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 Discussions
Terminated For Gross Negligence
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="UPS Lifer" data-source="post: 308626" data-attributes="member: 9789"><p>I read through all the posts. My first reaction was the same as everybody's ...we are not getting all the facts. My gut feeling was that L was either traveling through a yellow or a red light to be charged with gross negligence. My next thought was where did the motorcycle hit the vehicle.... the exact location. This will also tell a piece of the missing info. Not sure it is necessary anymore.</p><p></p><p>Dannyboy - you did a fantastic job on your assessment however I think that this needs to be looked at as SIMPLY as possible in regards to any UPS liability of L's job.</p><p></p><p>FACT (as we know it!) L did not have the right of way. It is as simple as that. He proceeded into the intersection and it was his obligation to make sure the intersection was clear PERIOD END OF STORY!. It does not matter to UPS what any of the other circumstances are based on what we know at this point. The arbitrator also must have agreed with the same concept. </p><p></p><p>I disagree with 705 - I think if 100 other UPS drivers were in the same position that this would not have happened to them. I have that much confidence in all of your professionalism on the road. I would bet one of my checks on it!</p><p></p><p>Just because L did not see the MC does not make it OK or relieve him of the responsibility. Some failure caused L not to adequately clear the intersection. We were not there and will probably never know the entire story. </p><p></p><p>My guess is that UPS took into consideration L's record and the fact that the MC was also a contributing factor to his own fatality, and that is why the combo job was offered.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="UPS Lifer, post: 308626, member: 9789"] I read through all the posts. My first reaction was the same as everybody's ...we are not getting all the facts. My gut feeling was that L was either traveling through a yellow or a red light to be charged with gross negligence. My next thought was where did the motorcycle hit the vehicle.... the exact location. This will also tell a piece of the missing info. Not sure it is necessary anymore. Dannyboy - you did a fantastic job on your assessment however I think that this needs to be looked at as SIMPLY as possible in regards to any UPS liability of L's job. FACT (as we know it!) L did not have the right of way. It is as simple as that. He proceeded into the intersection and it was his obligation to make sure the intersection was clear PERIOD END OF STORY!. It does not matter to UPS what any of the other circumstances are based on what we know at this point. The arbitrator also must have agreed with the same concept. I disagree with 705 - I think if 100 other UPS drivers were in the same position that this would not have happened to them. I have that much confidence in all of your professionalism on the road. I would bet one of my checks on it! Just because L did not see the MC does not make it OK or relieve him of the responsibility. Some failure caused L not to adequately clear the intersection. We were not there and will probably never know the entire story. My guess is that UPS took into consideration L's record and the fact that the MC was also a contributing factor to his own fatality, and that is why the combo job was offered. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Terminated For Gross Negligence
Top