Unjust / progressive discipline

[Mugarolla]

A warning letter is the first step, in progressive discipline.

It's not wise to blow it off.

Always protest every warning letter with a grievance.



Protesting the company's position, is your contractual right.

They have been known to make mistakes.


And if the issue progresses, the first question an arbitrator or a Panel would ask....

Did you protest the warning letter ? If not, why ?


It wouldn't help your case.... if you said, you deserved it.




I was wondering why you highlighted that.

??



-Bug-

Copied and pasted. Did not notice it was highlighted.

 

[Mugarolla]

It really does no good. Unless they withdraw it, you still have a warning letter. Protesting it does not stop the next step in progressive discipline.

Yes, grieve the stupid ones. But if you are observed by 2 management people not wearing your seatbelt, grieving that warning letter could bring that big spotlight right over your head. I sure hope you do everything by the methods or there will be more warning letters coming your way.

And if you are not worried because you do everything by the book, why did you get a warning letter for in the first place? I'm sure you know how vindiction management can be.

Whoops...that should have said vindictive. Like someone else asked, how do you grieve a warning letter? For instance, an observed seatbelt warning letter. Do you lie and say it was on? If you want to lie your way out of a warning letter, you are no better than management.

If you got a seatbelt warning letter, just make sure you always wear it from now on.

 

[scooby0048]

Like someone else asked, how do you grieve a warning letter? For instance, an observed seatbelt warning letter.

That's a good example now here's a question to that. They do their observations from a good distance away and there is no way to see into the car unless you look from the side or front. So my question would be how could the sup possibly tell if someone was wearing the seatbelt or not. I think no matter how good a driver is at following the methods and being safe, the supes have to write something up so it looks good to the higher-ups whether it is true or not. What if the supe has a hardon for you, it's their word against yours.

If they insist on these BS observations, then they should video the observations. At least that way anything that is documented is irrefutable proof of a violation and an unbiased account. They don't trust us enough to do our jobs safely then install cameras in the cabs...otherwise friend off and leave us alone!

 

[TooTechie]

That's a good example now here's a question to that. They do their observations from a good distance away and there is no way to see into the car unless you look from the side or front.

Unless it's the old 1980s truck with just the lapbelt, you can easily see if someone has a black strap across their chest as they drive past.

 

[bleedinbrown58]

Unless it's the old 1980s truck with just the lapbelt, you can easily see if someone has a black strap across their chest as they drive past.

Couldn't they just check the telematics report?

 

[scooby0048]

Unless it's the old 1980s truck with just the lapbelt, you can easily see if someone has a black strap across their chest as they drive past.

Couldn't they just check the telematics report?

Maybe the seatbelt thing was a bad example, where I was going was that most of these observations are done from a good distance and I know there are times when they have no idea what is going on in the cab of the car.

 

[TooTechie]

Couldn't they just check the telematics report?

They're not supposed to discipline using telematics alone. They have to corroborate it.

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

They're not supposed to discipline using telematics alone. They have to corroborate it.

Record, drive,record. Whats that?

 

[TooTechie]

Maybe the seatbelt thing was a bad example, where I was going was that most of these observations are done from a good distance and I know there are times when they have no idea what is going on in the cab of the car.

Oh yeah--they'll definitely try to bs you if you let them. We had them try to give someone a verbal for failure to follow methods because an air pickup piece was not pulled off a truck. The on car tried to say it was scanned when that truck was unloaded proving it must have been in that truck.

I pointed out that there is no scanner at the point where they're unloading the trucks in our operation so they couldn't prove the driver left it on the car and two different drivers swept that location so either of them could have accidentally left it on the car.

They then tried to give verbals to both drivers and that didn't happen either. They're slimy.

 

[silenze]

I always say I wasn't trained properly and cannot be held accountable.

 

[OLDMAN3]

Maybe the seatbelt thing was a bad example, where I was going was that most of these observations are done from a good distance and I know there are times when they have no idea what is going on in the cab of the car.

Yep,
Example from two drivers years ago...
1. Warning letter for being observed not sounding horn when backing.
-Upon questioning management, since it was below 0 degrees outside they did not have the window open; when they "did not hear the horn" from a considerable distance.
2. Warning letter for being observed not using handrail when entering package car.
-Upon questioning management, it was determined that they observed driver from in front of the package car at a considerable distance. Management was unaware there was a second handrail inside of the cab, which they could not have seen the driver use or not use.

Both instances were a center manager who targeted specific drivers, she was later fired.

 

[OLDMAN3]

When receiving a warning letter based on "observations", find out who the 2 managers were, and ask them about the observations separately before your grievance hearing. Ask them how it came about that they were observing you....did they target you specifically? Where did they first see you? Where were they located when observing you? Where were you located? How long did they follow you? Did they notice any other behavior that violated the methods? Did they observe other drivers as well? etc. etc.

Notice any inconsistencies between the 2 manager's stories. Believe me, some managers will just simply make stuff up to nail someone they are targeting. See if they change their story at the grievance hearing. Have at least 1 witness present when talking to them. If they were targeting you specifically without good reason, file a harassment /over-supervision grievance in addition.

 

[scooby0048]

When receiving a warning letter based on "observations", find out who the 2 managers were, and ask them about the observations separately before your grievance hearing. Ask them how it came about that they were observing you....did they target you specifically? Where did they first see you? Where were they located when observing you? Where were you located? How long did they follow you? Did they notice any other behavior that violated the methods? Did they observe other drivers as well? etc. etc.

Notice any inconsistencies between the 2 manager's stories. Believe me, some managers will just simply make stuff up to nail someone they are targeting. See if they change their story at the grievance hearing. Have at least 1 witness present when talking to them. If they were targeting you specifically without good reason, file a harassment /over-supervision grievance in addition.

That is a great idea but the only problem is we don't have 2 managers doing observations. Just one so basically what he says goes.