I Smell A Thief, I Think.

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
I would suggest that you not discuss a current, ongoing disciplinary situation involving a fellow employee on the Internet.

Since you yourself have not chosen to remain anonymous, it is possible that this person's right to privacy might be violated; someone who knows who you are might be able to infer who they are and this could expose both the company and your local union to a potential lawsuit.

If they were walked out today, that means that they are still employed and are entitled to due process under the grievance procedure until such time as their case is resolved and their termination is finalized.
 

RockyRogue

Agent of Change
If they were walked out today, that means that they are still employed and are entitled to due process under the grievance procedure until such time as their case is resolved and their termination is finalized.

I'm not going to pretend any knowledge whatsoever of these things. I remember when I worked for UPS in Illinois years ago, I got to talking to a guy who'd started when the Hub opened 25 years prior. He told me he'd seen people taken by LP to an office, a steward right behind them. A half hour later, the local law showed up. Five minutes later, the steward walked out, followed by the local law....with the miscreant in cuffs. In my opinion, when a person has been accused of theft and the company has probable cause, he forfeits any rights to union job protection. Period.

This individual may be considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law but he's still under arrest for theft from my company. Personally, if it weren't illegal--and I don't think it is illegal--I'd can the guy on the spot for theft and let the law sort out the punishment. I don't like liars and I hate thieves. The contract does NOT supercede the law, though I have met Teamsters--mostly stewards--who certainly thought it did (or should).

All that having been said, I agree with your privacy statement. -Rocky
 

stevetheupsguy

sʇǝʌǝʇɥǝndsƃnʎ
I would suggest that you not discuss a current, ongoing disciplinary situation involving a fellow employee on the Internet.

Since you yourself have not chosen to remain anonymous, it is possible that this person's right to privacy might be violated; someone who knows who you are might be able to infer who they are and this could expose both the company and your local union to a potential lawsuit.

If they were walked out today, that means that they are still employed and are entitled to due process under the grievance procedure until such time as their case is resolved and their termination is finalized.
There's nothing ongoing. Went into the office a bona fide UPS employee, with benefits, a great salary and a strong job in a shaky economy. He left the office, after RESIGNING, a casualty of his own greed and immaturity. There's no arbitration, panels or any more words that are going to save this guy. HE'S DONE!!!

Tell me sober, what privacy right does he have to steal from his employer? I'm sorry, but when you run around as blatantly as this guy did, not getting caught, even though the truth is obvious, you deserve what you get when it catches up to you. I hope that the video somehow winds up on youtube.
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
There's nothing ongoing. Went into the office a bona fide UPS employee, with benefits, a great salary and a strong job in a shaky economy. He left the office, after RESIGNING, a casualty of his own greed and immaturity. There's no arbitration, panels or any more words that are going to save this guy. HE'S DONE!!!

Tell me sober, what privacy right does he have to steal from his employer? I'm sorry, but when you run around as blatantly as this guy did, not getting caught, even though the truth is obvious, you deserve what you get when it catches up to you. I hope that the video somehow winds up on youtube.

In your original post you merely said that he had been accused of theft and walked out the door. This would imply that there was an investigation underway and that the employee had been suspended pending termination. While this process is underway, it is unwise to discuss it publicly on the Internet.

If he has in fact resigned, then good riddance to him. I have no respect for thieves...but until they either confess or are convicted in a court of law then they are entitled to a presumption of innocence and due process under both the law and the grievance procedure.
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
I'm not going to pretend any knowledge whatsoever of these things. I remember when I worked for UPS in Illinois years ago, I got to talking to a guy who'd started when the Hub opened 25 years prior. He told me he'd seen people taken by LP to an office, a steward right behind them. A half hour later, the local law showed up. Five minutes later, the steward walked out, followed by the local law....with the miscreant in cuffs. In my opinion, when a person has been accused of theft and the company has probable cause, he forfeits any rights to union job protection. Period.

If the company has proof of the theft, then the employee has no "union job protection". Per the contract, theft is a cardinal offense that falls outside of the progressive disciplinary procedure and is grounds for immediate dismissal.

In the case you described, the employee was entitled to, and received, the union representation guranteed under the contract.

If I read your words correctly, the mere accusation of theft should allow the company to completely circumvent the labor agreement and declare the employee guilty as charged with no due process. I respectfully disagree. There is a process. Let it work.
 

RockyRogue

Agent of Change
If the company has proof of the theft, then the employee has no "union job protection". Per the contract, theft is a cardinal offense that falls outside of the progressive disciplinary procedure and is grounds for immediate dismissal.

Right. Video-tape is the worst enemy of any criminal. When I worked in Denver, I think one of the sorts had a theft problem. LP thought they knew who it was and set up a camera in a totally innocuous looking package car. Caught red-handed. Then again, I may have heard this secondhand somewhere else. This, however, would be the proof you'd be seeking, I believe. And while we're on this subject....I would have no problem with 'ratting' out a thieving employee. Scream all you want about union solidarity. Wrong is wrong.

In the case you described, the employee was entitled to, and received, the union representation guranteed under the contract.

The instance I described happened 10, 15, 20 years ago and was secondhand information. I'm going to make an assumption that LP had a reason for talking to the employee and he called 'steward.' They were interested enough in talking to him that they got a steward and took him upstairs. It was all downhill from there.

If I read your words correctly, the mere accusation of theft should allow the company to completely circumvent the labor agreement and declare the employee guilty as charged with no due process. I respectfully disagree. There is a process. Let it work.

I see your point. -Rocky
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
And while we're on this subject....I would have no problem with 'ratting' out a thieving employee. Scream all you want about union solidarity. Wrong is wrong.

Theft is a criminal act, and if I witness a criminal act then I will report it.

When we pledge "not to bring reproach" upon a fellow union member....that does not include ignoring criminal activity. It means that we will not side with the company against a fellow member over production or labor issues. We do not actively assist the company in building or documenting a termination case against a fellow member.

The intent of the language is to draw a clear boundary between the role of the management person and the union employee. It was never intended to require us as union members to condone or turn a blind eye towards bona fide criminal activity.
 

stevetheupsguy

sʇǝʌǝʇɥǝndsƃnʎ
In your original post you merely said that he had been accused of theft and walked out the door. This would imply that there was an investigation underway and that the employee had been suspended pending termination. While this process is underway, it is unwise to discuss it publicly on the Internet.

If he has in fact resigned, then good riddance to him. I have no respect for thieves...but until they either confess or are convicted in a court of law then they are entitled to a presumption of innocence and due process under both the law and the grievance procedure.
I agree wholeheartedly. Sorry for the misleading post.
 

Old International

Now driving a Sterling
I would stay mum on my thoughts until I knew for sure that the employee was stealing. Then I would rat the bastard out. Or, wait long enough and LP will get him.
 
D

Dis-organized Labor

Guest
LP GOT HIM! Score LP:1 Idiot Thief:0

Doesn't it seem as though these type of things always work themselves out? I'm only talking about theft of this sort.
A long time ago (pre-UPS), I worked at a Freight Forwarder in LA. We loade up a 53' truck with computers and the truck was found in front of the drivers house (sans computers). Guess what??? The driver stole them.... It's always a matter of time.
 
Top