barnyard
KTM rider
That is what I thought. Here, all wine and beer is over 21. Some meds too.
What are the chances
- Thread starter 3838373
- Start date
That is what I thought. Here, all wine and beer is over 21. Some meds too.
Bottom rung
Well-Known Member
And if it did...I still wouldn't leave the pkg. Might as well give them the rope.
'Lord Brown's bidding'
Well-Known Member
Might as well put this here:
Why are drivers being fired for signing someone else's name? According to the contract NO, that is not dishonesty!
Dishonesty is defined very particularly in the contract: '...when an act of dishonesty is made with the intent to defraud UPS or one of its customers', or words to that effect. Now, I could see if someone was caught signing for a time-commit package, away from the customer's location and without doing so would make the package late, but outside of that, why?
If a manager called for a driver's job, the shop steward should point out the strict wording in the contract, correct? And if the manager wants to pursue the termination and now needs to "investigate" whether what the employee did does in fact meet the agreed upon definition of "dishonesty", the employee should be allowed to continue to work under article 7, right?
Slightly related topic: Is there a definite progression of discipline, or is it really a building-to-building thing? In my hub it is supposedly: meeting with accused, center manager and shop steward; warning letter; 1-, 3- and 5-day suspension, and then termination. However, I read here of guys getting fired for 'rolling packages', which also isn't a cardinal offense listed in the contract. What gives?
Why are drivers being fired for signing someone else's name? According to the contract NO, that is not dishonesty!
Dishonesty is defined very particularly in the contract: '...when an act of dishonesty is made with the intent to defraud UPS or one of its customers', or words to that effect. Now, I could see if someone was caught signing for a time-commit package, away from the customer's location and without doing so would make the package late, but outside of that, why?
If a manager called for a driver's job, the shop steward should point out the strict wording in the contract, correct? And if the manager wants to pursue the termination and now needs to "investigate" whether what the employee did does in fact meet the agreed upon definition of "dishonesty", the employee should be allowed to continue to work under article 7, right?
Slightly related topic: Is there a definite progression of discipline, or is it really a building-to-building thing? In my hub it is supposedly: meeting with accused, center manager and shop steward; warning letter; 1-, 3- and 5-day suspension, and then termination. However, I read here of guys getting fired for 'rolling packages', which also isn't a cardinal offense listed in the contract. What gives?
Mugarolla
Light 'em up!
Progressive discipline is warning letter, suspension, discharge.
It is usually case by case as to whether to give more than one suspension in lieu of discharge.
There is no defined 1, 3, 5 day suspension. First offense could be a warning letter. Second offense could be a suspension. Third offense could be a discharge.
The Central still has Article 17i, other serious offenses. UPS thinks that forgetting to wipe, and any other offense, falls under 17i and subject to discharge.
They also like to claim offenses, such as "rolling packages" is a cardinal sin, dishonesty.
You were dishonest by rolling the packages, not informing management, and by doing so, defrauded UPS and the customer by not delivering the packages on time. If, by rolling packages, you mean hiding them amongst the pick up pieces.
'Lord Brown's bidding'
Well-Known Member
How has a driver defrauded UPS by rolling packages; that word means he has profited in some way at UPS' expense; same thing with the customer. It's not just about damaging the customer or UPS, but profit to the driver has to be there; otherwise, it should be "failure to follow methods and procedures". I've always felt it was a genius move on the bargaining committee's part getting that word "defraud" in there; shoot, even changing the time clock shouldn't be anything, outside of a bonus center.
As for progressive discipline, you say first offense could be a warning letter; it cannot go past that right, legally? So if a manager is like, "What?! You rolled a pacakge?! YOU'RE GONE!", it should be as simple as saying, "Noooo, he hasn't been disciplined for this before[in the last nine months, since records no longer count against you after that time, and your 'sin clock' resets]; the most he can get is a warning letter." There is a disagreement, which means for the time being the employee should work under article 7, right?
'Lord Brown's bidding'
Well-Known Member
BTW, when I think of "rolling" packages or stops, I think of them being sheeted with some exception code and being attempted the next day. However, with your definition, while that is certainly a dishonest act, it shouldn't be classified as dishonesty; for starters, how did the employee profit? Aside from that, I'd think the customer suffering a "loss" should be something that needs to be investigated, at least if I understand how ground guarantees work: if you ship something from NYC to DC, it should get there in one day, however, aren't UPS packages guaranteed to get there in five? If so, and the driver in DC did not make the delivery that first day, technically the customer has not suffered a loss, since the package is not guaranteed to get there for another four days.
I am not condoning acts of dishonesty, and it is also nice to remember there is a way of catching dishonest people who don't happen to also commit true acts of defrauding UPS or its customers in their dishonesty: failure to follow methods and procedures. Truth be told, for someone in management who wants somebody gone, and if they are serious, they could probably have them terminated in three days, if that is the actual progressive discipline outline you presented. I would hope after a suspension of even a day someone would be scared straight of whatever it was they were doing, if not the warning letter. If they truly have a hard head, though, the 'problem child' could be removed as quickly as the management team wants them to, provided they are willing to watch them for a day to catch them not following a method or procedure. But outside of cardinal sins, which dishonesty is when it has acts of fraud involved, no one "can" be fired for a first time offense, right? What am I naively missing here?
I am not condoning acts of dishonesty, and it is also nice to remember there is a way of catching dishonest people who don't happen to also commit true acts of defrauding UPS or its customers in their dishonesty: failure to follow methods and procedures. Truth be told, for someone in management who wants somebody gone, and if they are serious, they could probably have them terminated in three days, if that is the actual progressive discipline outline you presented. I would hope after a suspension of even a day someone would be scared straight of whatever it was they were doing, if not the warning letter. If they truly have a hard head, though, the 'problem child' could be removed as quickly as the management team wants them to, provided they are willing to watch them for a day to catch them not following a method or procedure. But outside of cardinal sins, which dishonesty is when it has acts of fraud involved, no one "can" be fired for a first time offense, right? What am I naively missing here?
Mugarolla
Light 'em up!
Defrauding the company does not necessarily mean that the driver has to profit from it.
Part of the legal definition of fraud is to cheat or trick or to misrepresent facts knowing they are false. An employee does not have to gain monetarily to be discharged for dishonesty.
The legal definition of fraud (defraud)
1. To practice fraud; to cheat or trick; to deprive a person of property orany interest, estate, or right by fraud, deceit, or artifice.
2. Fraud, To defraud. The term 'fraud' is generally defined in the law as an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage.
3. Defraud. To make a Misrepresentation of an existing material fact, knowing it to be false or making it recklessly without regard to whether it is true or false, intending for someone to rely on the misrepresentation and under circumstances in which such person does rely on it to his or her damage. To practice Fraud; to cheat or trick. To deprive a person of property or any interest, estate, or right by fraud, deceit, or artifice.
Intent to defraud means an intention to deceive another person, and to induce such other person, in reliance upon such deception, to assume, create, transfer, alter, or terminate a right, obligation, or power with reference to property.
And about a warning letter. I said "could" get a warning letter for a non cardinal sin because not every center manager will give a warning letter for every scenario, even though, contractually, he could. This was not in reference to rolling packages. I said an employee can be terminated for rolling packages.
Rolling packages can get you terminated for dishonesty. These cases are usually settled for time served and the employee is put back to work.
Only if you drive a DeLorean and your name is McFly...
