Hate it when this happens

[texan]

That is the exact baby I found a few weeks ago. His collar was embedded in his neck, but he was a big huge, I mean huge loving puppy. I bet he went 200 pds. Everyone ran into the gas station, And I offered him my slim jim. Which he gladly took. Everyone just stepped back, and said yes hes cute, beautiful , and really big..............I left the store attendant in charge, I had to leave. I had called the animal group, the dog catcher and the cops. The cop lady came and stayed with him. I had tied him to a guard rail which lasted about 2 minutes. But he just stayed with the cop lady, he loved people. Im sure he will be found a good home, the dog guy was the same guy who rescued my bluebelle, white doberman.
I was berated for leaving him. Others said well my management knows I will never leave a dog. Arent you a teamster.....You didnt have to go. Tell me where in my teamster protection I can wait for a dog rescue? I did what I could do since everyone else was scared, and he didnt get hit.
And I know in my heart someone will take him.
On a side note my bluebelle treated me like I was rotten meat when I got home. Even after washing my hands profusely from the rotting going on around his neck, where the collar was embedded, she still smelled it and I guess she was thinking I was out killing doggies. She ran up to me when I got home, then backed away which she never does. Would not let me touch her all night. her eyes were full of fear. Even growled at me.
But she is so smart, I used her key words. I sat her down, I told her "the boy doggy was in the "road", he was going to get "hit", he doesnt have a "mommy and daddy" that love him.
I found him a "home", he will get "food" and "kisses" and "treats" he is a "good dog". She kept turning her head and tilting it like she does when she is listening. Then all was well. Never tell me dogs dont understand.

They know......."Never tell me dogs dont understand"

 

[Re-Raise]

We live on a farm with three house in a row and a few years back our lab had a litter of puppies under the porch of my sisters house. One night when the puppies were small one of them turned up missing.

We took 4 wheelers around looking for the puppy. The mother lab apparently was smart enough to figure out what we were doing. Sadly the puppy had been hit by a car down the road.

That mother lab found the puppy and carried it in her mouth up to the house and sadly left it at our feet.

I have never doubted the intelligence of dogs since.

 

[toonertoo]

We live on a farm with three house in a row and a few years back our lab had a litter of puppies under the porch of my sisters house. One night when the puppies were small one of them turned up missing.

We took 4 wheelers around looking for the puppy. The mother lab apparently was smart enough to figure out what we were doing. Sadly the puppy had been hit by a car down the road.

That mother lab found the puppy and carried it in her mouth up to the house and sadly left it at our feet.

I have never doubted the intelligence of dogs since.

Imagine the grief, and no way to show it. or to get comfort. Being a dog, would be tough.

 

[Packmule]

In our building, hitting a dog in the street has never been considered an avoidable accident. Dogs don't belong in the street. In a driveway, it gets real gray real fast. In my view, it should depend on whether or not I have access to a public turn around, like a coldesac, cross street, etc. When I have no choice but to use a private drive to reach the house, or turn around, using the driveway I'm delivering to gives me a ligitimate reason for being there. I support the homeowner's right to have dogs running around in his driveway, but he has no right to expect me to endanger a neighbor's dogs, property, children, because of it. And UPS has no right to expect me to do so either. Either they issue a nationwide decree that we no longer deliver to ANY residential that does not provide us the ability to stay of public roads, or they stand behind us when bad things happen on private roads.
Sounds like yet another piece of contract language we need to go to the mat on next contract over. But that would require a union that proactively fixes problems, instead of reactively hanging us out to dry.

 

[soberups]

Sounds like yet another piece of contract language we need to go to the mat on next contract over. But that would require a union that proactively fixes problems, instead of reactively hanging us out to dry.

What kind of language are you after? What we currently have is adequate in my opinion; I could care less whether or not I get an award or recognition for safe driving as long as I am still employed.

 

[brownmonster]

I just got my 15 years safe driving award. A green cardboard box. Why bother, it goes right in the crap can anyways.

 

[dilligaf]

What kind of language are you after? What we currently have is adequate in my opinion; I could care less whether or not I get an award or recognition for safe driving as long as I am still employed.

There are some languages that need to be added.

1. We (here, but I think this should at least go in Western Region) need better language on bidding and vacating procedures. Since we have lifetime bids, there is no clear cut language. It is ambiguous at best. All done on past practice.

IE: If a driver bids a new rte, how long does the bidding driver have to decide if he/she wants to keep that rte? How long does that driver have to remain on that bid before vacating it? When vacating, how long does management have before posting the open rte? The rte that I have now was not posted for several weeks after being vacated. When a driver vacates a route, how long before that driver can rebid a new rte?

2. There is another one but for the life of me I cannot remember what it is right now and I can't find my paper that I had it written down on.

I don't think Packmule's idea is half bad. How many drivers have been charged with an accident that is caused by an act of Mother Nature or the stupidity of someone else? Maybe the language should say something like: If the driver is determined to be not at fault by law enforcement then the driver is not to be charged with an avoidable accident.

 

[Packmule]

While you are one of the mose articulate BC contributors I've read, and your opinions of the safe driving program couldn't be more dead-on accurate, your unwavering faith in the union to use current language effectively is a bit naieve. In the end, it is the company alone that makes all the decisions when gray areas like my current one arises. Therefore, stronger, more detailed language becomes necessary protect us.

Consider this. The guy who retired from my route, openly bragged about having killed 27 dogs in his 28 year career and retired a circle of honor driver. Yet, how many people on this thread alone have stated that in their building ANY dog strike is now a chargable accident. That means a warning letter. Then I drive back into a farmyard to discover the owner parked a horse trailer in the only safe turnaround. So I get into a little mud, leave tire tracks in in the grass, and now I'm on suspension. Get back to work and some idiot slides into the side of my car on a snowy day two seconds before I get the vehicle completely stopped at a stop sign. Tier three, intersection accident. Terminated. This is why it is important to prevent that first warning letter from ever happening, and the only way to do that is to eliminate every gray area we can with more detailed contract language.

In the union's defense I will say that they will only do what we tell them to do. Trouble is, too many ignorant schmucks focus that energy on raises we don't need and shouldn't want in this current economic environment. The union loves them, though, cause they then raise the dues.

Beat the drum! Better yet, honk your horn! Doesn't matter if you're making $90 bucks an hour if you're getting railroaded into an unemployment line because of stupid little stuff.

 

[dilligaf]

While you are one of the mose articulate BC contributors I've read, and your opinions of the safe driving program couldn't be more dead-on accurate, your unwavering faith in the union to use current language effectively is a bit naieve. In the end, it is the company alone that makes all the decisions when gray areas like my current one arises. Therefore, stronger, more detailed language becomes necessary protect us.

Consider this. The guy who retired from my route, openly bragged about having killed 27 dogs in his 28 year career and retired a circle of honor driver. Yet, how many people on this thread alone have stated that in their building ANY dog strike is now a chargable accident. That means a warning letter. Then I drive back into a farmyard to discover the owner parked a horse trailer in the only safe turnaround. So I get into a little mud, leave tire tracks in in the grass, and now I'm on suspension. Get back to work and some idiot slides into the side of my car on a snowy day two seconds before I get the vehicle completely stopped at a stop sign. Tier three, intersection accident. Terminated. This is why it is important to prevent that first warning letter from ever happening, and the only way to do that is to eliminate every gray area we can with more detailed contract language.

In the union's defense I will say that they will only do what we tell them to do. Trouble is, too many ignorant schmucks focus that energy on raises we don't need and shouldn't want in this current economic environment. The union loves them, though, cause they then raise the dues.

Beat the drum! Better yet, honk your horn! Doesn't matter if you're making $90 bucks an hour if you're getting railroaded into an unemployment line because of stupid little stuff.

​I too enjoy reading Sober's post but I think you hit this one dead on.

 

[Indecisi0n]

​I too enjoy reading Sober's post but I think you hit this one dead on.

Pun intended?

 

[dilligaf]

Pun intended?

Hadn't really thought of it.

 

[QKRSTKR]

Here they may deem it avoidalbe. They would say what if a child had went under your truck to retrieve a ball or toy. You should have checked under your truck on the way back to it. That's whay they say. No accident like this has dicipline so far here. They put it on your record as avoidable but no union letter.

My understanding of wild animals such as deer and yotes are unavoidable. Don't veer for deer.

 

[soberups]

. Then I drive back into a farmyard to discover the owner parked a horse trailer in the only safe turnaround. So I get into a little mud, leave tire tracks in in the grass, and now I'm on suspension. Get back to work and some idiot slides into the side of my car on a snowy day two seconds before I get the vehicle completely stopped at a stop sign. Tier three, intersection accident. Terminated. This is why it is important to prevent that first warning letter from ever happening, and the only way to do that is to eliminate every gray area we can with more detailed contract language.

.

If I may ask...did you actually serve that suspension? And when you were terminated, did you stay at home with no pay or did you continue working while the suspension and termination were resolved thru the grievance procedure?

I agree with you that stronger and more detailed language regarding accidents would be nice....but not if it came at the expense of the innocent-until-proven-guilty language for non -cardinal infractions.

My opinion is that it would be difficult and unweildy to put language in the contract that gave specific definitions of what is and is not an avoidable accident.

 

[dilligaf]

If I may ask...did you actually serve that suspension? And when you were terminated, did you stay at home with no pay or did you continue working while the suspension and termination were resolved thru the grievance procedure?

I agree with you that stronger and more detailed language regarding accidents would be nice....but not if it came at the expense of the innocent-until-proven-guilty language for non -cardinal infractions.

My opinion is that it would be difficult and unweildy to put language in the contract that gave specific definitions of what is and is not an avoidable accident.

It is true that writing language like this could be difficult, at best. And writing something that started out being ambiguous would only create more problems but to let the company determine, solely, what is avoidable and unavoidable is not any better than not having any language at all. We all know, I assume, that letting some desk jockey determine how to classify an accident that they did not participate in is just asking for unwarranted warning letters and terminations.

 

[Packmule]

No, no, Sober. That was just showing you an example of how easily things can happen. None of it has actually occurred. Yet.

 

[Packmule]

Reality is, if this had been a driveway with children in it, I would have turned around in some other driveway because kids are kids and dogs are dogs. I just don't want to risk some neighbor's dog--or kid--trying to avoid his dog. Dogs present when there is no public turn around, the customer is ultimately responsible for creating the hazzard. I know. I have a dog. Wouldn't catch it near the driveway off of a leash in MY hand.

 

[soberups]

It is true that writing language like this could be difficult, at best. And writing something that started out being ambiguous would only create more problems but to let the company determine, solely, what is avoidable and unavoidable is not any better than not having any language at all. We all know, I assume, that letting some desk jockey determine how to classify an accident that they did not participate in is just asking for unwarranted warning letters and terminations.

My feeling is that I could care less how much meaningless paper the desk jockey wants to spew out. He can write all the warning and suspension and termination letters he wants, but as long as we have the innocent until proven guilty language then I will keep working and making $$ while he spews the paper and my case will get tossed before it ever makes it to panel.

There has been a veritable blizzard of warning and suspension letters in my building over the last few years for cracked mirrors, scrapes, tire marks etc. but the only accident-related termination that was ultimately upheld was a guy who was steering the package car with his knees while text messaging on the DIAD and talking on his cell phone all at the same time. He went off the road and ran into a telephone pole. The PC was totalled and the pole was knocked down. Gross negligence. All the other ticky-tacky crap has been resolved at the center level before even going to panel, and the drivers involved continued working and making money throughout the process.The only real "consequence" they ever faced was not getting a trinket or a plaque for a safe driving award.

 

[dilligaf]

My feeling is that I could care less how much meaningless paper the desk jockey wants to spew out. He can write all the warning and suspension and termination letters he wants, but as long as we have the innocent until proven guilty language then I will keep working and making $$ while he spews the paper and my case will get tossed before it ever makes it to panel.

There has been a veritable blizzard of warning and suspension letters in my building over the last few years for cracked mirrors, scrapes, tire marks etc. but the only accident-related termination that was ultimately upheld was a guy who was steering the package car with his knees while text messaging on the DIAD and talking on his cell phone all at the same time. He went off the road and ran into a telephone pole. The PC was totalled and the pole was knocked down. Gross negligence. All the other ticky-tacky crap has been resolved at the center level before even going to panel, and the drivers involved continued working and making money throughout the process.The only real "consequence" they ever faced was not getting a trinket or a plaque for a safe driving award.

It's not the working terminations that are the problem. If this was 100% the case then I would agree with you. There are too many non-working terminations that are unjustified and cause extreme hardship for the driver. If I were to be terminated unjustly (non working) and have to wait for it to go to panel (which could take months) I would be in serious jeopardy of losing my house. Even to risk a suspension for a few weeks would cause financial harm.

 

[soberups]

It's not the working terminations that are the problem. If this was 100% the case then I would agree with you. There are too many non-working terminations that are unjustified and cause extreme hardship for the driver. If I were to be terminated unjustly (non working) and have to wait for it to go to panel (which could take months) I would be in serious jeopardy of losing my house. Even to risk a suspension for a few weeks would cause financial harm.

In the Western Conference that you and I are both in, the only way you can get a non-working termination is for provable dishonesty or one of the other cardinal infractions (drinking, drugs, assault, theft etc.) Employees who are issued suspension or termination letters for reported accidents continue working until the case is resolved at panel.

 

[dilligaf]

In the Western Conference that you and I are both in, the only way you can get a non-working termination is for provable dishonesty or one of the other cardinal infractions (drinking, drugs, assault, theft etc.) Employees who are issued suspension or termination letters for reported accidents continue working until the case is resolved at panel.

That's good for us.