Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Socks and Trucks!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bubblehead" data-source="post: 2182483" data-attributes="member: 14176"><p>I get copies of all of the dockets and decisions, and certain cases catch my eye.</p><p>When you network yourself with as many people as I do, all kinds of things are possible.</p><p>It's funny how you dinosaurs think that in 2016 that you have to be in the hearing to "<em>listen to the facts of the case</em>", that somehow the ranks are still closed in your secret society.</p><p></p><p>When I inquired about this specific case, because it sounded interesting, I got <em>all of the facts</em> I needed.</p><p>If I were to close my eyes, it would have been "<em>like I was in the room"</em>.</p><p>As the charging party, the company had the burden of proof, and they proved nothing.</p><p>In the drivers defense, he had 4 decades of Central Region decisions and established Local practices on his side, yet still the "baby was split".</p><p>Anybody who has been around for more than a cup of coffee knows; had the driver had any real culpability, he would have been lucky to be put back to work, let alone receive half back pay.</p><p>What a travesty it would be if this decision managed to set a new precedence, after such a long standing privilege had been preserved by our predecessors.</p><p></p><p>The only thing I don't understand, is why they didn't "refer the case back to parties", like they do most every other time the Union presents a good case?</p><p>I can only assume, without any first hand knowledge or contacts in that Local, that this guy wasn't looking for a deal and the case was destine to be right back in front of this same panel in 3 months.</p><p>Either way, it was another crap decision.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bubblehead, post: 2182483, member: 14176"] I get copies of all of the dockets and decisions, and certain cases catch my eye. When you network yourself with as many people as I do, all kinds of things are possible. It's funny how you dinosaurs think that in 2016 that you have to be in the hearing to "[I]listen to the facts of the case[/I]", that somehow the ranks are still closed in your secret society. When I inquired about this specific case, because it sounded interesting, I got [I]all of the facts[/I] I needed. If I were to close my eyes, it would have been "[I]like I was in the room"[/I]. As the charging party, the company had the burden of proof, and they proved nothing. In the drivers defense, he had 4 decades of Central Region decisions and established Local practices on his side, yet still the "baby was split". Anybody who has been around for more than a cup of coffee knows; had the driver had any real culpability, he would have been lucky to be put back to work, let alone receive half back pay. What a travesty it would be if this decision managed to set a new precedence, after such a long standing privilege had been preserved by our predecessors. The only thing I don't understand, is why they didn't "refer the case back to parties", like they do most every other time the Union presents a good case? I can only assume, without any first hand knowledge or contacts in that Local, that this guy wasn't looking for a deal and the case was destine to be right back in front of this same panel in 3 months. Either way, it was another crap decision. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Socks and Trucks!
Top