UPS Wrongly fired Driver for Union Activities but stays fired due to Facebook postings

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
UPS should not be able to fire someone for inflammatory social media posts based on the simple fact that it's not a cardinal sin. But when things get to the point where the case is heard by a federal judge (or any judge for that matter) the risk of getting screwed over by our inept legal system is high.

He was fired for, or actually not reinstated, because he violated UPS's Anti-Harassment Policy by posting what he did.

It is happening everywhere. People are being fired, disciplined, or even not hired for what they are posting on social media.
 

Overpaid Union Thug

I ❤️ (_!_) & ( , )( , )
He was fired for, or actually not reinstated, because he violated UPS's Anti-Harassment Policy by posting what he did.

It is happening everywhere. People are being fired, disciplined, or even not hired for what they are posting on social media.
Yes but not a cardinal sin. We arent just any comapny. We have a union contract that says what a cardinal sin is. It never should have reached the chair of a judge. The problem was that the union didnt uphold their end.
 

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
Yes but not a cardinal sin. We arent just any comapny. We have a union contract that says what a cardinal sin is. It never should have reached the chair of a judge. The problem was that the union didnt uphold their end.

The CRSA still has 17i. Other cardinal offenses.

And by the way, the union wanted this guy gone also.
 

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
Yes but not a cardinal sin. We arent just any comapny. We have a union contract that says what a cardinal sin is. It never should have reached the chair of a judge. The problem was that the union didnt uphold their end.

Let's go one step further.

Walk into your sup's office in the morning and punch him in the nose.

Workplace violence is not a cardinal sin, yet see how fast you are terminated with no chance of coming back.

Same can be said for harassment.
 

Overpaid Union Thug

I ❤️ (_!_) & ( , )( , )
The CRSA still has 17i. Other cardinal offenses.

And by the way, the union wanted this guy gone also.
The latter was the only true problem in this case.

Let's go one step further.

Walk into your sup's office in the morning and punch him in the nose.

Workplace violence is not a cardinal sin, yet see how fast you are terminated with no chance of coming back.

Same can be said for harassment.

Wrong. Umprovoked physical violence is a cardinal sin. Harrassment isnt listed as a cardinal sin. At least in my supplement.

The fact is that we have a contract and its SUPPOSED to protect us from the company being able to fire us at will and having it stick. Even if its for something in their precious little employee handbook. The union obviously, and purposely, failed all of us. I say us because it sets a dangerous precedent. The case never should have made it to the NLRB. Its a shame we have union members defending this.
 

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
Wrong. Umprovoked physical violence is a cardinal sin

Maybe in your supplement, but not all.

Western Pennsylvania Supplement. You know, the one covering the mentioned employee.

ARTICLE 52 - DISCHARGE OR SUSPENSION

The Employer shall not discharge nor suspend any employee without
just cause, but in respect to discharge shall give at least one (1)
warning notice of a complaint against such employee to the employee
personally, in writing, and a copy of the same to the union and
job steward affected except that no warning notice need be given to
an employee before they are discharged if the cause of such discharge
is dishonesty, drinking alcoholic beverages during the work
day (including meal period), addiction, use or possession of illegal
drugs or narcotics, recklessness resulting in serious accident while
on duty or the carrying of unauthorized passengers while on the job.
The warning notice herein provided shall not remain in effect for a
period for more than nine (9) months from the date of said warning
notice. A warning notice shall be reviewed and issued in a timely
fashion with the employee within five (5) working days (exclusive
of any absences from work) from the date of the incident or the
completion of the Employers investigation.


New England Supplement

ARTICLE 59 - DISCHARGE OR SUSPENSION

The Employer shall not discharge or suspend any employee without
just cause but, in respect to discharge or suspension, shall give at
least one warning notice of the complaint against such employee to
the employee personally, or in writing, and a copy of the same to the
Union affected except that no warning notice need be given to an
employee before he is discharged if the cause of such is dishonesty
or drunkenness or drinking during working hours (including lunch
time and/or break periods), recklessness resulting in a serious accident
while on duty or the use or possession of illegal drugs or the
carrying of unauthorized passengers. The warning notice, as herein
provided shall not remain in effect for a period of more than nine
(9) months from the date the employee was first informed that a
warning letter will be issued. Discharge must be by proper written
notice to the employee and the Union affected.


Here is two big supplements without a physical violence clause for a cardinal sin. Punch a sup in either of these two supplements and you will be gone for good.

Even if its for something in their precious little employee handbook.

Workplace violence and workplace harassment go above and beyond a precious little handbook. This aslo protects YOU.

The union obviously, and purposely, failed all of us.

The union wanted this guy gone too. They were complicit in this.

I say us because it sets a dangerous precedent

The precedent has already been set. Post derogatory, inflammatory, etc remarks about UPS management on social media and you lose your job. It will happen, and happens, in every company in the US. Especially the Fortune 500 companies. With, or without, a union.

Its a shame we have union members defending this.

If your talking about me, I am not defending this. The Administrative Law Judge overturned his discharge, which he should have done. UPS retaliated against this guy.

As for the Facebook posts, he made his bed and now has to lie in it. I'm not defending him not being reinstated for his posts, I just know the reality of corporations and the judicial system.
 

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
the issue is law, not contract. Federal and State law supersede any contract item.

That too.

But yes, he is correct. Federal, State and Local law supercedes any contract and any contract cannot supercede any Federal, State or Local laws.

Harassment

Harassment is a form of employment discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, (ADEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, (ADA).

Harassment is unwelcome conduct that is based on race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. Harassment becomes unlawful where 1) enduring the offensive conduct becomes a condition of continued employment, or 2) the conduct is severe or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. Anti-discrimination laws also prohibit harassment against individuals in retaliation for filing a discrimination charge, testifying, or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or lawsuit under these laws; or opposing employment practices that they reasonably believe discriminate against individuals, in violation of these laws.

Petty slights, annoyances, and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not rise to the level of illegality. To be unlawful, the conduct must create a work environment that would be intimidating, hostile, or offensive to reasonable people.

Offensive conduct may include, but is not limited to, offensive jokes, slurs, epithets or name calling, physical assaults or threats, intimidation, ridicule or mockery, insults or put-downs, offensive objects or pictures, and interference with work performance. Harassment can occur in a variety of circumstances, including, but not limited to, the following:

  • The harasser can be the victim's supervisor, a supervisor in another area, an agent of the employer, a co-worker, or a non-employee.
  • The victim does not have to be the person harassed, but can be anyone affected by the offensive conduct.
  • Unlawful harassment may occur without economic injury to, or discharge of, the victim.
Prevention is the best tool to eliminate harassment in the workplace. Employers are encouraged to take appropriate steps to prevent and correct unlawful harassment. They should clearly communicate to employees that unwelcome harassing conduct will not be tolerated. They can do this by establishing an effective complaint or grievance process, providing anti-harassment training to their managers and employees, and taking immediate and appropriate action when an employee complains. Employers should strive to create an environment in which employees feel free to raise concerns and are confident that those concerns will be addressed.

Employees are encouraged to inform the harasser directly that the conduct is unwelcome and must stop. Employees should also report harassment to management at an early stage to prevent its escalation.

Employer Liability for Harassment

The employer is automatically liable for harassment by a supervisor that results in a negative employment action such as termination, failure to promote or hire, and loss of wages. If the supervisor's harassment results in a hostile work environment, the employer can avoid liability only if it can prove that: 1) it reasonably tried to prevent and promptly correct the harassing behavior; and 2) the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer.

The employer will be liable for harassment by non-supervisory employees or non-employees over whom it has control (e.g., independent contractors or customers on the premises), if it knew, or should have known about the harassment and failed to take prompt and appropriate corrective action.

When investigating allegations of harassment, the EEOC looks at the entire record: including the nature of the conduct, and the context in which the alleged incidents occurred. A determination of whether harassment is severe or pervasive enough to be illegal is made on a case-by-case basis.

If you believe that the harassment you are experiencing or witnessing is of a specifically sexual nature, you may want to see EEOC's information on sexual harassment.

Workplace Violence

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) of 1970, employers are required to provide their employees with a place of employment that "is free from recognizable hazards that are causing or likely to cause death or serious harm to employees." The courts have interpreted OSHA's general duty clause to mean that an employer has a legal obligation to provide a workplace free of conditions or activities that either the employer or industry recognizes as hazardous and that cause, or are likely to cause, death or serious physical harm to employees when there is a feasible method to abate the hazard.
 

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
he could have been the the biggest :censored2: in the world. the union should have still fought for his job 100 percent.

a union is only as strong as it's weakest link.

In a time when unions are failing you'd think they'd be at 100% on everything.

You forgot that the union was complicit in this case. They wanted him gone to. He ran against the incumbents. He didn't win this time, but next time?

Also in the back of the minds of the union is that if they lose a member, he will be replaced by another dues paying member plus an initiation fee.

While I agree this never should be a consideration, to the local, it is a wash. Lose one, gain one.

I have been to many locals and seen with my own eyes this mentality.
 

olroadbeech

Happy Verified UPSer
You forgot that the union was complicit in this case. They wanted him gone to. He ran against the incumbents. He didn't win this time, but next time?

Also in the back of the minds of the union is that if they lose a member, he will be replaced by another dues paying member plus an initiation fee.

While I agree this never should be a consideration, to the local, it is a wash. Lose one, gain one.

I have been to many locals and seen with my own eyes this mentality.
let's just hope the union never wants YOU gone.( don't know if you are hourly or management )
 

Faceplanted

Well-Known Member
As I said, how can ups prove a Facebook account is yours? Many many people make fake accounts to troll people, or catfish people.

Facebook does not make you show a photo Id with your name to open up a Facebook with The said name.

I don't think ups could have the right to do this without somehow getting a court order to prove the IP address tracing back to the claimed owner of the account. And we cannot just assume so because that goes against being innocent until proven guilty in this country

It could have even been an account multiple people had access too who who could have made the comments.
 
Last edited:

Overpaid Union Thug

I ❤️ (_!_) & ( , )( , )
Maybe in your supplement, but not all.

Western Pennsylvania Supplement. You know, the one covering the mentioned employee.

ARTICLE 52 - DISCHARGE OR SUSPENSION

The Employer shall not discharge nor suspend any employee without
just cause, but in respect to discharge shall give at least one (1)
warning notice of a complaint against such employee to the employee
personally, in writing, and a copy of the same to the union and
job steward affected except that no warning notice need be given to
an employee before they are discharged if the cause of such discharge
is dishonesty, drinking alcoholic beverages during the work
day (including meal period), addiction, use or possession of illegal
drugs or narcotics, recklessness resulting in serious accident while
on duty or the carrying of unauthorized passengers while on the job.
The warning notice herein provided shall not remain in effect for a
period for more than nine (9) months from the date of said warning
notice. A warning notice shall be reviewed and issued in a timely
fashion with the employee within five (5) working days (exclusive
of any absences from work) from the date of the incident or the
completion of the Employers investigation.


New England Supplement

ARTICLE 59 - DISCHARGE OR SUSPENSION

The Employer shall not discharge or suspend any employee without
just cause but, in respect to discharge or suspension, shall give at
least one warning notice of the complaint against such employee to
the employee personally, or in writing, and a copy of the same to the
Union affected except that no warning notice need be given to an
employee before he is discharged if the cause of such is dishonesty
or drunkenness or drinking during working hours (including lunch
time and/or break periods), recklessness resulting in a serious accident
while on duty or the use or possession of illegal drugs or the
carrying of unauthorized passengers. The warning notice, as herein
provided shall not remain in effect for a period of more than nine
(9) months from the date the employee was first informed that a
warning letter will be issued. Discharge must be by proper written
notice to the employee and the Union affected.


Here is two big supplements without a physical violence clause for a cardinal sin. Punch a sup in either of these two supplements and you will be gone for good.



Workplace violence and workplace harassment go above and beyond a precious little handbook. This aslo protects YOU.



The union wanted this guy gone too. They were complicit in this.



The precedent has already been set. Post derogatory, inflammatory, etc remarks about UPS management on social media and you lose your job. It will happen, and happens, in every company in the US. Especially the Fortune 500 companies. With, or without, a union.



If your talking about me, I am not defending this. The Administrative Law Judge overturned his discharge, which he should have done. UPS retaliated against this guy.

As for the Facebook posts, he made his bed and now has to lie in it. I'm not defending him not being reinstated for his posts, I just know the reality of corporations and the judicial system.
Wow... You are so eager to debate you are all over the place man. And that is why you are totally missing the point here. That point, as I stated, is that the union has failed us on this one.

Can I assume that you are trying to cite dishonesty as a catch-all loophole that the company was able to exploit to fire this guy?
 

Overpaid Union Thug

I ❤️ (_!_) & ( , )( , )
What self-respecting adult male has a Facebook to begin with?
I currently don't have a Facebook account but I can name some self-respecting respecting adults that would have a Facebook account. Such as...

Any adult that wants to stay in touch with numerous friends and/or relatives

Any adult that likes to have various news outlets all pooled together on one news feed at the touch of their fingertips

Famous adults that are fine with having any number of fans follow them to help bolster their career

Adults that own, or are part of, a business that want to be able to reach out to millions of potential consumers in order to promote their brand or product
 

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
let's just hope the union never wants YOU gone.( don't know if you are hourly or management )

Sorry if the truth hurts. The local wanted this guy gone. One of the reasons his discharge was reversed by the judge.

If my local wants me gone, and I go in front of an NLRB ALJ to get my discharge reversed, I won't be stupid enougn to have posted on social media that my sup is a knuckle dragging.....etc.

And trust me. It is not rampant, for the most part the locals do a good job of representing, but there is that occassional instance where they do not.

In this case, the local fell short (on purpose) but it was remedied by the NLRB.
 
Top