Dispute my resignation

[542thruNthru]

Testimony from non employees isn't admissible. And he wouldn't get in the middle of it anyway.

Admissible Lol.

 

[wilberforce15]

Admissible Lol.

May vary by local.

We've had employees come back because the witness against them was no longer employed, and we've had some fired because a witness in their favor was no longer employed.

Considered nonadmissable.

 

[wilberforce15]

You can laugh, but it's happened plenty.

Guy walks out in sort. The PT Sup said he didn't give him permission. Ft Sup fires hourly.

PT Sup leaves the company. Everything against the employee is hearsay. No witness against him.

 

[542thruNthru]

You can laugh, but it's happened plenty.

Guy walks out in sort. The PT Sup said he didn't give him permission. Ft Sup fires hourly.

PT Sup leaves the company. Everything against the employee is hearsay. No witness against him.

Much different situation but hey if you believe you have to be an employee to be a witness thats cool.

 

[wilberforce15]

Much different situation but hey if you believe you have to be an employee to be a witness thats cool.

I believe what I've seen and heard during appeals, so yes, I know that testimony from non employees is outright dismissed. That's because I've seen it dismissed on those grounds.

 

[wilberforce15]

You've let people get fired or stay fired based on the word of a non-employee?

Pathetic.

 

[Lineandinitial]

I believe what I've seen and heard during appeals, so yes, I know that testimony from non employees is outright dismissed. That's because I've seen it dismissed on those grounds.

LOL.........So you're a package handler AND a Union Labor Representative? How many "testimonies" have you witnessed??? LOL

 

[wilberforce15]

LOL.........So you're a package handler AND a Union Labor Representative? How many "testimonies" have you witnessed??? LOL

I've been a witness in two such situations. And connected to many more.

I can tell you explicitly what my stewards and reps have said, and has happened in these situations in my hub, and that's that it is dismissed outright.

A non-employee is someone that has no vested interest in the truth and no possible consequence for lying.

That's why it cannot be used as a basis for validation of an accusation. There is no recourse against them for lying. So, they don't get to play a part.

I guess you just hang your people out to dry?

 

[wilberforce15]

So, in this case, why should anybody allow a statement from the Coke guy if he can lie with no possible consequence?

That's pathetic.

 

[542thruNthru]

You've let people get fired or stay fired based on the word of a non-employee?

Pathetic.

How have I done anything?

 

[wilberforce15]

How have I done anything?

Why should a statement from the Coke guy be allowed?

You're losing on the issue at hand. So, I'm getting you back on target.

 

[542thruNthru]

I've been a witness in two such situations. And connected to many more.

I can tell you explicitly what my stewards and reps have said, and has happened in these situations in my hub, and that's that it is dismissed outright.

A non-employee is someone that has no vested interest in the truth and no possible consequence for lying.

That's why it cannot be used as a basis for validation of an accusation. There is no recourse against them for lying. So, they don't get to play a part.

I guess you just hang your people out to dry?

Yes that would be the argument that a BA or steward would make but to say that is inadmissible is wrong lol.

 

[wilberforce15]

Yes that would be the argument that a BA or steward would make but to say that is inadmissible is wrong lol.

And that argument has won enough here that it is simply common practice to dismiss statements from non employees, or not allow them to be used as validation of an accusation.

Thanks for playing.

 

[wilberforce15]

Obviously this guy is toast and deserves it.

I'm correcting you on whether a statement from the Coke guy would matter.

 

[542thruNthru]

Why should a statement from the Coke guy be allowed?

You're losing on the issue at hand. So, I'm getting you back on target.

His statement would be used to corroborate the facts that they already have. It would not be automatically dismissed.

 

[wilberforce15]

I believe this is where I say Q. E. D. and let the toddlers keep squabbling.

 

[542thruNthru]

And that argument has won enough here that it is simply common practice to dismiss statements from non employees, or not allow them to be used as validation of an accusation.

Thanks for playing.

Lol.

Because you say so it must be fact. Hurry up you're losing millions of dollars being on here and not day trading.

 

[wilberforce15]

Lol.

Because you say so it must be fact. Hurry up you're losing millions of dollars being on here and not day trading.

I made your days pay in about 3 minutes today.

Want a screenshot to rub it in?

 

[wilberforce15]

From 9:49 to 9:51, I made 400 bucks and then I closed the program for the day.

I can do the math for you if multiplication is too hard. That's about a 60k in and out day trade in 2 minutes.

You working hard?

 

[wilberforce15]

I went back to Old Faithful AMC for a little afternoon dough. I saw something I wanted on Amazon.

200 more bucks in 90 seconds. Using the same 60k.