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 Union Issues
Fired for job abandonment
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: 3229173" data-attributes="member: 63706"><p>Pick up a phone. I feel confident that a phone call would have gotten the OP back to work and sorted out any misunderstanding there may have been without needing to resort to going immediately to termination. At another company, as a manager, hr would not allow me to terminate someone until they no called no showed at least three shifts after at least one attempt to contact the employee. There may have been extenuating circumstances. The fact that they went straight to termination, in this case, suggests that management was more worried about the accommodation issues than about treating an employee fairly.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not nearly as big a deal as the management is trying to trump it up to be, and certainly not grounds for immediate termination. Even without past practices consideration I can't see justification for more than a write up in this case. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No doubt. I certainly sympathize with the challenges involved in maintaining an adequate work force, which is all the more reason not to jump the gun in terminating people when warnings will suffice. Also, the OP did return in this case. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Not equating, though certainly relating. Based on the information provided I don't think the OP felt it was ok to leave whenever he wanted, simply felt like it was what he should have done in that situation. A warning would have sufficed to correct that. I realize, based on the provided information up to the point of my original argument, that we don't know if the supervisor would have said it was ok to leave or not had the OP asked. If the answer to that is yes, then the only thing the OP did that could be construed as improper was failing to check, which doesn't hurt the company any more (or at all) than someone who shows up two minutes late.</p><p></p><p></p><p>If a company does not enforce their policies, or enforces them sporadically, then those policies are no good in the eyes of the law. Which is why I say policy is what the company does, not what is on paper. HR and Business Law 101. How is an employee supposed to know what is acceptable behavior, as far as the company is concerned, when the company is inconsistent in their enforcement? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>More than a slight misrepresentation of what happened. Saying "whenever he wants" suggests it's an ongoing problem, and that he did so for his own purposes, not because he didn't want to get in trouble for stealing time. Once again, not saying he shouldn't have checked in, just saying he didn't need to be terminated for a possibly harmless mistake.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Would you prefer "unjustified". I'd say fake because the reason for the termination likely has nothing to do with the reason they wanted to terminate him, but that's just speculation.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No doubt, and I'll happily alter my position appropriately as more facts come to light.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This really speaks to the heart of my problem with this apparent habit that some managers have of jumping right to termination. It's a major disruption in an employee's life, and even if it turns out not to be justified, the manager is apparently at no risk of any consequence for their actions. So we tell an employee to put on their big boy pants, which I have no problem with, but then ignore the fact that management faces zero responsibility for disrupting a person's life completely out of proportion with the actual offense, if any actual offense even exists. And they only get away with it because we let them.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sorry to disappoint, but I don't read every post on every thread on this forum. I have never heard of a TIYS Specialist, so that doesn't tell me whether you are management or not. Based on your approach to this matter, if you aren't management, then you could easily replace them, because you seem to be making their arguments for them.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I'll work on ratcheting it down a bit for you.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="zubenelgenubi, post: 3229173, member: 63706"] Pick up a phone. I feel confident that a phone call would have gotten the OP back to work and sorted out any misunderstanding there may have been without needing to resort to going immediately to termination. At another company, as a manager, hr would not allow me to terminate someone until they no called no showed at least three shifts after at least one attempt to contact the employee. There may have been extenuating circumstances. The fact that they went straight to termination, in this case, suggests that management was more worried about the accommodation issues than about treating an employee fairly. Not nearly as big a deal as the management is trying to trump it up to be, and certainly not grounds for immediate termination. Even without past practices consideration I can't see justification for more than a write up in this case. No doubt. I certainly sympathize with the challenges involved in maintaining an adequate work force, which is all the more reason not to jump the gun in terminating people when warnings will suffice. Also, the OP did return in this case. Not equating, though certainly relating. Based on the information provided I don't think the OP felt it was ok to leave whenever he wanted, simply felt like it was what he should have done in that situation. A warning would have sufficed to correct that. I realize, based on the provided information up to the point of my original argument, that we don't know if the supervisor would have said it was ok to leave or not had the OP asked. If the answer to that is yes, then the only thing the OP did that could be construed as improper was failing to check, which doesn't hurt the company any more (or at all) than someone who shows up two minutes late. If a company does not enforce their policies, or enforces them sporadically, then those policies are no good in the eyes of the law. Which is why I say policy is what the company does, not what is on paper. HR and Business Law 101. How is an employee supposed to know what is acceptable behavior, as far as the company is concerned, when the company is inconsistent in their enforcement? More than a slight misrepresentation of what happened. Saying "whenever he wants" suggests it's an ongoing problem, and that he did so for his own purposes, not because he didn't want to get in trouble for stealing time. Once again, not saying he shouldn't have checked in, just saying he didn't need to be terminated for a possibly harmless mistake. Would you prefer "unjustified". I'd say fake because the reason for the termination likely has nothing to do with the reason they wanted to terminate him, but that's just speculation. No doubt, and I'll happily alter my position appropriately as more facts come to light. This really speaks to the heart of my problem with this apparent habit that some managers have of jumping right to termination. It's a major disruption in an employee's life, and even if it turns out not to be justified, the manager is apparently at no risk of any consequence for their actions. So we tell an employee to put on their big boy pants, which I have no problem with, but then ignore the fact that management faces zero responsibility for disrupting a person's life completely out of proportion with the actual offense, if any actual offense even exists. And they only get away with it because we let them. Sorry to disappoint, but I don't read every post on every thread on this forum. I have never heard of a TIYS Specialist, so that doesn't tell me whether you are management or not. Based on your approach to this matter, if you aren't management, then you could easily replace them, because you seem to be making their arguments for them. I'll work on ratcheting it down a bit for you. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Fired for job abandonment
Top