 

UnconTROLLed

perfection
Combining the unfriendly southern New England demeanor with the UPS lack of morals and ethics by both parties, what it boils down to is this type of workplace sitation which is VERY real, btw. I know the supervisor.
 

upssup

Well-Known Member
Here is a fine example of how it works. My daughter worked here in the hub and was sexually harassed by a coworker. It was said coworkers 4th OFFENCE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF A COWORKER. My daughter was upset to say the least to see that THE UNION GOT HIM HIS JOB BACK! needless to say that my daughter who was a very hard worker and excellent employee quit and left the company. If this is what the union believes it should do for it's employees then I am glad I am no longer a union employee. How do the teamsters justify bringing this turd back to UPS?
 

dannyboy

From the promised LAND
How do the teamsters justify bringing this turd back to UPS?
ups sup

why would you expect anything different? after all, the post was about a sup that did not get any punishment (at least at that time) for the harrassment.

if its good for the gander, its good for the goose.

my personal view is both ought to be looking for work, not your daughter, which is my point to tie.

d
 
Top