No humanity allowed in the workplace!

[exupser87]

It was putting a stop to possible PLANNED abuse that otherwise would not have happened. If, in that case, it WAS micro-managing then there would be times where even that is justified. There needs to be reasonable limits, and their approach was certainly outside of that, and absolutely an immature approach. Funny how everybody decided to take a muture approach from there on out, and I never had a problem with it. A much bigger mistake would have been to ignore it, with the attitude that was justified, because I wouldn't want to micro-manage.


Drones ? I've got news for you. We're ALL drones, whether we admit it, or not.

I think you missed my point. Anyway, I don't want to hijack this thread any more than we already have.

 

[cachsux]

What should have happened was the supervisor should have documented future occurrences, brought the guy back in upon returning to work with the Steward to explain what was happening and held discipline pending the outcome of the FMLA. If it was denied, by all means, fire the guy, but it sounds like it would have been approved.

FMLA or not, you feel absences for something as serious as cancer are a justifiable reason for termination? Moral implications aside I`m pretty sure thats grounds for a good legal case.

 

[JonFrum]

Red, did the employee have the 1250 hours in 12 months to qualify him for up to 12 weeks of FMLA leave, or did he only have the 625 hours to qualify him for up to six weeks non-FMLA leave? I ask because I believe the six weeks leave is not part of the FMLA. It's modeled after the FMLA, but it is only a clause in the Contract, not Federal Law. Sombody correct me if I'm wrong.

My understanding is that UPS must invoke the FMLA and inform the employee of his rights, as soon as UPS has reason to believe the FMLA may apply. Even if the employee never heard of the FMLA. The burden is on the employer.

How culpable the Supervisor (and UPS) may be may depend on weather this case falls under FMLA, or just the Local 705 Contract. The FMLA has penalties for employer misbehavior. The Contract doesn't.
- - -
Also, is there really any law that says if the Company does something for one employee, it has to do it for all? I know the Union will invoke that argument in order to encourage UPS not to descriminate, but I think it's just a moral arguement, not an actual legal obligation. UPS can't descriminate in a way that breaks the Law, but they can descriminate in lots of other ways. Manageing involves making destinctions.

I'm just wondering if doing something for one employee sets a precedent. I don't think it does. I don't think anyone would want to discourage any employer from doing the right thing, by threatening to declare a precedent has been set and obligating management to do it for everyone nationwide.

There is the doctrine of Past Practice, but it takes a while for a past practice to rise to that level. And the Contract always overrules a Past Practice if the two conflict.

 

[cachsux]

Red, did the employee have the 1250 hours in 12 months to qualify him for up to 12 weeks of FMLA leave, or did he only have the 625 hours to qualify him for up to six weeks non-FMLA leave? I ask because I believe the six weeks leave is not part of the FMLA. It's modeled after the FMLA, but it is only a clause in the Contract, not Federal Law. Sombody correct me if I'm wrong.

The six weeks for ptimers is FMLA time providing them the same rights. It may have been negotiated into the contract but it is there.

My understanding is that UPS must invoke the FMLA and inform the employee of his rights, as soon as UPS has reason to believe the FMLA may apply. Even if the employee never heard of the FMLA. The burden is on the employer.

http://www.dol.gov/whd/fmla/

 

[thelus]

Section 6. Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
All employees who have worked for the Company for a minimum of twelve (12) months and worked at least 1250 hours during the
past twelve (12) months are eligible for unpaid leave as set forth in the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993.
Additionally, any employee not covered above, that has worked for the Company for a minimum of thirty-six (36) months and accrued
at least 625 paid hours during the past twelve (12) months is eligible for unpaid leave as set forth below, except that the amount of
leave allowed will shall be computed at one half (1/2) of the time provided by the FMLA.
Eligible employees are entitled up to a total of 12/6 weeks of unpaid leave during any twelve (12) month period for the following
reasons:
1. Birth of a child;
2. Adoption, or placement for foster care;
3. To care for a spouse, child, or parent of the employee due to a serious health condition;
4. A serious health condition of the employee.
The employee’s seniority rights shall continue as if the employee had not taken leave under this section, and the Employer will shall
maintain health insurance coverage during the period of the leave.
The Employer may require the employee to substitute accrued paid vacation or other paid for leave for part of the 12 / 6 week leave
period.
The employee is required to provide the Employer with at least thirty (30) days advance notice before FMLA leave begins, if the need
for leave is foreseeable. If the leave is not foreseeable, the employee is required to give notice as soon as practicable. The Employer
has the right to require medical certification of a need for leave under this Act. In addition, the Employer has the right to require a
second (2nd) opinion at the Employer’s expense.
The provisions of this section are in response to the Federal Act and shall not supersede any state or local law which provides for
greater employee rights.
Eligible employees shall be allowed to take intermittent leave as directed by a medical professional.

there is are language red as you can see we added a nice part of that when it says Eligible employees shall be allowed to take intermittent leave as directed by a medical professional. i hope even though our fellow brother passed you filled a grievance using that line of that article.

 

[mnnice]

Several weeks back we had an employee that was brought in the office for attendance. This employee is a part time auditor on the twilight shift. During the conversation he explained that he has called in here and there because he has cancer and is going through treatments. The treatments take a toll on his body and if he could come to work he would.

He was explained his rights under FMLA which he would now apply for. But before he left the office he was placed on notice of suspension for his attendance.

A little over a week later while he was still waiting for his FMLA to get approved he called in again because he was not up to coming in to work after his treatments. He was now placed on notice of termination for his attendance.

This supervisor already knew that he is sick. She already knew that he has applied for the FMLA. She knew that he is fighting for his life but obviously does not care.

I tried my best to inform him that he has nothing to worry about that we would not allow him to lose his job because hes sick with cancer and that the treatments he was goiing through made him to sick to come to work.

This employee has over 5 years in as a part timer and has never had any talk withs for anything!

This is why I do what I do! This has been eating me up the last few days because this employees heart gave out and he died. He died thinking that the company he worked for wants to fire him because he was sick.

When someone is sick we band together to show support and help them through the tough times. Crap even ups hits us up for United way donations yearly. But they can not show an employee a little respect during these times?

I have a baptism to go to today and I can assure you that I will be praying hard for karma to come back around on this sup!

This is a bad situation for everyone involved. My prayers go out to the employee. The supervisor, manager, division manager and HR manager should have all been involved with this decision making. It was the wrong thing to demand this employee to come to work every day. I truly wonder why his doctor didn't give him a slip indicating he can't work because of his condition.

 

[hellfire]

My experience has been quite the opposite with cancer patients. The union doesn't do jack. Where the company has set up banking accounts for donations. Daily sign up lists for helping with :errands, projects, food.

We currently have someone who had a brain tumor. Nearly all the drivers are donating a certain amount of money every month so he has a regular income. And our yearly United Way golf tourney won't be going to United Way this year. He will be getting the 8-10K instead.

i agree,, with 26 yrs in me ive never personally seen any management act like this.........also..theres a gentleman here with 35 yrs service???????????????

 

[redshift1]

i agree,, with 26 yrs in me ive never personally seen any management act like this.........also..theres a gentleman here with 35 yrs service???????????????

I agree I've never seen anything but compassion for seriously ill employees. All the time off they need no questions asked. This is stirring the coals.

 

[Braveheart]

This is sad to hear

BUT,

If his attendance is poor, why would UPS want someone that can't commit to their job?

This person should be laid off, and offered work when they can commit to a regular work schedule without missing time. Which is the equiv of FMLA time out, no? I disagree with discipline or termination, obviously, under the circumstances.

FMLA is 12 weeks and or 60 days for you to use as you see fit.

The pathetic manager should have personally put the FMLA paperwork on overdrive and shut his mouth. They have no right to lay him off!

Another reason UPS has guys who are disgruntled.

 

[Braveheart]

Unfortunately, this is the nature of being a union represented employee.

I had union employees reporting to me for over 15 years and you had to be very careful in setting precedence by being compassionate to an employee because the union would come back later and say you did for this employee A ... why not for employee B.

Personally, I would find a way to take care of the person - union represented or not..

I've had non-union employees reporting to the last 16 years and it is much easier to use your judgment in "taking" care of employee needs.

FMLA is law so no reason to "blame union".

And there are countless times I have seen UPS do extra for a person without a law or union issue.

 

[Catatonic]

FMLA is law so no reason to "blame union".

And there are countless times I have seen UPS do extra for a person without a law or union issue.

As I have said before, the union is not the blame.

It is the nature of US "Contract Law". If one party of a contract does not enforce or relaxes enforcement of a term of the contract then that term may not be considered part of the contract going forward.
I call it the "Nature of the Beast".

And as far as "And there are countless times I have seen UPS do extra for a person without a law or union issue.".
I think I have said this in almost every post. In fact that is the only reason I got involved in this thread because the OP said or implied that this was just UPS being uncaring and calloused towards it's employees.

And as I have also said frequently, I would have found a way to take care of this employee's needs. What is outlined here is a weak individual not willing to take the steps to become a leader.

 

[UPSNewbie]

This is a bad situation for everyone involved. My prayers go out to the employee. The supervisor, manager, division manager and HR manager should have all been involved with this decision making. It was the wrong thing to demand this employee to come to work every day. I truly wonder why his doctor didn't give him a slip indicating he can't work because of his condition.

My understanding is that he was able to work most of the time. Some days, chemo just beat him up.

Red, I hope you clear his name. Nobody deserves that kind of treatment.