cachsux
Wah
Still waiting for citation of contract language that would make it a discipline-able offense.
To be off the clock, punch back in to crap, and punch back out?
They'll get you for stealing time.
Still waiting for citation of contract language that would make it a discipline-able offense.
To be off the clock, punch back in to crap, and punch back out?
They'll get you for stealing time.
What is "stealing time"?
File early, file often.
I think is inference might be, from his perspective, there's no such thing as stealing time.
If it means that much to you prince your cheeks together hold it and feel uncomfortable until you are back on the clock. Being a ups driver who dabbled in the country I've become accustoms to this feeling.So you can't be forced to punch out for break if you have to go to the bathroom right?
What if I'm already punched out and have to crap? Am I allowed to go back on the clock before using the bathroom and then go back on break again when I'm done?
I don't think it's become this. We just have to endure these special from time to time. It's a trade off that I will deal with for an overall great forum.To the OP---no, you cannot punch back in to use the restroom.
Is this really what this forum has become?
I don't think it's become this. We just have to endure these special from time to time. It's a trade off that I will deal with for an overall great forum.
Still waiting for citation of contract language that would make it a discipline-able offense.
When an arbitrator looks at a discipline dispute, the arbitrator first asks whether the employee's wrongdoing has been proven by the employer, and then asks whether the method of discipline should be upheld or modified. In 1966, an arbitrator, Professor Carroll Daugherty, expanded these principles into seven tests for just cause. The concepts encompassed within his seven tests are still frequently used by arbitrators when deciding discipline cases.
Daugherty's seven tests are as follows:
- Was the employee forewarned of the consequences of his or her actions?
- Are the employer's rules reasonably related to business efficiency and performance the employer might reasonably expect from the employee?
- Was an effort made before discipline or discharge to determine whether the employee was guilty as charged?
- Was the investigation conducted fairly and objectively?
- Did the employer obtain substantial evidence of the employee's guilt?
- Were the rules applied fairly and without discrimination?
- Was the degree of discipline reasonably related to the seriousness of the employee's offense and the employee's past record?
Bottom line, If you gotta poop....poop! Just don't abuse it!Just because it's "not [explicitly] in the contract" doesn't mean the company can't fire you for it. The company has the contractual right to fire you for "just cause."
There's no mention in the CBA of what would happen if I punched a supervisor in the face, but I can guarantee you I wouldn't have a job if I walked up to my sort manager and laid him out.
You'd also most likely start the following day pooping in a cell with 10 other guys!Just because it's "not [explicitly] in the contract" doesn't mean the company can't fire you for it. The company has the contractual right to fire you for "just cause."
There's no mention in the CBA of what would happen if I punched a supervisor in the face, but I can guarantee you I wouldn't have a job if I walked up to my sort manager and laid him out.
Just because it's "not [explicitly] in the contract" doesn't mean the company can't fire you for it. The company has the contractual right to fire you for "just cause."
There's no mention in the CBA of what would happen if I punched a supervisor in the face, but I can guarantee you I wouldn't have a job if I walked up to my sort manager and laid him out.
Not even under Cardinal Sin: fighting in the workplace?