It Appears I'm Being Fired - Please help... - Page 5 - Brown Cafe

dannyboy · 07-22-2009, 08:49 AM

Quote:

homeowner had no insurance.

Home owner cant insure your belongings, only you can do that.

As for trials that we face, each one of us here have trials, some more than others.

Many are self inflicted, some just happen. You would be surprised on how many are truly self inflicted when you look at them from an outside view. Been there, got the scars (in more ways than one) to prove it.

The whole trick is to limit the ones that we self inflict (like no renters insurance), and try to limit the exposure to the others. That type of lifestyle only makes sense, and is the responsible way to live.

The other things that life throws us builds character in how we deal with those issues.

d

JohnnyPension · 07-22-2009, 11:07 AM

Similar fees here in Arizona but a portion is tax deductible.

stevetheupsguy · 07-22-2009, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livin the Dream?

On the contrary, the whole "2nd meaning" by using the first letter in a sentence here was started by me. I'm just better at it, because you don't even see when I do it.

If your posts were meant to be humorous, then I apologize - I didn't get it.

Dannyboy - I understand what you say. Home was rented, no renters insurance, homeowner had no insurance.

The matters in my life that I bring up here, have brought up in the past, are a mere fraction, a fraction of a fraction if you will, of the complications in my life in the past decade or so. Not complaining, because I believe everyone has to deal with the cards that they are dealt. However, I'm pretty sure that, If I told here of every major catastrophe that my family has had in the past decade, you would simply not believe it. In the midst of this, details get lost, and here we are.

Reminds me of someone that tries to do everything their way. When you started at UPS you tried it your way and where did that get you? Now it's time to look at your life. In what way are you being stubborn? Who's advice are you not taking? When did you leave the right path and start on the one that you're currently on? It's time to take a long deep look at your life and see things clearly. As Danny said, a lot of this could be self inflicted and I think it is, JMHO, as always.........even though you can't read this because you choose to ignore me for some odd reason. Here's a good question. When was the last time you got on your knees and had a one on one with "The Man"?

cachsux · 07-22-2009, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevetheupsguy

When was the last time you got on your knees and had a one on one with "The Man"?

If he loses his job thats what it might take to get it back.

tieguy · 07-22-2009, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannyboy

Tie

As a steward, I have a right to know what the meeting is about. That is the only way I can properly represent the driver. Any obstruction by management to interfere with that right is not viewed by me or the union very favorably.

Basically, if you tried that the way this was represented to have gone down, I would have excused both the driver and myself. Then met with management to find out what was going on. In the event of no answer from management, the meeting would be over. Period. Next meeting would be with the BA.

You want treated with respect when in the office by the union representative, then show respect.

The way this supposedly was handled showed no respect what so ever to the driver or the steward.

We are not little children here, we are adults. But not acting like these guys did.

d

Danny I fully understand your point. I think many stewards have demanded the right to do as you say. Many like yourself have developed a relationship and understanding that you will be accorded these rights.

Contractually though the language in the contract is somewhat ambigious and does not clearly define the stewards rights during an investigatory meeting.

This type of meeting can highlight the delicate nature of the job you do as a steward.

Weingarten actually gives you the right to know the nature of the interview and may even support your right to provide private counsel and to object to any questions that you feel are misleading or inappropriate. Taking such a stance in this scenario could however ignite a literal application by the company which would be harmful towards the employee.

The company could if provoked in this case simply discharge the employee for driving on a suspended license.

Instead the less confrontational steward appears to have helped the employee in that he was allowed to explain his situation and afforded the opportunity to provide supporting documentation at a later date.

The effective steward in this case may be the one that exercises quiet diplomacy rather then the rabble rouser.

tieguy · 07-22-2009, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tourists24

http://www.umass.edu/usa/weingarten.htm

Tie; here is a little info that gives a little more insight about representation and steward rights based on the whole byproduct of Weingarten. It explains that a steward is NOT merely a witness

Tourist I appreciate the link

I'm familiar with this definition of Weingarten which supports the employees right to ask for and have a steward present during an investigatory interview. This definition which is the more common one I see does not seem to go beyond the scope of having a steward present.

The actual legal reference is found under title 5 section 7114 (a)

That reference does support the employees rights to have the steward present but does not support the stewards rights as mentioned in the stewards hand books many of you use.

Livin the Dream? · 07-22-2009, 08:04 PM

No news. I assume that I will be terminated, with the knowledge that I will fight it win my job back. I can't see UPS making an exception due to the circumstances, but I can see it reversed at panel. If I were in thier position, that is what I would do - I just wish they would do something.

Can I go for pay I've missed from not driving while they investigate?

Anyone have the wording with regards to being terminated due to suspended license?

705red · 07-22-2009, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livin the Dream?

No news. I assume that I will be terminated, with the knowledge that I will fight it win my job back. I can't see UPS making an exception due to the circumstances, but I can see it reversed at panel. If I were in thier position, that is what I would do - I just wish they would do something.

Can I go for pay I've missed from not driving while they investigate?

Anyone have the wording with regards to being terminated due to suspended license?

Ask for lost wages in your grievance not your guarantee. Lost wages wording would include your O.T. Also keep copies of your checks to show how many hours you usually work and if you can tell your steward to file an information request for the driver that is doing your usual work to compare hours.

dannyboy · 07-22-2009, 09:20 PM

Tie

Every issue is different, and has different twists and facets to it. And that is what you are driving at.

That is why as a steward, I like to know what is being discussed and why. I appreciate openness and honesty from both sides. I hate playing games with peoples jobs.

And that is what the cat and mouse tactic would have done, was to alienate me in a major way.

I believe they used tactics that were uncalled for.

d

satellitedriver · 07-22-2009, 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livin the Dream?

On the contrary, the whole "2nd meaning" by using the first letter in a sentence here was started by me.Really, I thought bbags took that credit,old as the thought was. I'm just better at it, because you don't even see when I do it. I, to, have an ignore default,but, that does not mean I have not seen,which I wish to ignore.

If your posts were meant to be humorous, then I apologize - I didn't get it.
Cool, I have a very weird sense of humor.

Dannyboy - I understand what you say. Home was rented, no renters insurance, homeowner had no insurance.

In my interpretation, Danny was just stating the simple 80/20 rules of ones actions and the results.

The matters in my life that I bring up here, have brought up in the past, are a mere fraction, a fraction of a fraction if you will, of the complications in my life in the past decade or so. Not complaining, because I believe everyone has to deal with the cards that they are dealt. However, I'm pretty sure that, If I told here of every major catastrophe that my family has had in the past decade, you would simply not believe it. In the midst of this, details get lost, and here we are.
You must be a young person, to be willing to swap stories of "major catastrophes" in the last decade.
Danny can speak for himself,on that subject.
I could sit with you around a camp fire and tell you what events have incurred in my life, of over 5 decades, never would I have called any of them catastrophic.
Life changing, Yes
Painful, Yes
Catastrophic, No

skirhustler · 07-22-2009, 10:49 PM

Fed Ex Ground is hiring here in Los Angeles nobody wants to work for them. They keep quitting.

JonFrum · 07-23-2009, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tieguy

Danny I fully understand your point. I think many stewards have demanded the right to do as you say. Many like yourself have developed a relationship and understanding that you will be accorded these rights.

Contractually though the language in the contract is somewhat ambigious and does not clearly define the stewards rights during an investigatory meeting.

This type of meeting can highlight the delicate nature of the job you do as a steward.

Weingarten actually gives you the right to know the nature of the interview and may even support your right to provide private counsel and to object to any questions that you feel are misleading or inappropriate. Taking such a stance in this scenario could however ignite a literal application by the company which would be harmful towards the employee.

The company could if provoked in this case simply discharge the employee for driving on a suspended license.

Instead the less confrontational steward appears to have helped the employee in that he was allowed to explain his situation and afforded the opportunity to provide supporting documentation at a later date.

The effective steward in this case may be the one that exercises quiet diplomacy rather then the rabble rouser.

Tie, steward's rights are defined by the NLRA and the decisions of the NLRB and the Courts. The UPS Contract pre-supposes all of that.

Try searching the Internet for "steward's rights."

If UPS should fire a driver for unknowingly driving with a suspended license, what punishment should UPS suffer for being guilty of unknowingly putting a driver on the road with a suspended license? Should UPS's Common Carrier authority be revoked? Should UPS be shut down nationwide for, say, 90 days, or just the guilty facility?

tieguy · 07-23-2009, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 705red

Ask for lost wages in your grievance not your guarantee. Lost wages wording would include your O.T. Also keep copies of your checks to show how many hours you usually work and if you can tell your steward to file an information request for the driver that is doing your usual work to compare hours.

might as well ask for a pizza party while he is also asking for the ridiculous.

The guy was driving on a suspended license for five months. UPS has been slow and careful to make sure they get this one right. Asking for something stupid right now is a good way to aggravate the situation.

tieguy · 07-23-2009, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonFrum

Tie, steward's rights are defined by the NLRA and the decisions of the NLRB and the Courts. The UPS Contract pre-supposes all of that.

Try searching the Internet for "steward's rights."

I've done that jon. I'm well aware that there is an author out there making a living off of stewards buying his reference material. At this point I've gone to the actual legal language, searched NLRB rulings in regards to Weingarten rights and weingarten language. The legal language appears to support the prescence of the steward not his controlling or disrupting the meeting. your contractual language is in honesty too vague and still gives management the discretion to decide when and how they will allow the steward his rights. So at this point you folks keep telling me you have certain rights in this investigatory process that are not supported by any legal or contractual language that I have found.

If UPS should fire a driver for unknowingly driving with a suspended license, what punishment should UPS suffer for being guilty of unknowingly putting a driver on the road with a suspended license? Should UPS's Common Carrier authority be revoked? Should UPS be shut down nationwide for, say, 90 days, or just the guilty facility?

Living the dream broke the law whether knowingly or not. UPS does not have to prove that point. Living would have to prove that he did not know. UPS could have made this much harder on him then they have.

Livin the Dream? · 07-23-2009, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tieguy

Living the dream broke the law whether knowingly or not. UPS does not have to prove that point. Living would have to prove that he did not know. UPS could have made this much harder on him then they have.

I agree completely. Regardless of the extenuating circumstances, I was driving with a suspended license.

PennDot DOES have a record of the mail being returned to them, undelivered, requesting $25 restoration fee. UPS is aware of this.

You really think they'll give a pizza party?

Sat Driver - The word Catastrophic was used on purpose. I am happy for you though

dannyboy · 07-23-2009, 08:45 AM

Tie

The points you make are valid. They would set the tone for the company to either let it slide, or play hardball.

The problem I have with the tactics are that they are not very professional. They reek of attempts at intimidation. Not at all what should be used by those seeking to pass themselves off as professional management employees.

As far as being a steward on something like this, it does have the potential to be ugly, and while there are extenuating circumstances on the part of the driver, it is still 100% his responsibility to make sure he has a valid license. Period. Goes back to the old saying, ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

I am also sure that the local management is not in charge of the decision, that comes from above. But sometimes those with angry mouths at the beginning of the conversation end up causing real trouble at the conclusion of the issue.

As for our contract and the legal rights of the steward, our contract states that the rights spelled out in the contract are in addition to any law of the land that applies, and if there are any limits in the contract that would violate such law, the law supersedes the contract language.

So any rights given that were law under wiengarten are actually a given in our contract.

That being said, that does not give the steward the right to be disruptive or antagonistic at the hearing. You confer with the driver, you council the driver, and you politely interrupt when you have a point to make or to tell the driver its time you shut up. The driver has the right to not self incriminate.

d

dannyboy · 07-23-2009, 08:50 AM

Catastrophic

Interesting choice of words.

Overused by drama queens for sure!

Ive had a lot of different things happen, tragic, traumatic even. But none catastrophic.

But I guess in an age of oversensationalism to catch peoples short attention, many words have been very watered down. It is what it is.

d

tourists24 · 07-23-2009, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannyboy

Tie

The problem I have with the tactics are that they are not very professional. They reek of attempts at intimidation. Not at all what should be used by those seeking to pass themselves off as professional management employees.

That being said, that does not give the steward the right to be disruptive or antagonistic at the hearing. You confer with the driver, you council the driver, and you politely interrupt when you have a point to make or to tell the driver its time you shut up. The driver has the right to not self incriminate.

d

good points there danny,,,, I ran into a situation just last week. Had a driver in the office and was told to shut up and sit there quietly by CM.... Ive been a steward for years and he knows not to say that to me. I didnt shut up and it interrupted the meeting. No need for it.

dannyboy · 07-23-2009, 09:24 AM

As a steward, you are there to aid the employee in helping the company get to the bottom of a situation that involves that employee. The object is to get to the truth, no matter how bad it might be. I believe in openness and truthfulness, and it has served me well during my time at UPS. But the employee does have the right to not incriminate himself. AT those times, the only thing I recommended is to not answer instead of lying. The employee has that right, but then that also signals the company that there is something wrong.

There are times when I felt the employee was both lying to me and the company. There have also been times that the employee was wrong, and company was right in its dealings. Usually if both parties can negotiate like adults, then they can come to an agreement that works and is good for both parties.

There are other times when the situation demands that you stick to the bottom line and you go all the way with your convictions, in spite of what the company wants.

Its a case by case call.

d

Livin the Dream? · 07-23-2009, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannyboy

Catastrophic

Interesting choice of words.

Overused by drama queens for sure!

Ive had a lot of different things happen, tragic, traumatic even. But none catastrophic.

But I guess in an age of oversensationalism to catch peoples short attention, many words have been very watered down. It is what it is.

d

Or you have been blessed / lucky. Good for you.

tieguy · 07-23-2009, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannyboy

Tie

The points you make are valid. They would set the tone for the company to either let it slide, or play hardball.

The problem I have with the tactics are that they are not very professional. They reek of attempts at intimidation. Not at all what should be used by those seeking to pass themselves off as professional management employees.

d

Danny ,

I didn't see what was really all that unprofessional about it.
I can see the conversation.

Holy crap living has been driving on a suspended license for five months.

Does he know its suspended.?

How could he not know?

Lets ask him and see how he acts without any warning.

The tactic gave him credibility. If the steward talks to him the fear is living cooks up some excuse with the help of the steward and they never find out the truth.

I think its a better tactic then firing him and letting him argue his way back in.

What would have happened if he got pulled over during that five month period? Do they lock you up for driving on a suspended license? If so then I think UPS handled it much better then the police would have.

altstewie · 07-23-2009, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tieguy

Danny ,

I didn't see what was really all that unprofessional about it.
I can see the conversation.

Holy crap living has been driving on a suspended license for five months.

Does he know its suspended.?

How could he not know?

Lets ask him and see how he acts without any warning.

The tactic gave him credibility. If the steward talks to him the fear is living cooks up some excuse with the help of the steward and they never find out the truth.

I think its a better tactic then firing him and letting him argue his way back in.

What would have happened if he got pulled over during that five month period? Do they lock you up for driving on a suspended license? If so then I think UPS handled it much better then the police would have.

I actually agree with Tie in this situation. The OP should find out if the steward didnt intervene at the thought that it would be best for him not to.

I think the whole intervening thing is probably best most of the time. It just has to be looked at on a case by case basis.

dannyboy · 07-23-2009, 03:34 PM

Tie

Quote:

Lets ask him and see how he acts without any warning.

The tactic gave him credibility. If the steward talks to him the fear is living cooks up some excuse with the help of the steward and they never find out the truth.

If that would have been the way they handled it, I would agree 100%.

But did they ask him about his license being suspended? That is not how it was posted.

The question to the driver was "do you have anything you want to tell us about?"

As a shop steward, I would have suggested that you get to a point with the question, as that type of fishing expedition is very unprofessional, and totally inappropriate for a UPS setting. Its more like what you would expect in a movie with the Nazi interrogations going on.

The proper way would have been to ask to see his license, then ask why he did not report it being suspended. The resulting facial expressions would have told you the same things without the crap.

The quest for the truth is fine. But the way they got to what they wanted was BS, and you know it.

Best

d

satellitedriver · 07-23-2009, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livin the Dream?

I agree completely. Regardless of the extenuating circumstances, I was driving with a suspended license.

PennDot DOES have a record of the mail being returned to them, undelivered, requesting $25 restoration fee. UPS is aware of this.
This undelivered mail thing -extenuating circumstances- , rings so false. Did you not check for your mail at the post office? I can only assume that you have other pertinent bills that needed to be addressed in the last 5 months. More telling, in your tale, is that you state that PennDot requested a $25 restoration fee.
To whom did they make this request?
They probably did it by mail, after the fact.
Your time line and excuses do not match.

You really think they'll give a pizza party?Nope

Sat Driver - The word Catastrophic was used on purpose ( I would call it a deliberate attempt). I am happy for you though Thanks, and I am sadden, for you.

Livin the Dream? · 07-24-2009, 07:12 AM

SatDriver, don't know what to tell you - it is what it is.

Sad is when a forum poster has to put a forum moderator on his "ignore" list, if you ask me.....

UPS did eventually ask to see my license at the end of the interrogation, which I presented. Friday, still no word.

Note - Did you know the forum doesn't allow you to ignore a moderator?