Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mrs.BrownCoat" data-source="post: 6032367" data-attributes="member: 111353">Employee was terminated. Went to hearing and they also stacked some other offenses in with the originally noted offense. Apparently employee also Employee was terminated. During the hearing they stacked another “cardinal” offense- lowering the dock plank at the customer warehouse although this has been the norm during deliveries and no one ever instructed employee to not do this. Article 17 wording “egregious” certainly doesn’t seem to fit either scenario. No verbal or written warnings. Employee swears nothing more than the explained scenario.Apparently union steward told employee that it would be useless to appeal case to next level for hearing. It seem the union fought very hard here. Of course when you are forcing employees into retirement because you are automating the warehouse they are dispensable.Be cautious, that article 17 “other cardinal offenses” serves as a convenient loophole as does their loose definition of egregious.Still wondering if employee should request appeal. What is there to lose?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mrs.BrownCoat, post: 6032367, member: 111353"] Employee was terminated. Went to hearing and they also stacked some other offenses in with the originally noted offense. Apparently employee also Employee was terminated. During the hearing they stacked another “cardinal” offense- lowering the dock plank at the customer warehouse although this has been the norm during deliveries and no one ever instructed employee to not do this. Article 17 wording “egregious” certainly doesn’t seem to fit either scenario. No verbal or written warnings. Employee swears nothing more than the explained scenario. Apparently union steward told employee that it would be useless to appeal case to next level for hearing. It seem the union fought very hard here. Of course when you are forcing employees into retirement because you are automating the warehouse they are dispensable. Be cautious, that article 17 “other cardinal offenses” serves as a convenient loophole as does their loose definition of egregious. Still wondering if employee should request appeal. What is there to lose? [/QUOTE]

Verification