Question about termination

[Brownslave688]

Yes I know guy acts like he’s raping the woman yes yes but why even think about asking that towards someone at work

Oh I agree lol some guys are nervous talkers. Some have no filter. Some don’t care. Some think everything is a joke.

 

[Fido]

Oh I agree lol some guys are nervous talkers. Some have no filter. Some don’t care. Some think everything is a joke.

Sounds like one of our 30 year drivers here. Randomly comes up to me showing me random picture of a woman telling me he’s going to the out of her. I tell him it’s probably a dude and he gets mad and walks away.

 

[542thruNthru]

@542thruNthru can you believe these guys?

I hate when my wife wants to play the rape game. My ass hurts for a week!

 

[Mugarolla]

I may be slightly off but I'll attempt to answer your questions. The union will argue that if the company allowed someone to work after being knowledgeable of an infraction, they must not have deemed it to be a cardinal infraction or they would have terminated immediately. If it is not a cardinal infraction, progressive discipline needs to take place. On the other hand, the company can say they did not have full information to make a determination at the time of being aware. Would potentially depend on the specific facts of the case.

As far as talking to someone without a Union Rep, it depends, again, on the specifics. If the company did not allow the driver to have requested representation than any information that resulted from that conversation can not be used against them for discipline. The company could still discipline if they had information independent of that conversation but past practice is such that they usually don't.

Weingarten rights, as laid out in case law and regulations, are largely misunderstood. A company can discipline an employee without union representation available but only if they solely impose discipline without any questions / interviews taking place. In the real UPS world, and probably other places, representation is made available regardless for discipline to avoid potential issues and the lack of representation has been accepted as an issue often by UPS Labor.

As for your specific case, we do not have all of the information available to make an educated comment. We don't know what the 'victims' stated to the company, the overall environment or a number of other factors. If it wasn't considered egregious, he could be in progressive discipline.

Very good. I’m impressed.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

So we have a driver (not me) in our center who has had a couple of issues in the last year. During peak last year he asked a seasonal preloader (cute girl) if she wanted to play the "rape game". No clue what that is, nor did anyone else. A complaint was filed by another driver (not me) anf it went to HR. People were interviewed (not me) and during his route he was told to come back in. He was terminated that day after he had worked a few hours. He was brought back because he worked that day???
Fast forward to last week. He asked a 6 year preloader (black guy) "what do you call an old black guy?" ......"retired farm equipment". The preloader let the supervisor know to keep him away or it would not end well. She asked why..blah blah and he did not want to get into it. Well it came out and the supervisor took it to management. They talked with him about what happened without a union rep there and he went on delivering that day. Stuff has been said and it went to higher ups. He shows up at the facility this past Friday mid route and an ambulance hauls him away for a "mental breakdown". We are being told he cannot be terminated because he worked the day after he was talked to without a union rep there. Is there any truth to this? I do not know enough about any of this union stuff because I show up and do my job. No real need for representation when it comes to disciplinary reasons. This has now got to the regional manager and we have heard this is not over yet. Can someone explain to me how someone can keep his job when things are said like this?

This is actually a legitimate concern. Despite some of the responses to the contrary. It IS your business as well as anyone else’s that works in that building.

If proper protocols aren’t followed when dealing with sexual harassment and/or racism (or for any other disciplinary problem) then people such as the driver you are taking about will continue to be employed and, therefore, be given more opportunities to do things they shouldn’t be doing.

It also gives the impression that certain rules are simply there to be broken. Things could get worse. That driver will put his hands on some girl or will make more racial remarks. And it could have been avoided if they had actually followed the discipline process correctly one of the first times he screwed up.

The same scenario applies to temperamental employees that tend to straddle the line that separates harmless banter among employees from threatening behavior. Eventually they say something stupid. If permitted its possible that employee will take it a step farther next time. Maybe too far. If disciplined (PROPERLY) the first time the guy learns his lesson or is fired. If not he eventually punches someone’s lights out.

 

[upsmademedoit]

I may be slightly off but I'll attempt to answer your questions. The union will argue that if the company allowed someone to work after being knowledgeable of an infraction, they must not have deemed it to be a cardinal infraction or they would have terminated immediately. If it is not a cardinal infraction, progressive discipline needs to take place. On the other hand, the company can say they did not have full information to make a determination at the time of being aware. Would potentially depend on the specific facts of the case.

As far as talking to someone without a Union Rep, it depends, again, on the specifics. If the company did not allow the driver to have requested representation than any information that resulted from that conversation can not be used against them for discipline. The company could still discipline if they had information independent of that conversation but past practice is such that they usually don't.

Weingarten rights, as laid out in case law and regulations, are largely misunderstood. A company can discipline an employee without union representation available but only if they solely impose discipline without any questions / interviews taking place. In the real UPS world, and probably other places, representation is made available regardless for discipline to avoid potential issues and the lack of representation has been accepted as an issue often by UPS Labor.

As for your specific case, we do not have all of the information available to make an educated comment. We don't know what the 'victims' stated to the company, the overall environment or a number of other factors. If it wasn't considered egregious, he could be in progressive discipline.

Thanks Fenris! I appreciate the well thought out response and explanation. Things have got really weird since I posted this and still not sure what is going to happen to him.

 

[upsmademedoit]

This is actually a legitimate concern. Despite some of the responses to the contrary. It IS your business as well as anyone else’s that works in that building.

If proper protocols aren’t followed when dealing with sexual harassment and/or racism (or for any other disciplinary problem) then people such as the driver you are taking about will continue to be employed and, therefore, be given more opportunities to do things they shouldn’t be doing.

It also gives the impression that certain rules are simply there to be broken. Things could get worse. That driver will put his hands on some girl or will make more racial remarks. And it could have been avoided if they had actually followed the discipline process correctly one of the first times he screwed up.

The same scenario applies to temperamental employees that tend to straddle the line that separates harmless banter among employees from threatening behavior. Eventually they say something stupid. If permitted its possible that employee will take it a step farther next time. Maybe too far. If disciplined (PROPERLY) the first time the guy learns his lesson or is fired. If not he eventually punches someone’s lights out.

Thanks for the reply Thug. I actually heard both things that were said and I feel like he put me and a few other people in the middle of all this garbage and all I want to do is go to work, do my job, and leave. He made it my business. When I found out HR was doing interviews, I went to a 40+ year guy and asked him what I should say I were to be interviewed. I do not want to help anyone lose their job or get in the middle of crap. He told me "you tell them what you heard him say, nothing more, nothing less." Thankfully they had enough info from others that they did not ask me to give a statement or question me. What sucks is that girl was visibly shaken after he said that to her. I would not want my daughter to have to hear that crap when you are just trying to work and get on permanent. She was a hard worker and would have been kept on for sure. The last situation, the loader would have taken care of business if he really wanted to. He did not want to lose his job and thus the reason he let our sup know. I appreciate the reply man!

 

[PT 4 Life]

Who the hell walks up to someone and says you want to play the rape game? Lmao. Guy clearly has something wrong with him.