Appropriate discipline

What discipline should he get?

  • None. We all drive like that.

    Votes: 7 9.0%
  • Verbal warning

    Votes: 13 16.7%
  • Written warning

    Votes: 45 57.7%
  • Termination

    Votes: 13 16.7%

  • Total voters
    78

atatbl

Well-Known Member
I do not post here much. I have negative rep points for a reason. I am sure I will get them for this.

I read threads here everyday. When I read this thread originally it was only about a page long. It was disgusting to see danny_boy defend this drivers actions. Saying that it is illegal to be in a middle (or far left lane for that matter) and do the posted speed limit. I am happy to see most of you do not agree with him. Perhaps, as some of you have brought up, he should learn there is a MINIMUM MPH on EVERY HIGHWAY AND INTERSTATE in the country. NO EXCEPTION. We all know (with the exception of danny), that this is MUCH less than 60MPH EVERYWHERE. I know he will argue with me, but I challenge him to find something different through Nexus or LawLibrary. I am not an attorney yet, but a juvenile could defend ANYONE who gets a ticket for doing 60 in the FAR LEFT lane (much less the middle) and get a "not guilty" verdict.

More to the point, after two sets of research I found no substantial**** case law of any party that has ever been cited for doing the speed limit on a U.S. interstate or highway.

**** There were two cases I found that convicted (meaning convicted before this incident even occurred) drug dealers were pulled over for not allowing traffic to pass while in the right lane. You read that correctly. They were in the far right lane, yet did not let traffic pass. This is not a debate about illegal profiling for convicted offenders, so please do not bother to argue about that point. I just had to make sure that everyone knew where the two cases that were exceptions came from. By the way they were on I-35....... kind of known to drug traffickers or anyone involved in law enforcement.

Furthermore, the "shock jock" reporter was a prick for doing what he did, overall. However, he did it because it is the type of thing his job demands. That is not an excuse. If any of us did this for fun, it would be sickening.

WHY HE DID THIS IS NOT THE POINT. At least not in the U.S. He followed the law to watch someone break it. This was the point. danny will not understand why what he did was legal (as he has pointed out), but it was. It is how we make changes. I do not like that the victim happened to be us. We work for UPS, this is not good for us. The driver deserves whatever he gets. This is not good FOR US. Again, we work for UPS! See the emblem on that truck? UPS. We became the victim of THAT DRIVER'S actions.

I am sorry to seem so vindictive in this posting. Neg rep away. The point still remains, I am SOOOOOOOOOO happy most of you saw through that gorilla dust danny posted about the reporter breaking the law in ANY WAY. He did what he did, it was POSSIBLY unethical to the average person, certainly not in media perspective. Definitely not in interstate traffic law.

Danny, I submit to you that I would like you to quit preaching to a church you do not belong to. Please. Quit. We know that you know how to get police reports. You showed that in the other thread.

In fact, you manage to make a post here stating one sentence ON TOPIC and then revert back to the thread about the motorcyclist.

I look forward to you quoting three or four sentences from my post and then molesting them into a controverted mind frame that was not the substance of my post. Which you never fail at doing, but then again, I am not the first person to bring this to your attention.

-Reporter followed the law
-Feeder driver followed to closely (citation)
-Feeder driver flashed lights in aggressive manner (citation)
-This is illegal on ALL interstates, although not federal law. Every area of interstate has the "road rage" clause in it now, which includes this. Statute numbers vary from "section" to "section".
-Driver aggressively merged lanes (cutoff) the reporter. Forget statutes you can find this in any state's laws. However, Interstates have federal mandate on that. I am just to tired, lazy, and angry to find it. Find it yourself. If you do not believe me, challenge me then. (Regardless, citation)


 
Last edited:

local804

Well-Known Member
There you go with the conspiracy theory that management is out to get all non-management! Because of the TV exposure, discipline would need to be swift. A covert operation to go after this driver would not make the point necessary to set the example. I know you know this!!!

QUOTE]

No no no Ups lifer, I do not use a conspiriacy theory that all UPS management is out to get our non management employees. I have seen way too many retaliatory moves first hand from management here(NY area) to back my opinion. From guys speaking up in PCM to filing grievances, some have got alot of unwanted attention and had to deal with oversupervision and micrmanagement to its fullest. From what I can tell, management like yourself and Chan are not your typical UPS management here. Tieguy, well maybe thats a different stroy (jk):) I also am the one who thinks the driver is totally wrong and should be dealt with for JUST the action he took and not set out for a witch hunt.
 

atatbl

Well-Known Member
There you go with the conspiracy theory that management is out to get all non-management! Because of the TV exposure, discipline would need to be swift. A covert operation to go after this driver would not make the point necessary to set the example. I know you know this!!!

QUOTE]

No no no Ups lifer, I do not use a conspiriacy theory that all UPS management is out to get our non management employees. I have seen way too many retaliatory moves first hand from management here(NY area) to back my opinion. From guys speaking up in PCM to filing grievances, some have got alot of unwanted attention and had to deal with oversupervision and micrmanagement to its fullest. From what I can tell, management like yourself and Chan are not your typical UPS management here. Tieguy, well maybe thats a different stroy (jk):) I also am the one who thinks the driver is totally wrong and should be dealt with for JUST the action he took and not set out for a witch hunt.

Your post raises a very interesting question. How to handle it without making it a witch hunt.

I would definitely agree that this incident should only be disciplined for the driver in the way that it would be for any other. If he has previous "engagements", such as this one, then increase the penalty. If not, discipline him the same way you would if there were not reporters present and filming it.

This might open a whole different can of worms. How is a company supposed to treat an employee that acts like this and then gets media attention? Keeping to the specifics of this case: a professional that directly disobeys laws that he has agreed to abide by as a professional. Laws that directly affect that professionals occupation. Say, for example, a police officer buys cocaine in a non-occupational stature. Or, a broker uses inside information to make transactions. Or, a doctor fails to follow the Hippocratic Oath. Maybe, a lawyer fails to defend his/her client "zealously".

As I know will be pointed out, there are some logical flaws to this analogy. Comparing the examples I gave to a professional driver should deduct: A professional driver steals packages and then delivers them to a co-conspirator.

However, the point remains, these things happen every day. At least this driver is in a union. He may be offered another non-driving job at some point. All of the others I pointed out lose their licenses to practice or serve immediately and will probably NEVER work in the same field again. When police officers do what that driver did, they are fired. Most are forced to go into private security. I hope I do not offend anyone with the next sentence, it is not meant maliciously. That would be equivalent of most of you going to work for DHL in the U.S.

I ask again, what is the organization to do? Not make a disciplinary action? Of course not, they have to. Not fire the individual? Asinine. Completely Asinine. Actions needs to be taken. Lives were risked in this situation. Remember my examples? How many people die when insider info is used to trade? How many people are guaranteed death when police break the law? How many people suffer when a doctor commits malpractice? The answer: you cannot put a number on it. Every situation only has POTENTIAL for a NEGATIVE OUTCOME.

This driver raised the potential (from just being someone on the road, that might be in an unavoidable accident at any second) to a level that most people see as scary.

Forget any press = good press for the pretense of the latter:

-No action = bad press, clear negligence of the company, loss of sales
-Action not deemed acceptable by public = bad press, possible future lawsuit, loss of sales
-Termination (or any "rash" recourse) = bettering press in follow-up, sales steadily average

(The previous is ONLY meant to address "what is a company to do?". That is why I am not taking into account this driver having to find another place to feed his family. Sometimes people forget, when you work for a PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANY you work for a PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANY. People will argue whether or not the good of the many should screw the good of the few, but I will not do that here.)

The amazing thing is, thanks to attorneys that keep danny's point of mind in this, this driver will be out there with potential to kill, maim, hurt others within a months time.

You can all squawk at the comparison that it could be your family in the next vehicle this guy does this to. You can tell those posters "keep playing on emotion." The fact that you are all ignoring is this: It will always be someone's family. To be honest, I do not care if it is yours. Amazingly enough, I cannot honestly wish it was, because it is not their fault you are such a horrible person. I know the neg reps are coming for this, but let me explain. You say it is all a play on emotions?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?! How so????? It is HUMAN LIFE. IT DOES NOT MATTER IF IT IS YOUR FAMILY OR NOT. Quit being so careless to toss out OTHERS' families. I want mine to live, regardless of whether you do or not.
 
Last edited:

dannyboy

From the promised LAND
Ive tried to make sense of your last post. you were doing pretty well until the bold area. You must have inhaled too deeply.

Try again.

d

Or then again, not.
 
Last edited:

brownrecluse

Well-Known Member
Dear sat

The driver was not in the fast lane, he was in the middle, going slower than the rest of the traffic, not just the UPS truck. the correct place for the car would have been in the far right lane, except to pass. So the car was actually breaking the law as well, something the feeder driver was well aware of.

But that does not excuse his poor behaviour.

d
I respectfully disagree (with the legal aspect of your post). If the car was driving the max speed limit in the center or the right lane, then clearly no law was being broken. If however the car was driving continuously in the left lane, then a law (at least in MI) is being broken.

While I personally think it's wise to go with the flow (in any non-commercial vehicle), there is no law (again in MI) on the books that states that a driver must keep up to, or may not drive slower than, other traffic that's breaking the law by speeding.

Common courtesy, and unfortunately nothing else, dictates that the 4 wheeler should have moved to the right to let the truck pass. However, professionalism and training, and a plethora of other reasons, should have kept the feeder driver within his space/safety cushion. Period. no debate, non-negotiable.

We are professional drivers. We train, and we become professional drivers so that we act accordingly, professionally, and safely in any given situation that we may encounter on the road.

There's no rational, logical, or legal reason that the feeder driver had any right to endanger the lives or property of others just because he didn't want to travel the speed limit.

...and...that car in the middle lane would have annoyed me too.

PT
 

dannyboy

From the promised LAND
I Dont know how else to say it. I never once defended the UPS driver. What he did was wrong. Period. I did offer some potential scenario's where a Driver might be in a bigger hurry than others.

What I did comment on was the fact that the slower driver, regardless of speed, stayed in the middle lane. The lane that the truck drivers are restricted to when passing slow traffic in the right lane. The car could have very easily moved to the left lane, to allow the truck driver to pass in his passing lane. Remember, he is not allowed to use the far left lane. Period.

That is what my comments are about. The restriction of the truck traffic to the right two lanes, and the stupidity and inconsiderate behaviour of the car traffic that hogs the center thinking that is the travel lane. Its not, its the truck passing lane, the only way they can go around slower drivers like 1 time that refuse to do the speed limit. That is the only way they have to go around road blocks like that.

GEEZ, read the post for what it says, not for what you think you want it to say.

d
 
Top