Dizzee
ɹǝqɯǝɯ ɹoıuǝs
im glad u put UPS and not UPSF
Hit "refresh" on your browser.

( Just pokin' fun at ya. I've let it fly out the back door of my truck more than once. Not when a restroom was available, mind you, but still. )
im glad u put UPS and not UPSF
Apologies for not coming in or commenting sooner.....
For starters, is it really that clear that the supervisor is responding to being taken advantage of? I had the unfortunate dilemma of having to urinate after a PCM at the same time a former center manager had the same urge. Eight minutes later, the Steward came up to me to inform me that the center manager had told him that I had to "pee on my time, not the company's." This had nothing to do with fairness or courage, it had everything to do with power & disrespecting a worker. It might also be worth mentioning that this was the first time the center manager had spoken to the steward about my "performance" during his tenure. So perhaps he most certainly did wake up and feel the need to gig me at this opportunity.
Secondly, exactly what is considered "appropriate total duration" of time in the restroom? (Given my knowledge of anatomy and physiology, I have a real difficult time calling it a "privilege") And does this time take into account the individuals circumstances. I get up early in the morning and exercise to keep my body in shape to deal with supervisors like Tie who give competent, industrious employees more work. These workouts require that I drink plenty of water early in the morning. I also have a particular diet which forces me to urinate more frequently. PCMs frequently revolve around health and hydration; you can't have it both ways.
Thirdly, exactly what, when, and why does an employee need a doctor's note for bathroom use? Many factors come into play here, such as age, weather, diet, stress, and fitness. And if an employee came in with a doctor's note for a medical condition that caused frequent restroom usage, like say for an enlarged prostate, does that employee run the risk of being "put on the radar"?
Fourth, if there is a problem in this area with one or a small percentage of workers in the group, what on earth is wrong with addressing only them? I would find a PCM on the subject of basic human functions disrespectful and degrading, not to mention a waste of my time. Sorry, I don't share your opinion that the supervisor is the "heroic victim" trying to make a fair workplace here.
If you run a business of 15+ employees. Pay them good salary with tremendous benefits and give them their honest, fair days break paid for by you. And you have 3 of those employees taking restroom breaks everyday or every other day at 20 minutes a pop. At the minimum, 1 hour a day, 2 or 3 hours a week. At the maximum, 1 hour a day, 5 hours a week. So, using a average of full time and part time employee salaries of 15 dollars an hour, that is about 75 dollars a week of paid personal time. Chalk up the amount of time other employees take to use the restroom. Now add up the amount of time it takes away from handling volume in your operation requiring you to keep employee later......Its pretty clear to see that we are talking somewhat near $10,000 a year, if not way more. Now add up the other operations that have maybe 1 or maybe 5 employees taking advantage of their restroom break (or using vending machines, cell phones, etc)....it clearly adds up...clearly.
A reasonable amount of time is a reasonable amount of time. Hell, if you take longer, sometimes it happens, of course. But how can everyone here find it so absurd that the company is asking it's employees to let their supervisors know that they are taking a restroom break. What it does it make both supervisors and employees aware that:
a) The supervisor knows where his employee is in case of an emergency.
b) The employee knows he can't be walking around the hub eating a Kit Kat bar and returning saying, "Oh, I was just away for 3 minutes. Didn't you see me walk out of the operation?".
Its business, its principle. The majority of time, it is the employees who are urging their supervisors about other employees taking extended restroom breaks on a daily basis..
If you run a business of 15+ employees. Pay them good salary with tremendous benefits and give them their honest, fair days break paid for by you. And you have 3 of those employees taking restroom breaks everyday or every other day at 20 minutes a pop. At the minimum, 1 hour a day, 2 or 3 hours a week. At the maximum, 1 hour a day, 5 hours a week. So, using a average of full time and part time employee salaries of 15 dollars an hour, that is about 75 dollars a week of paid personal time. Chalk up the amount of time other employees take to use the restroom. Now add up the amount of time it takes away from handling volume in your operation requiring you to keep employee later......Its pretty clear to see that we are talking somewhat near $10,000 a year, if not way more. Now add up the other operations that have maybe 1 or maybe 5 employees taking advantage of their restroom break (or using vending machines, cell phones, etc)....it clearly adds up...clearly.
A reasonable amount of time is a reasonable amount of time. Hell, if you take longer, sometimes it happens, of course. But how can everyone here find it so absurd that the company is asking it's employees to let their supervisors know that they are taking a restroom break. What it does it make both supervisors and employees aware that:
a) The supervisor knows where his employee is in case of an emergency.
b) The employee knows he can't be walking around the hub eating a Kit Kat bar and returning saying, "Oh, I was just away for 3 minutes. Didn't you see me walk out of the operation?".
Its business, its principle. The majority of time, it is the employees who are urging their supervisors about other employees taking extended restroom breaks on a daily basis..
Is anyone tried the argument that they drink water on company time and so therefore need to expend it on company time?
The next step will be not allowing people to drink water on company time which will = major lawsuit for dehydration.
Yes, that was more or less one of my points in both of my posts in this thread. Thanks for the backup.