Terminated For Gross Negligence

[dannyboy]

One other thing this driver did was to stop out in the intersection a bit.

Notice he looked left right left? But that is for where people drive on the correct side of the road? Where this was shot, it should be right, left right, as the first lane you cross is on the right. Had he looked right one more time before pulling out, he might have given the cyclist one more chance to be seen.

Good dramitization for sure. Shows how fast it can happen,

Thanks brett!

d

 

[Channahon]

After all these posts, the only question I have is, what did your steward advise you to do, if anything? UPS offered you an inside job, you rejected the position, you no longer work for UPS, and found another job with less benefits for your family.

Did you give some thought to your situation for your family, or just let your gut reaction for UPS take over.

How tragic and sad to be involved in the loss of another's life, and how that may impact you throughout your life. I've never been in this type of situation, and cannot walk in your shoes.

Whatever path you choose in life, may it be for you and your family to live a life that brings you comfort and solace.

As this tragic situation was not in your control based on your comments made here.

 

[tieguy]

. Once something happens, you cannot change it... If the intersection was not clear.. I would have not proceeded... I could have easily died in this accident, too.. There are no winners in this situation..

L if the intersection was clear then no one would have run a motorcycle into the side of your vehicle. The intersection was not clear.

 

[dannyboy]

L

I will make this my last post on your situation, unless you need more information.

I had the pleasure of making the acquaintance of an arbitrator on a flight to Philly last year. She had several times been involved with conflicts between UPS/Teamsters. She gave me her card then, and I called her today to get an insight as to what went on behind closed doors in your case.

After recapping your story, sharing the information gathered, and reading some of the posts you have made here, she gave me her point of view on your case. Understand, she had nothing to do with it, only giving me her impression of how the arbitrator ruled the way he did.

In your postings, you never once indicated you shared responsibility for the accident. Not once. And I would suspect that is also a good indication you did the same throughout the hearing processes you went through. She picked up on that very quickly, and it really bothered her. Enough so, that in a case that could have gone either way, that would have made a really big difference in the ruling.

She also mentioned that there are many arbitrators that only look at the written agreement. In your case, the national agreement says that you can be terminated when you are involved in an accident involving a fatality. Pure and simple, plain as day. They can fire you for that accident. They don’t have to, but they can. You and the union agreed to the language, so the language rules. They went out of their way to offer you a job, and you refused. That also made a big impression, and not a good one.

Others, including this one, prefer a more human approach. If there are extenuating circumstances, similar to your case, then there could be some measure of leniency. The big problem is that you never ever considered that you were just as much at fault as the cyclist, a fact that made a deep impression on her. Almost to the point that you come off very callous about the whole thing.

Yes it was tragic. Mistakes happen. Things get missed and overlooked. But we are human. Things do happen. But your attitude and inability to admit your part in this accident cost you at the hearings and with the arbitrator.

Bottom line is that she thought you and you alone were the reason for the ruling to come down the way it did. No remorse on your part hurt you badly when it came to trying to get your job back. Even after 9 pages of posts, you still don’t get or admit it.

Maybe that is your way of dealing with it. If so, you need to get help. Actually you need to get help either way.

Wishing you the best in the future,

Daniel

 

[laurietito]

L

I will make this my last post on your situation, unless you need more information.

I had the pleasure of making the acquaintance of an arbitrator on a flight to Philly last year. She had several times been involved with conflicts between UPS/Teamsters. She gave me her card then, and I called her today to get an insight as to what went on behind closed doors in your case.

After recapping your story, sharing the information gathered, and reading some of the posts you have made here, she gave me her point of view on your case. Understand, she had nothing to do with it, only giving me her impression of how the arbitrator ruled the way he did.

In your postings, you never once indicated you shared responsibility for the accident. Not once. And I would suspect that is also a good indication you did the same throughout the hearing processes you went through. She picked up on that very quickly, and it really bothered her. Enough so, that in a case that could have gone either way, that would have made a really big difference in the ruling.

She also mentioned that there are many arbitrators that only look at the written agreement. In your case, the national agreement says that you can be terminated when you are involved in an accident involving a fatality. Pure and simple, plain as day. They can fire you for that accident. They don’t have to, but they can. You and the union agreed to the language, so the language rules. They went out of their way to offer you a job, and you refused. That also made a big impression, and not a good one.

Others, including this one, prefer a more human approach. If there are extenuating circumstances, similar to your case, then there could be some measure of leniency. The big problem is that you never ever considered that you were just as much at fault as the cyclist, a fact that made a deep impression on her. Almost to the point that you come off very callous about the whole thing.

Yes it was tragic. Mistakes happen. Things get missed and overlooked. But we are human. Things do happen. But your attitude and inability to admit your part in this accident cost you at the hearings and with the arbitrator.

Bottom line is that she thought you and you alone were the reason for the ruling to come down the way it did. No remorse on your part hurt you badly when it came to trying to get your job back. Even after 9 pages of posts, you still don’t get or admit it.

Maybe that is your way of dealing with it. If so, you need to get help. Actually you need to get help either way.

Wishing you the best in the future,

Daniel

By the way, this has been his wife typing since the first thread.... My husband doesn't even mess with computers....He has been reading all of your lovely and supportive comments.... So maybe I am the callous one... any wife would be a little bitter after going through this experience with her husband....

 

[dannyboy]

IF you want bitter, might I suggest a visit to the parents of the young man?

d

 

[HEFFERNAN]

From reading this whole post from page 1 to page 9
DannyBoy makes the most sense
You would have probably been better served to accept the job offer and then fight your way from that position
And no matter how many words are in the contract, and how many i's are dotted and t's are crossed, you didnt show any human emotion into your approach and it looks like it may have cost you the driving job

Not one of us drivers wants to go through this tragedy ever, so I really sympathize with where you have ended up. Sometimes, if they like you and respect youand feel your pain, they will give you more leeway in a situation like this

 

[dannyboy]

I remember a story once long ago. There was a man on a luxury liner that was having a great time. The liner sunk, and he was the only survior with only a plank to keep him up. A small fishing boat came by and offered him help. The man refused saying he wanted to wait for a luxury liner instead. One that never came.

IMHO, both showed the same good judgement.

The lack of remorse, both as a poster here and most likely at his hearings is something I and many others have a hard time understanding. Im chalking it up to that is his way of being able to deal with the death. At least I hope so.

Either way, that lack of remorse and the acceptance of some of the responsibility for the accident is what cost him long run all the way to the top, IMHO.

Yes, I know this type of situation can and does happen to others. But I would hope that they are a bit more honest with themselves. Might it also be that they are back in delivery within a short time instead of on the street?

Mrs L

Please dont insult us by

By the way, this has been his wife typing since the first thread.... My husband doesn't even mess with computers....He has been reading all of your lovely and supportive comments.... So maybe I am the callous one... any wife would be a little bitter after going through this experience with her husband.... Yesterday 09:38 PM

AT best you are a liar, and quite possibly suffer from the same mental delusions as your husband. This post and this one alone in written in a sane (besides the premis of the post) manner, has proper spelling and punctuation, uses capital letters....etc etc etc. Totally different style. So dont insult our intellegence, we are a bit smarter than that, and since you blindly supported your husband.........

Best wishes

d

 

[over9five]

Cheryl, I think it's time to close this thread....

 

[over9five]

Cheryl, I think it's time to close this thread....

...but before you do, I'd like to commend Danny for doing an awesome job trying to help these people. It's just gone on too long now, and I feel it's no longer going in a productive direction.

 

[dannyboy]

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on thier next post. If it is like the last one, with multiple personalities.........

I hate L went through what he did. But by the grace of God and a second or third look going through intersections, it could be anyone of us.

Its how we respond to the situtation that will set us appart and determine the outcome.

d

 

[over9five]

Re: Time to close...

I know. Seems to me if they really wanted help, they would have taken it private with you as you offered. Obviously they haven't.

 

[dannyboy]

Actually they have sent some PM's, but mainly to find out what and how I found out things, some of which they didnt even know.

I do think it is funny about the last post though.

d

 

[trickpony1]

Wanna know the really sad part of this situation?
This is the company that teaches/demands that we buckle the seat belt as we start the engine.
This is the company that teaches/demands that we put the keyring on our little finger for quicker accessibilty as we walk to the front door.
This is the company that tells us we are spending too much time in the back of the package car but they don't seem to mind if we have to make repeat trips down the same street to deliver that second and third package we didn't see the first time.
This is the company that puts us under considerable pressure/stress to make commits but, by God, we have to take our lunch.
I could go on but I'm sure you know what I am talking about.
Could it be that the two individuals (this thread as well as the thread of "freaking out, husband fired.....) were doing their very best to make commits, make production and make 9.5? We need to consider that the two separate threads are just the tip of the iceberg and there are many more incidents that we don't hear/ know about where the driver(s) were going like a bat out of hell (OOPS! I used a naughty word) to please their supervisors and make numbers.
Luckily, I got out of PC and into feeders early in my career because I could see it wasn't gonna get any better. It looks like I was right.
The stress/pressure/anxiety might explain why PC drivers are signing the feeder bid sheet in record numbers.

 

[dannyboy]

I dont doubt for a minute that had a bearing on what happened. I also do believe him when he stated he just did not see him. From where he was sitting, yes, I believe him 100%.

But that still does not take away from the fact that the other driver had the right of way, which our driver crossed.

Like I said, it could happen to any of us.

d

 

[BigUnionGuy]

Let me see if I can clear a few things up on this thread:

Laurietito was discharged for Central Region Article 17 (d) Gross negligence. One of the criteria is that there was a fatality. Doesn't mean the driver was at fault... He just met the criteria for the company to take a position of discharge. And it was sustained through the grievance procedure.

The biggest thing I see drivers get hung up on, is when the other driver is cited or deemed to be at fault by the police. The company doesn't have the ability or authority to determine guilt. But in keeping with their training they deem it was AVOIDABLE. BIG DIFERENCE.

The Central Region-JAC panels don't use arbitrators. It is a straight panel system consisting of an equal number of representatives from both the company and Union. The panel vote does not have to be unaimous.... but usually is.

This whole idea that cases are being traded is utter bullsh#t. I don't know of anyone who wants to go to jail.

I really have to laugh when people say to file NLRB charges against the local for mis-representation. Fact of the matter is, unless the local refuses to pursue or process the grievance, its not an NLRB charge. The agent could be the worst in the world.... but as long as he takes it on........

That is not the case here. The one poster put up the agents initials who stated he knew the grievant, the agent, and was a member of the same local. The agent in question has been on the National Negotiating Committee for every contract since "82" or "87". So this person losing their job was not because of lack of experience on the agents part.

Most likely what happened, from reading some of laurietito's posts, was he told the panel it was the other guys fault and he should be held blameless. and get his job back. and with back pay.

Keep in mind someone died. In my experience, that is the worst thing to do. Usually that will get you the opportunity pursue other employment. Its sad that they were willing to go outside the contract to keep him employed by allowing him to take an inside job. And he turned it down.

Now that the grievance procedure has been completed laurietito is free to do what ever he feels is proper.

-Bug-

 

[dannyboy]

BUG

You and I are in agreement on everything but

This whole idea that cases are being traded is utter bullsh#t.

Sorry pal, seen it done first hand. Ole fashion horse trading. We cut you some slack on those cases, you cut us some slack on this one. Four drivers go back to work, the fifth hits the road, instead of all 5. I do not believe that was the case here though.

I too believe that the union did everything in its power to get his job back. The final course of action was dictated by L though, and he is left with the results.

Now that the grievance procedure has been completed laurietito is free to do what ever he feels is proper

Except that any action against the union or the company will fail because of his conduct prior to and during the hearings. Both can show cause that they tried to work with L in this case, up and beyond what the contract calls for, and he refused.

d

 

[laurietito]

Wanna know the really sad part of this situation?
This is the company that teaches/demands that we buckle the seat belt as we start the engine.
This is the company that teaches/demands that we put the keyring on our little finger for quicker accessibilty as we walk to the front door.
This is the company that tells us we are spending too much time in the back of the package car but they don't seem to mind if we have to make repeat trips down the same street to deliver that second and third package we didn't see the first time.
This is the company that puts us under considerable pressure/stress to make commits but, by God, we have to take our lunch.
I could go on but I'm sure you know what I am talking about.
Could it be that the two individuals (this thread as well as the thread of "freaking out, husband fired.....) were doing their very best to make commits, make production and make 9.5? We need to consider that the two separate threads are just the tip of the iceberg and there are many more incidents that we don't hear/ know about where the driver(s) were going like a bat out of hell (OOPS! I used a naughty word) to please their supervisors and make numbers.
Luckily, I got out of PC and into feeders early in my career because I could see it wasn't gonna get any better. It looks like I was right.
The stress/pressure/anxiety might explain why PC drivers are signing the feeder bid sheet in record numbers.

Good Point!!! This job was always one of the most stressful jobs I have ever had....I actually thought about going to feeders!!

 

[laurietito]

Let me see if I can clear a few things up on this thread:

Laurietito was discharged for Central Region Article 17 (d) Gross negligence. One of the criteria is that there was a fatality. Doesn't mean the driver was at fault... He just met the criteria for the company to take a position of discharge. And it was sustained through the grievance procedure.

The biggest thing I see drivers get hung up on, is when the other driver is cited or deemed to be at fault by the police. The company doesn't have the ability or authority to determine guilt. But in keeping with their training they deem it was AVOIDABLE. BIG DIFERENCE.

The Central Region-JAC panels don't use arbitrators. It is a straight panel system consisting of an equal number of representatives from both the company and Union. The panel vote does not have to be unaimous.... but usually is.

This whole idea that cases are being traded is utter bullsh#t. I don't know of anyone who wants to go to jail.

I really have to laugh when people say to file NLRB charges against the local for mis-representation. Fact of the matter is, unless the local refuses to pursue or process the grievance, its not an NLRB charge. The agent could be the worst in the world.... but as long as he takes it on........

That is not the case here. The one poster put up the agents initials who stated he knew the grievant, the agent, and was a member of the same local. The agent in question has been on the National Negotiating Committee for every contract since "82" or "87". So this person losing their job was not because of lack of experience on the agents part.

Most likely what happened, from reading some of laurietito's posts, was he told the panel it was the other guys fault and he should be held blameless. and get his job back. and with back pay.

Keep in mind someone died. In my experience, that is the worst thing to do. Usually that will get you the opportunity pursue other employment. Its sad that they were willing to go outside the contract to keep him employed by allowing him to take an inside job. And he turned it down.

Now that the grievance procedure has been completed laurietito is free to do what ever he feels is proper.

-Bug-

Thank-you for all of your information.. You are right it was a JAC hearing. The inside job was offered before the JAC hearing and panel. I had to turn it down due to personal reasons..

 

[over9five]

"..(OOPS! I used a naughty word) to please their supervisors and make numbers."

PLEASE don't say "supervisors" again!