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="Mugarolla" data-source="post: 3232592" data-attributes="member: 8481"><p>What does your short term memory have to do with what we are discussing?</p><p></p><p>The OP clocked out and left without any approval. What are you going to write down?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As do I.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>OK. The issue here is that some people think that the reasonable discussion with management should be that the OP did nothing wrong. He cannot be fired for job abandonment, he is being retaliated against because of his disabilty, this was not a Cardinal Sin.</p><p></p><p>Remind you of anyone on here?</p><p></p><p>Good luck with that.</p><p></p><p>The reasonable discusson is what I pointed out and people like you don't seem to like.</p><p></p><p>The reasonable discussion is that the OP made a mistake. That we realize it may look like job abandonment, but that is not what the OP intended.</p><p></p><p>We realize that job abandonment is a serious issue, but this was a misunderstanding.</p><p></p><p>He thought it was alright ro leave, as he has done in the past, but from now on he will check with his sup before leaving.</p><p></p><p>That is a reasonable discussion. And guess what? That is what puts him back to work on the spot.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In order to resolve these cases, you must know both sides. You must realize that what the grievant did may have been a contractual violation</p><p></p><p>Just because I point out to a bunch of anonymous posters on an Internet chat forum that the OP was the one in the wrong, doesn't mean that I wouldn't get him back to work.</p><p></p><p>He would have been back the next day.</p><p></p><p>I point these things out for you to see the other side of every arguement.</p><p></p><p>You need to admit to yourself and the grievant that he may be in the wrong.</p><p></p><p>[USER=63706]@2033[/USER], by his or her statements would take the position that the employee did nothing wrong, violated no CBA articles and was singled out because he was disabled.</p><p></p><p>Any Steward on this forum knows that taking that stance will not win any cases, only prolong the time off for the grievant.</p><p></p><p>That is why people like [USER=4992]@BigUnionGuy[/USER] have a job, some Stewards who have no idea what they are doing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mugarolla, post: 3232592, member: 8481"] What does your short term memory have to do with what we are discussing? The OP clocked out and left without any approval. What are you going to write down? As do I. OK. The issue here is that some people think that the reasonable discussion with management should be that the OP did nothing wrong. He cannot be fired for job abandonment, he is being retaliated against because of his disabilty, this was not a Cardinal Sin. Remind you of anyone on here? Good luck with that. The reasonable discusson is what I pointed out and people like you don't seem to like. The reasonable discussion is that the OP made a mistake. That we realize it may look like job abandonment, but that is not what the OP intended. We realize that job abandonment is a serious issue, but this was a misunderstanding. He thought it was alright ro leave, as he has done in the past, but from now on he will check with his sup before leaving. That is a reasonable discussion. And guess what? That is what puts him back to work on the spot. In order to resolve these cases, you must know both sides. You must realize that what the grievant did may have been a contractual violation Just because I point out to a bunch of anonymous posters on an Internet chat forum that the OP was the one in the wrong, doesn't mean that I wouldn't get him back to work. He would have been back the next day. I point these things out for you to see the other side of every arguement. You need to admit to yourself and the grievant that he may be in the wrong. [USER=63706]@2033[/USER], by his or her statements would take the position that the employee did nothing wrong, violated no CBA articles and was singled out because he was disabled. Any Steward on this forum knows that taking that stance will not win any cases, only prolong the time off for the grievant. That is why people like [USER=4992]@BigUnionGuy[/USER] have a job, some Stewards who have no idea what they are doing. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Fired for job abandonment
Top