Logically, if he could have fired me on the spot he would have had no reason to threaten me with reduced hours.
Especially if he could not fire me.
point that out cause if so I surely missed that.
Purposely twisting my argument shows you either aren't reading what I said or you are being purposfully disingenuous to support your argument. The latter is especially slimy.
The threat was hours would be made ZERO if I didnt resign.
But the threat was always he would make my hours 0. THAT is one of the most basic violations of the whole title 7 act.
The labor director basically screamed at me to give him my badge and leave and be fired for sexual harrassment or resign
As I said to others, the labor director was demanding i give him my badge and leave and he wasnt going to schedule me and fire me for sexual harassment if I didn't resign
No, he was saying that I would still be employed, but I would simply have no hours. The second part of what you said is irrelevant.He threatened you with 0 hours. That would be a discharge, because contractually, you're guaranteed three and a half hours.
If he wants to give you 0 hours, you can grieve for your guarantee every day.
I hate to burst your bubble, but he can fire you for anything. The question is, will it be upheld at a grievance hearing.
Cool, you know you were talking about what PEOPLE in the thread were talking about, right? Here is an example of you twisting stuff again. So dishonest.You're welcome to look it up in the UPS code of business conduct.
Workplace violence and sexual harassment are grounds for immediate discharge, upheld by countless arbitrators and administrative law judges of the NLRB.
Yes, yes you did.I didn't twist anything. So, someone yelled at you. Grow up.
huh, weird. Cause when he came at me trying to take my badge and fire me on the spot he wasnt trying to take hours. How is a discharge and reduction of hours the same, yet different things? I dont think you understand this. You are implying he meant fire me when he specifically said he was going to make it so I worked no hours, which was separate from his firing talk.You have a contractual 3 and 1/2 hour daily guarantee. The threat of 0 hours meant he was was going to discharge you.
This is a perfect example of how dumb your logic is. This ONLY applies if you are talking about playing by the book. Like you said, I could grieve him if he gave me no hours. Wait, how could I grieve him, I thought that getting zero hours meant I'm fired?Again, the only way he could make you have 0 hours is if he discharged you. Contractually, you're guarantee three and a half hours per day.
The only way he can give you 0 hours is if he discharges you.
No need, nothing I said here hurts my case at all. I have no worries.And by the way, if you decide to sue UPS, you better ask @cheryl to remove this thread, because, in case you forgot what you said,
Never mind, I'm sure UPS already has copies of this.
Look, yet another slimy tactic. More twisting. Why are you conveniently leaving out the fact that he threatened to not schedule me? Oh right, cause it proves you wrong. How about this, make a valid point using all the details AT ONCE without twisting anything and I'll concede.The labor manager told you that if you did not resign he was going to fire you for sexual harassment. That is legal and that is not a violation of the law.
Here, let me help you out to show you exactly what you said.
You are bad at this, man. Say what you will about me getting duped by UPS, but you are literally fighting against points I never said. You are swinging at ghosts.
The labor director basically screamed at me to give him my badge and leave and be fired for sexual harrassment or resign
As I said to others, the labor director was demanding i give him my badge and leave and he wasnt going to schedule me and fire me for sexual harassment if I didn't resign.
Are you purposely ignoring the fact he said be fired, scheduled no hours OR resign? Address this directly please.What part of discharge don't you understand?
No, you used a "big boy word" incorrectly.OK. I see. You may not understand because I used a big boy word.
He threatened to take my badge and fire me on the spot AFTER threatening to not schedule me. How on earth is that not getting through to you. You REALLY think he threatened to discharge me then after I asked for more time he retaliated by threatening to discharge me? Do you see how stupid that is?When the labor manager was going to fire you, that means he was going to discharge you.
He was not going to schedule you and he was going to give you 0 hours because he was going to discharge (fire) you.
Tell that to the forum. I only implied he couldnt based on what others said.And yes, he can discharge (fire) you for sexual harassment.
And yes, it is legal, meaning it is not illegal, for him to ask you to resign instead of being discharged (fired).
Look up Constructive Discharge please. Altering hours to encourage someone to resign IS illegal, both federally AND in my state. Everyone here, and the Business Agent all say I couldn't be fired. So since he was threatening me and pressuring me, that IS illegal. Simple google search.
No, actually he never addressed anything I said. He pretended like he did by countering points no one said. If you think that's a win in his book...that doesn't make you look good. You gotta use that lovely UPS college money and take some reading comprehension classes, friend.You got me, I didn't realize I was dealing with Perry Mason. Since @Mugarolla already authored a quite detailed explanation regarding constructive discharge, and the rights of union members, and in addition, he also touched on the expected outcome, I'm not going to waste my time trying to add anything.
You're no longer working here, the guy who kicked your ass is no longer working here, and neither one of you will be back so there is nothing more to talk about.
Good luck with your MMA career, smart ass mouth, and your future employment.
Be thankful that you have UPS, man, cause I don't imagine much else is out there for you
You got me, I didn't realize I was dealing with Perry Mason. Since @Mugarolla already authored a quite detailed explanation regarding constructive discharge, and the rights of union members, and in addition, he also touched on the expected outcome, I'm not going to waste my time trying to add anything.
You're no longer working here, the guy who kicked your ass is no longer working here, and neither one of you will be back so there is nothing more to talk about.
Good luck with your MMA career, smart ass mouth, and your future employment.
Thanks for actually speaking coherently, I needed a break.You want my advice? Know your audience.
@Mugarolla seems to be giving you sound advice as far as I can tell. Whatever woulda, coulda, shoulda happened, your issue now is that you are out. If you want back in, you'll have to fight for it. If you believe the company did something illegal, you need to lawyer up.
Hahaha. Acting like typing slow is somehow evident. You just used "speaking slowly" and made it "typing slowly" even though it didnt translate AT ALL. congrats!I am going to try one more time. I know this is a hard concept to grasp for some people. Maybe it would help if I used a bigger font, or how about capital letters. Would that help you understand?
I'll tell you what, I'll just type a little bit slower so maybe you can follow along.
You ready? Here we go. I'm typing real slow.
You are bonafide incoherent.If you did not resign, the labor manager was going to fire you for sexual harassment. This means you would no longer be on the schedule and your hours would be reduced down to zero. But, you would still remain a UPS employee until the grievance process was concluded.
The labor manager told you he would reduce your hours to zero and take you off the schedule. This is what happens when an employee is fired.
He was not going to allow you to continue working, and just reduce your hours from say, 6 hours a day down to 4. That's not what he meant.
He was going to fire you, take you off the schedule, and reduce your hours to zero. I don't care what you thought he meant. This is exactly what he was going to do, and what he told you would happen.
Pal, you aren't even with yourself at this point.You still with me?
I agree with 99.9 percent of this, it was never in question. But, tell that to several others here who said I wouldnt have been fired.This is the route that you should have taken, instead of resigning.
Now, if you had the wisdom to file a grievance after being fired, one of three things would happen during the grievance process.
1. Your grievance would be deadlocked.
This means that you would remain discharged, continue to not be put on the schedule, continue to receive 0 hours of work, but, still remain a UPS employee, at least until the next step of the grievance process.
2. Your discharge would be upheld.
Meaning you are still discharged, you will never be put on the schedule, you will never get more than 0 hours of work and you are no longer a UPS employee. Pack your bags, get out and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
3. Your discharge would be overturned.
This would mean that you are no longer discharged, you will be put back on the schedule, you would start receiving at least your 3 and 1/2 hour guarantee of work, and you will still remain a UPS employee.
This is not a hard concept to understand.
Ugh. Ignoring everything I said again.I won't quote you again, but you said in two separate posts on this forum that the labor manager told you that you either resign or he would fire you.
And if he had to fire you, that would mean you would be taken off the schedule and your hours would be reduced to zero.
Did you address anything I said? Seriously, answer this.Any questions?
Hahaha. Acting like typing slow is somehow evident. You just used "speaking slowly" and made it "typing slowly"
You are bonafide incoherent.
0 hours does not mean fired.
Suspended is how many hours?
So If I was suspended, my hours are reduced to 0, according
according to you I'm fired.
Can you address anything?
You have literally ignored everything, every single counterpoint you ignored.
If he said he was going to reduce my hours then after said he was going to fire me because I didn't accept his terms, how is that the same.
You literally dont have an answer and that's exactly why you haven't addressed it.
Pal, you aren't even with yourself at this point.
I agree with 99.9 percent of this, it was never in question.
But, tell that to several others here who said I wouldnt have been fired.
Ugh. Ignoring everything I said again.
Suspenion.
Injury.
Constructive Discharge.
Discharge.
All ways to have 0 hours. Agree
He told me he would reduce my hours BECAUSE I didn't resign.
I asked the shop steward to clarify if he could. Afterwards he said he would fire me completely, therefore, not the same thing.
You are assuming he was following rules
That's your problem here.
Did you address anything I said?
OK, I'll play. I'm bored anyway.
This may get rather long, but it is directed strictly @Sadman101.
You liked that, did you?
You said he threatened to take your hours down to zero if you didn't resign. What do you think he meant by that? He meant that if you didn't resign, he was going to fire you and take your hours down to zero.
He never once said he was going to suspend you. But he did say he was going to fire you.
So why are you asking about a suspension when he told you he was going to fire you.
Should I type slower again?
He never said he was going to suspend you, he said he was going to fire you.
Not only according to me, but also according to your labor manager.
I just did. Let's keep going.
What Counterpoint are you talking about? You said the labor manager said either resign or I will fire you. You said he also said that he would take your hours down to zero. He can't do that contractually, unless he fires you.
You're supposed Counterpoint was that the labor manager said he was going to reduce your hours.
Yes. If you didn't resign he was going to reduce your hours down to zero by firing you.
Not a hard concept to comprehend.
He said that if you didn't resign, he was going to reduce your hours to zero, by firing you for sexual harassment.
Again, he cannot reduce your hours to zero without firing you.
Just did.
Then who am I with?
Look at that, we agree on something.
They were referring to the fact that your firing would not have stuck. Yes, you would have been fired, but most probably would have got your job back.
And if you don't believe me, go ask them for yourself what they meant by you would not have been fired.
I ignored nothing.
The labor manager did not say he was going to suspend you, he said he was going to fire you.
You were not injured, you were about to be fired.
You were about to be fired for sexual harassment. Nothing to do with constructive discharge.
Yes, he did say he was going to discharge you. This is the only one relevant. The others are not relevant to your situation
Exactly. But you said that he told you he was going to reduce your hours to zero because you didn't resign. That is correct.
If you didn't resign, he was going to reduce your hours to zero by firing you.
Or, BECAUSE you didn't resign, he was going to reduce your hours to zero by firing you.
It is the same thing. The labor manager cannot reduce your hours to zero unless he fires you.
If you didn't resign, he was going to reduce your hours to zero, by firing you, in that order.
Or, if you didn't resign, he was going to for you, thus reducing your hours to zero.
I'm not assuming anything. If the labor manager told you he was going to reduce your hours to zero and didn't mention anything about firing you, the shop steward would have said something, because he knows the labor manager cannot do that.
The shop steward knew that if you didn't resign the labor manager was going to fire you.
And the shop steward most likely believed that you would not get your job back in a grievance hearing.
That's why he told you to resign. And yes, he was wrong.
Who is the one with the problem here? I still got my job, do you?
Everything. You just don't get it.
Your whole argument is the labor manager supposedly told you he was going to reduce your hours to zero if you didn't resign before he told you he was going to fire you.
Before you waste your money on a lawyer, you better ask your union steward, who was there, how he thinks the labor manager can reduce your hours to zero without firing you.
I'll tell you what your steward's going to say. He's going to say that he believed that if you didn't resign, the labor manager was going to fire you for sexual harassment.
Case closed. I actually don't blame you. I blame your steward..
You are welcome to waste your money by lawyering up.
Better luck next time in your grab ass endeavors, try not to do it at the work place.Better luck next time, sonny.
OK, I'll play. I'm bored anyway.
This may get rather long, but it is
You liked that, did you?
You said he threatened to take your hours down to zero if you didn't resign. What do you think he meant by that? He meant that if you didn't resign, he was going to fire you and take your hours down to zero.
He never once said he was going to suspend you. But he did say he was going to fire you.
So why are you asking about a suspension when he told you he was going to fire you.
Should I type slower again?
He never said he was going to suspend you, he said he was going to fire you.
Not only according to me, but also according to your labor manager.
I just did. Let's keep going.
What Counterpoint are you talking about? You said the labor manager said either resign or I will fire you. You said he also said that he would take your hours down to zero. He can't do that contractually, unless he fires you.
You're supposed Counterpoint was that the labor manager said he was going to reduce your hours.
Yes. If you didn't resign he was going to reduce your hours down to zero by firing you.
Not a hard concept to comprehend.
He said that if you didn't resign, he was going to reduce your hours to zero, by firing you for sexual harassment.
Again, he cannot reduce your hours to zero without firing you.
Just did.
Then who am I with?
Look at that, we agree on something.
They were referring to the fact that your firing would not have stuck. Yes, you would have been fired, but most probably would have got your job back.
And if you don't believe me, go ask them for yourself what they meant by you would not have been fired.
I ignored nothing.
The labor manager did not say he was going to suspend you, he said he was going to fire you.
You were not injured, you were about to be fired.
You were about to be fired for sexual harassment. Nothing to do with constructive discharge.
Yes, he did say he was going to discharge you. This is the only one relevant. The others are not relevant to your situation
Exactly. But you said that he told you he was going to reduce your hours to zero because you didn't resign. That is correct.
If you didn't resign, he was going to reduce your hours to zero by firing you.
Or, BECAUSE you didn't resign, he was going to reduce your hours to zero by firing you.
It is the same thing. The labor manager cannot reduce your hours to zero unless he fires you.
If you didn't resign, he was going to reduce your hours to zero, by firing you, in that order.
Or, if you didn't resign, he was going to for you, thus reducing your hours to zero.
I'm not assuming anything. If the labor manager told you he was going to reduce your hours to zero and didn't mention anything about firing you, the shop steward would have said something, because he knows the labor manager cannot do that.
The shop steward knew that if you didn't resign the labor manager was going to fire you.
And the shop steward most likely believed that you would not get your job back in a grievance hearing.
That's why he told you to resign. And yes, he was wrong.
Who is the one with the problem here? I still got my job, do you?
Everything. You just don't get it.
Your whole argument is the labor manager supposedly told you he was going to reduce your hours to zero if you didn't resign before he told you he was going to fire you.
Before you waste your money on a lawyer, you better ask your union steward, who was there, how he thinks the labor manager can reduce your hours to zero without firing you.
I'll tell you what your steward's going to say. He's going to say that he believed that if you didn't resign, the labor manager was going to fire you for sexual harassment.
Case closed. I actually don't blame you. I blame your steward..
You are welcome to waste your money by lawyering up
Lawyering up is already in progress.
You have that right.Thanks for actually speaking coherently, I needed a break.
He actually isn't giving sound anything. He is addressing stuff I never said. Lawyering up is already in progress.