allahuakbar

"الحَمْد لله"
I mean everyone knows that you can smoke or drink as much as you want and when you get caught all you have to do is say "I have a problem. Free pass!" SMH. :)
So wait, what do we do then? I’m genuinely curious because they pulled someone off the road that was :censored2: faced and they did exactly that.
 

DumbTruckDriver

Allergic to cardboard.
If this really just comes down to mistaken beverage identity, did he not still have the energy drink can to prove that’s what he was drinking?
 

UnionStrong

You can go now, scab
If this really just comes down to mistaken beverage identity, did he not still have the energy drink can to prove that’s what he was drinking?
Exactly what I thought. Where’s the can? Something is not right here. I would never have stood still for this railroading if I was innocent. Take any test you want, I would have demanded to be tested with as many supes present that you could fit in the :censored2:ing room!
 

DumbTruckDriver

Allergic to cardboard.
Exactly what I thought. Where’s the can? Something is not right here. I would never have stood still for this railroading if I was innocent. Take any test you want, I would have demanded to be tested with as many supes present that you could fit in the :censored2:ing room!
Where’s Paul Harvey when you need him?
0F702F42-2423-484B-942F-A63FAF8835DA.jpeg
 

Indecisi0n

Well-Known Member
Hi guys,

So my friend was recently terminated after an employee claimed to observe him drinking alcohol. The coworker also stated that he had said something about beers in the vehicle. The coworker of course reported what he claims he had seen to management. My buddy says that when management called him, they weren't having it. They stated that they *knew* he was drinking and that he would be fired. They called the police and told them he was "drunk" and "intoxicated". Now, here's where it gets interesting. When the police showed up, they put him through a field sobriety test. He passed (of course) because he wasn't drunk. They searched the PC to find beers. They searched his clothes and bag. No beers. No evidence of alcohol or drugs. When he called the Sup. back, the Sup said he would have to go to the hospital to get a blood alcohol test (I've never seen or heard of this before). He went to the hospital and, of course, came back negative. However, he did not take a drug test. Sup. wanted him to take a "drug and alcohol test". He, not knowing what he was doing, apparently took only the drug test. When I googled this, it says there are several urine tests that test for both blood and alcohol, but for some reason the hospital couldn't do this test and instead had two separate tests. One blood alcohol. One urine drug panel. He took the alcohol test and left. When he goes in the next day, he's fired. Pack your :censored2: and leave. "Violation of UPS Drug and Alcohol Policy."

At the local hearing, he told management multiple times that he was not drunk and wasn't drinking. He says he never used drugs and asked if they had reasonable cause to require the separate drug test. He decided to fight the case at the Panel. When he went to the Panel, his BA told him it was done. He can go to treatment and get his job back or that's it. No opportunity to fight it. No chance to have his word heard.

Is this legit? This seems super fishy and, I like my friend a lot but I don't know what to believe. If the test came back negative, how can they make him do this? Does my friend need a lawyer?
I am a lawyer as a side job if you need advice.
 

Integrity

Binge Poster
Hi guys,

So my friend was recently terminated after an employee claimed to observe him drinking alcohol. The coworker also stated that he had said something about beers in the vehicle. The coworker of course reported what he claims he had seen to management. My buddy says that when management called him, they weren't having it. They stated that they *knew* he was drinking and that he would be fired. They called the police and told them he was "drunk" and "intoxicated". Now, here's where it gets interesting. When the police showed up, they put him through a field sobriety test. He passed (of course) because he wasn't drunk. They searched the PC to find beers. They searched his clothes and bag. No beers. No evidence of alcohol or drugs. When he called the Sup. back, the Sup said he would have to go to the hospital to get a blood alcohol test (I've never seen or heard of this before). He went to the hospital and, of course, came back negative. However, he did not take a drug test. Sup. wanted him to take a "drug and alcohol test". He, not knowing what he was doing, apparently took only the drug test. When I googled this, it says there are several urine tests that test for both blood and alcohol, but for some reason the hospital couldn't do this test and instead had two separate tests. One blood alcohol. One urine drug panel. He took the alcohol test and left. When he goes in the next day, he's fired. Pack your :censored2: and leave. "Violation of UPS Drug and Alcohol Policy."

At the local hearing, he told management multiple times that he was not drunk and wasn't drinking. He says he never used drugs and asked if they had reasonable cause to require the separate drug test. He decided to fight the case at the Panel. When he went to the Panel, his BA told him it was done. He can go to treatment and get his job back or that's it. No opportunity to fight it. No chance to have his word heard.

Is this legit? This seems super fishy and, I like my friend a lot but I don't know what to believe. If the test came back negative, how can they make him do this? Does my friend need a lawyer?
This definitely seems as you put it “fishy”.

If what you say is true and there is not more to the story and this were to happen to me I would definitely seek legal counsel.
 

Zowert

Well-Known Member
BINGO! Then fight it later
Exactly. Just never admit you have a problem. Simply agree to go to treatment on the guarantee that you get your job back. Go through the motions at rehab or whatever they have you do then once you get back to work file a grievance. I’d also drop anchor (follow orion to a T) and bury them in 9.5 grievances. They wanna play games, I can too.
 

UnionStrong

You can go now, scab
Exactly. Just never admit you have a problem. Simply agree to go to treatment on the guarantee that you get your job back. Go through the motions at rehab or whatever they have you do then once you get back to work file a grievance. I’d also drop anchor (follow orion to a T) and bury them in 9.5 grievances. They wanna play games, I can too.
Oh they would pay, drop and drag that anchor all day long.
 

allahuakbar

"الحَمْد لله"
It’s funny how he was fired and sat around for months then once he realized he was poor he went to treatment. Is his job even guaranteed back at this point?
 

quad decade guy

Well-Known Member
Exactly. Just never admit you have a problem. Simply agree to go to treatment on the guarantee that you get your job back. Go through the motions at rehab or whatever they have you do then once you get back to work file a grievance. I’d also drop anchor (follow orion to a T) and bury them in 9.5 grievances. They wanna play games, I can too.
Ok....

Do you think UPS thought about all of that before....yes I know.....

And your problem wouldn't magically go away.....you'd be back...then gone....anyway.

By the way....aren't you "admitting to a problem" by going to rehab?

And being to a "T" for the rest of your career...really?
 

Dr.Brownz

Well-Known Member
Hi guys,

So my friend was recently terminated after an employee claimed to observe him drinking alcohol. The coworker also stated that he had said something about beers in the vehicle. The coworker of course reported what he claims he had seen to management. My buddy says that when management called him, they weren't having it. They stated that they *knew* he was drinking and that he would be fired. They called the police and told them he was "drunk" and "intoxicated". Now, here's where it gets interesting. When the police showed up, they put him through a field sobriety test. He passed (of course) because he wasn't drunk. They searched the PC to find beers. They searched his clothes and bag. No beers. No evidence of alcohol or drugs. When he called the Sup. back, the Sup said he would have to go to the hospital to get a blood alcohol test (I've never seen or heard of this before). He went to the hospital and, of course, came back negative. However, he did not take a drug test. Sup. wanted him to take a "drug and alcohol test". He, not knowing what he was doing, apparently took only the drug test. When I googled this, it says there are several urine tests that test for both blood and alcohol, but for some reason the hospital couldn't do this test and instead had two separate tests. One blood alcohol. One urine drug panel. He took the alcohol test and left. When he goes in the next day, he's fired. Pack your :censored2: and leave. "Violation of UPS Drug and Alcohol Policy."

At the local hearing, he told management multiple times that he was not drunk and wasn't drinking. He says he never used drugs and asked if they had reasonable cause to require the separate drug test. He decided to fight the case at the Panel. When he went to the Panel, his BA told him it was done. He can go to treatment and get his job back or that's it. No opportunity to fight it. No chance to have his word heard.

Is this legit? This seems super fishy and, I like my friend a lot but I don't know what to believe. If the test came back negative, how can they make him do this? Does my friend need a lawyer?
Yes Lawyer them
 
Top