FrohikePremium
join:2000-07-23
Waxahachie, TX
kudos:4
1 edit | reply to Hall
Re: Goodbye said by Hall:
said by rpeAMP:
...and fire him if it hasn't been done already.
They can't fire him.... They'd try, the employee (with 100% support from his union) would take the firing to arbitration, and he'd eventually get his job back. In some cases, he'd even get back-pay because obviously he shouldn't have been fired in the first place !!.
The union will try and save his job. Thats what we pay the union for, to fight for your job, wrong or right. But in the end, there is no defense for this and will most likely get terminated. Personally I don't agree with that behavior, just puts the union and the company in negative light. |
|
 HallPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH
kudos:1 | said by Frohike:
The union hired PIs to follow the worker. So the union was responsible for getting him caught. And yes the union will try and save his job.
Okay, explain the logic in that to me, please. They did something that helps catch him doing something wrong, then defends home for doing this act. |
|
|
|
FrohikePremium
join:2000-07-23
Waxahachie, TX
kudos:4 | I misread the story. The Union actually hired PIs to follow managers. But even if the union caught this individual, they would still defend him. They wouldn't have a leg to stand on, but they would try. |
|
| reply to Hall
said by Hall:
said by Frohike:
The union hired PIs to follow the worker. So the union was responsible for getting him caught. And yes the union will try and save his job.
Okay, explain the logic in that to me, please. They did something that helps catch him doing something wrong, then defends home for doing this act.
Who said it was logical? Unions ARE NOT logical. The first poster had it right. They can't fire him - else face the rath of the union.
Unions need to stop this crap. They need to tell their members "you do something stupid/illegal/etc and get fired, too bad". Discrimination, unfair hiring/firing/working practices, etc is one thing, but sleeping on the job, destruction of company property, theft, and things like this need to be dealt with and the union needs to back the company - not the idiotic worker.
--
Common sense is not all that common. |
|
| reply to Frohike
Let's just remember that a union member is entitled to representation at his hearing/investigation, and the union is obligated to provide such representation by virtue of the employee's membership. Them doing so does not imply that they defend his action, but simply ensures that proper procedure is observed.
This is analogous to the Constitutional rights of the accused in court; whether we are innocent or guilty, we have the right to a fair trial.
And yes, I think any employee sabotaging company equipment and customer lines ought to forfeit his job. |
|
| reply to Frohike
Unions are evil anyway, anyone who is a memeber of the union should be fired for what this guy did no behalf of the Union. They were needed to get better conditions for workers in the early part of the 1900's since the late 60's there has been no reason for Unions they just cause trouble now. |
|
| said by haplo2112:
Unions are evil anyway, anyone who is a memeber of the union should be fired for what this guy did no behalf of the Union. They were needed to get better conditions for workers in the early part of the 1900's since the late 60's there has been no reason for Unions they just cause trouble now.
Yeah - teachers are already WAY overpaid. Let's break up their unions, too! (sarcasm, obviously)
The problem of corruption in the union is not inherent in having a union, just as the problem of corruption in companies is not inherent in having a company. The problem is certain individuals possessing too much power within those entities.
Unions are still necessary. Corrupt jag-offs from either side are the problem.
--
A good idea expressed in a poor manner is a bad idea. |
|
BeeperPart Of The Problem
join:2001-09-27
Dayton, OH | said by TheMadSwede:
Yeah - teachers are already WAY overpaid. Let's break up their unions, too! (sarcasm, obviously)
This is the most constructive education proposal I've run across.
said by TheMadSwede:
The problem of corruption in the union is not inherent in having a union, just as the problem of corruption in companies is not inherent in having a company. The problem is certain individuals possessing too much power within those entities.
Genius.
--
Guaranteed Fear and Loathing. Abandon all hope. Prepare for the Weirdness. Get familiar with Cannibalism. |
|
 Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth.Premium,MVM
join:2003-07-15
Gallifrey | reply to ZippyJRR
But can't SBC get him for trespassing, damaging private property or something like that that's outside the union but would still be a legal action?
--
I'm a woman by the way  . |
|
| The crime he is accused of committing is a felony. If convicted, he would no longer be eligible to work for SBC. |
|
 JoshNJPremium
join:2001-12-25
Freehold, NJ | reply to TheMadSwede
said by TheMadSwede:
The problem is certain individuals possessing too much power within those entities.
when a person works for a company, they choose to work for that company and whoever is in charge, if they don't like how the company is managed, too bad, quit and go someplace else. More companies really need to start refusing to deal with unions anymore. If the workers strike, hire replacements, there are plenty of qualified people out there who would be more than happy to take those jobs, and probably at lower wages than the union forces. In the short run giving a big FU to the unions would be bad for a business, but in the long run it would be better.
--
I support the RIAA |
|
| said by JoshNJ:
said by TheMadSwede:
The problem is certain individuals possessing too much power within those entities.
when a person works for a company, they choose to work for that company and whoever is in charge, if they don't like how the company is managed, too bad, quit and go someplace else. More companies really need to start refusing to deal with unions anymore. If the workers strike, hire replacements, there are plenty of qualified people out there who would be more than happy to take those jobs, and probably at lower wages than the union forces. In the short run giving a big FU to the unions would be bad for a business, but in the long run it would be better.
What's your goal for doing away with unions? What end results do you want?
I've seen firsthand the ridiculousness of the unions. I worked at UPS. They'd pass out their little union newspaper that discussed asanine demands like a 4-day work week and other short-sighted, dim-witted ideas. Or the UAW driving up the cost of autos with their posh health care and retirement plans. What are they thinking?
I've also seen the positive effects of a union. People able to afford health care for their families. People building relationships to protect themselves from a company that could really care less about them.
I've seen firsthand the ridiculousness of corporations. Axing people that had worked at a company for 15-20 yeards. Sending out communications regarding why it's actually good for people that their jobs are being globally sourced to a different country. Executive compensation reaching ridiculous levels while some employees have to save for years just to be able to afford a started home in some areas.
I've also seen the positive effects and actions of corporations. Providing profit sharing and bonuses for quality work done. Silly parties with beer (mmm...beer) to celebrate a finished project. A manager letting an employee take paid LOA because his wife has a brain tumor.
Where do you draw the line? In some people's short-sighted little worlds, "if you don't like it, then quit" is the answer for everything. And to some degree, it's right. No one's forcing anyone to do anything in this country -- well, except obey the laws and pay the taxes.
But that theory is completely void of any sort of human relation. That sounds too intangible to be of any value, especially if you're extremely right wing. I think it is of value, not to be the be-all-end-all, but at least a factor in decision making.
Now money is all that matters, so we shop at stores that piss on their employees and whine about unions jacking prices, then we cry for John Kerry or G-Dubs to save us when our job gets sent to India. We bash companies for their greed, then complain that we don't have a job that pays what we'd like, as we sit our fat asses in our too-big houses and drive our 2 cars around. We complain about paying taxes, then whine to our co-workers about sitting in traffic for hours because the roads suck. We complain that employment is down, but don't want to give any slack or benefits to employers. We base right and wrong on what works best for us and give our allegiances to political parties, leaving us impotent to take action against lying politicans, rampant corruption and blatant stupidity. We've lost so much focus that we don't care "that [our] daughters are porno stars and [our] sons sell death to kids[we're] so lost in [our] little worlds, [our] little worlds [we'll] never fix". We're certain that everyone else is dumb and we've got it figured out, but we fall apart when things don't go our way.
Unions aren't the problem and neither are companies. People are the problem. I recognize that doesn't give us any sort of association to bash or rail on or vote against, but it's the truth.
--
A good idea expressed in a poor manner is a bad idea. |
|
 MrFixitCTpay it forwardPremium,VIP,ExMod 2001-06
join:2000-12-01
Charleston, SC | reply to cmcgilton
doesn't matter, he admitted his action, he's been terminated from the employment roles and CWA has decided to let it stand, rather smart of them too...
--
of all the things I've lost in life I miss my mind the most.. |
|
 BadHatHook'M HornsPremium
join:2003-10-14
Rosa's Place
kudos:1 | reply to cmcgilton
Exactly.... Communications disruption is a federal offense in many cases. He will be fired. |
|
