Electronics used to fire rant driver?

quad decade guy

Well-Known Member
The company did not "surveil" him. To think otherwise and publicize that your interpretive skills are such is baffling. I think he will get his job back or a nice settlement equal to his career's income....

His crime is exposing the sacred shield to the world. Any "lockroom" lawyer can get his the $$ he deserves. I would not be surprised if he hasn't been approached by dozens of lockroomers..
It may be "baffling" to you. I can't help that.

To the point....again the result is the same....."surveillance" is/was applied. No? Was he not fired for "video" evidence? Don't be obtuse.

If that "evidence" is thrown out(whatever that means)....there is no case? Considering of course that the proverbial horse is out of the barn.

The point: What was he fired for? Exactly now. I've stated that the "language" is nebulous enough that just about anything can be construed as "not in the best interest of the Company".

I may be "publicly" thinking.....are you not doing the same? There are people right now reading your comments and thinking you should be hanged right beside the perp. To think he should get his job back with pay....just baffling....see?
 

quad decade guy

Well-Known Member
Umm.... no they didn't.

The customer posted it on social media.




40 years @ UPS.... and that's your knowledge of the contract and the Panel (or arbitration) system ?

Wow.




He is giving away a Union members job, to keep his comfy Union position?

I apologize to @542thruNthru for not congratulating him on his recent promotion.



:biggrin:
Exalted One,

Yeah after 40 years, I do know that what is written isn't worth *e. What is.... isn't.

What should be isn't.....in the "system".

You wouldn't go down a "rabbit hole" earlier.....you wanna go down this one?
 

Just A UPS Guy

Well-Known Member
Got a point(obtusely)?

Video evidence is being used to fire this guy. It's pretty cut and dried. Electronics can't be used....right?

Again, what was he fired for exactly? You have to have evidence right?

Yes, my point is that you are obtuse, but insist on implying that others are obtuse.

You obtusely insist that someone cannot be fired by use of electronics, but that isn't actually in the contract, not even article 6 sec 6.

You obtusely insist that he was serveilled by the company, but by the very definition of "surveillance" he was not.

As for what he was fired for, simply being an *hole. I don't know what the chances of it holding up are, but I'm certain that the termination was, at the very least, to save face in the midst of a PR nightmare during a pretty volatile time of racial tension.
 
Yes, my point is that you are obtuse, but insist on implying that others are obtuse.

You obtusely insist that someone cannot be fired by use of electronics, but that isn't actually in the contract, not even article 6 sec 6.

You obtusely insist that he was serveilled by the company, but by the very definition of "surveillance" he was not.

As for what he was fired for, simply being an *hole. I don't know what the chances of it holding up are, but I'm certain that the termination was, at the very least, to save face in the midst of a PR nightmare during a pretty volatile time of racial tension.
The driver was and is a right wing racist. Brown Cafe is loaded with them. But, your overall point is correct. Ignore the 80 year old quad guy.
 

Wally

BrownCafe Innovator & King of Puns
...You wouldn't go down a "rabbit hole" earlier.....you wanna go down this one?
No!

upload_2019-1-12_13-45-17.png
 

Wally

BrownCafe Innovator & King of Puns
Yes, my point is that you are obtuse, but insist on implying that others are obtuse.

You obtusely insist that someone cannot be fired by use of electronics, but that isn't actually in the contract, not even article 6 sec 6.

You obtusely insist that he was serveilled by the company, but by the very definition of "surveillance" he was not.

As for what he was fired for, simply being an *hole. I don't know what the chances of it holding up are, but I'm certain that the termination was, at the very least, to save face in the midst of a PR nightmare during a pretty volatile time of racial tension.
Is this thread about a feeder driver getting fired or the package car driver caught making comments the homeowners were alarmed at?
 

quad decade guy

Well-Known Member
Yes, my point is that you are obtuse, but insist on implying that others are obtuse.

You obtusely insist that someone cannot be fired by use of electronics, but that isn't actually in the contract, not even article 6 sec 6.

You obtusely insist that he was serveilled by the company, but by the very definition of "surveillance" he was not.

As for what he was fired for, simply being an *hole. I don't know what the chances of it holding up are, but I'm certain that the termination was, at the very least, to save face in the midst of a PR nightmare during a pretty volatile time of racial tension.
Well if being an a whole is all it takes....why are you still here?

I said he was surveilled. Just by someone else. Which evidence was used. Might want to look up that definition again....because he was.

If he gets his job back. He was wronged.
 

TSB

Well-Known Member
I think it's obvious that someone's "Word of the Day" calendar had the word "Obtuse" and someone else's had the word "Surveillance".
 

quad decade guy

Well-Known Member
I don't think that @quad decade guy.... is some sort of "stand up" Union person.
Ok. I don't think BUG is some sort of "stand up union person".....fun huh?

Ironic though......I'm the only one trying to keep this guys job.

Bug you certainly aren't. Matter of fact....wussy of the year?

Speaking of K I A coworkers....we just had another fatality. Hey BUG, keep covering for em....maybe we'll get a yard fatality. I guess that make s you a "good union person".
 

quad decade guy

Well-Known Member
Don't be obtuse!
Gosh I know it stings when called out publicly. It's all hear for everyone to read. Being called an a whole by an a whole is pretty entertaining.

BTW, don't like my words? I could use some very effective language but alas there is censorship here.

Now, want to talk about the original topic? Or just attack me? I have a job and have successfully done so for 40 years....
 
Top