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
discharged for dishonesty
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="Catatonic" data-source="post: 858162" data-attributes="member: 7966"><p>That is one part of the equation. When a non-Union member is fired it is because it is believed they should be fired and rarely does a non-Union member get their job back.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Related to the above answer to rat, in a rational relationship, the company would not have fired the driver. In this case, the driver was fired so that in a future incident the Union could not come back and say, "You didn't fire that driver for a similar incident and so this driver should not be fired". It is also a bit of a PR game that the company plays along with the Union to make the Union look good in getting a driver their job back. This would appear to me to be a situation where the driver was never intended to be fired - it's all part of the game.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>People see what they want to see. </p><p>I was talking about consistent company reaction to incidences that the company and the Union would negotiate on related to individual Union employees.</p><p>Accidents fall into this category, attendance does to, there are many others that you are more aware of than I am.</p><p>Disciplinary action against Union employees is an ongoing process at a macro level and a progressive process at the individual level.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Catatonic, post: 858162, member: 7966"] That is one part of the equation. When a non-Union member is fired it is because it is believed they should be fired and rarely does a non-Union member get their job back. Related to the above answer to rat, in a rational relationship, the company would not have fired the driver. In this case, the driver was fired so that in a future incident the Union could not come back and say, "You didn't fire that driver for a similar incident and so this driver should not be fired". It is also a bit of a PR game that the company plays along with the Union to make the Union look good in getting a driver their job back. This would appear to me to be a situation where the driver was never intended to be fired - it's all part of the game. People see what they want to see. I was talking about consistent company reaction to incidences that the company and the Union would negotiate on related to individual Union employees. Accidents fall into this category, attendance does to, there are many others that you are more aware of than I am. Disciplinary action against Union employees is an ongoing process at a macro level and a progressive process at the individual level. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
discharged for dishonesty
Top