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
Fired 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="zubenelgenubi" data-source="post: 3250467" data-attributes="member: 63706"><p>This is apparently a common theme amongst some management types. I honestly don't know how many of these accounts are true, or the full story, but there seems to be a lot of cases where management will trump up charges, and even redefine terms, in order to claim that an employee has committed a terminable offense.</p><p></p><p>My take is that any termination should have some formal investigation in order to attempt to prevent wrongful termination. An investigation wherein the employee in question is not interviewed is not a proper investigation. In your case, the dishonesty charge seems to have been trumped up. If you had actually lied about something, or actively tried to cover something up, that would constitute dishonesty. Failing to follow the methods is not, in and of itself, dishonest. Even if you swore an oath with your right hand raised and your left hand on the contract that you would follow all the methods perfectly every day, that would still not make you dishonest, simply imperfect, which we all are.</p><p></p><p>In your case, however, I can see little to criticize about what you did. You drove out of your way to make the attempt at the address of the business, using your area knowledge to determine how best to make the attempt. The only thing I would have done differently might have been to check with the guard, if one were present, to verify that you would be unable to make the delivery. You might as well since you drove all the way back there.</p><p></p><p>I was trained to sheet businesses as closed if you are unable to deliver to them, but that's a center by center or even a supervisor by supervisor situation. If this is something you've been warned about in the past, and they went through progressive discipline, it would be a different story. That's why I have a hard time understanding why these managers use this "tactic". The termination is going to be rescinded, so why waste everyone's time? The very fact that employees get their jobs back supports the argument that they shouldn't have been terminated to begin with.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="zubenelgenubi, post: 3250467, member: 63706"] This is apparently a common theme amongst some management types. I honestly don't know how many of these accounts are true, or the full story, but there seems to be a lot of cases where management will trump up charges, and even redefine terms, in order to claim that an employee has committed a terminable offense. My take is that any termination should have some formal investigation in order to attempt to prevent wrongful termination. An investigation wherein the employee in question is not interviewed is not a proper investigation. In your case, the dishonesty charge seems to have been trumped up. If you had actually lied about something, or actively tried to cover something up, that would constitute dishonesty. Failing to follow the methods is not, in and of itself, dishonest. Even if you swore an oath with your right hand raised and your left hand on the contract that you would follow all the methods perfectly every day, that would still not make you dishonest, simply imperfect, which we all are. In your case, however, I can see little to criticize about what you did. You drove out of your way to make the attempt at the address of the business, using your area knowledge to determine how best to make the attempt. The only thing I would have done differently might have been to check with the guard, if one were present, to verify that you would be unable to make the delivery. You might as well since you drove all the way back there. I was trained to sheet businesses as closed if you are unable to deliver to them, but that's a center by center or even a supervisor by supervisor situation. If this is something you've been warned about in the past, and they went through progressive discipline, it would be a different story. That's why I have a hard time understanding why these managers use this "tactic". The termination is going to be rescinded, so why waste everyone's time? The very fact that employees get their jobs back supports the argument that they shouldn't have been terminated to begin with. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Fired for dishonesty
Top