dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
340

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

2 recommendations

Oh_No

Member

This looks like it is justified.

I don't thing they realized how unionizing changes the employer/employee relationship. They just got the 1st taste of what happens when you dont follow the rules.
If the workers follow the rules then the union can protect them.

When there is a union, the company loses all flexibility and judgement and instead must blindly follow the rules with no exceptions as stated in the contract. If they make an exceptions it will get used against the company in the future by other employees.
The open door policy is for employees not union employees.

These guys need to bring their concerns to their union steward and let them negotiated with management.
Not doing the job you are being paid to do and standing outside of a VPs door is going to get you fired.

If they wanted to talk to the VP with the open door policy why did they not do so before they clocked in or after they clocked out???
Or why did they not setup a meeting with the VP in advance???
This really looks like a justified firing.
tired_runner
Premium Member
join:2000-08-25
CT
·Frontier FiberOp..

1 recommendation

tired_runner

Premium Member

said by Oh_No:


If they wanted to talk to the VP with the open door policy why did they not do so before they clocked in or after they clocked out???
Or why did they not setup a meeting with the VP in advance???

THIS

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

1 recommendation

FFH5

Premium Member

said by tired_runner:

said by Oh_No:


If they wanted to talk to the VP with the open door policy why did they not do so before they clocked in or after they clocked out???
Or why did they not setup a meeting with the VP in advance???

THIS

Because it really was an illegal walkout, wildcat strike, or whatever you want to call it. And the union was shocked the company actually had the stones to just flat out fire them. They misjudged their opponent.
tired_runner
Premium Member
join:2000-08-25
CT
·Frontier FiberOp..

tired_runner

Premium Member

Makes me laugh that the workers are making it seem like they were merely wanting answers and were innocently waiting for them during work time when they're supposed to be out there handling dispatches and trouble tickets.

Yet, this same union had no problem filing a lawsuit alleging intentional subpar service in Brooklyn without first maybe working with management on improving that, if that were really true.

It's bratty double standards with a funny sense of indignation at its best.
Kommie2 (banned)
join:2003-05-13
united state

Kommie2 (banned)

Member

said by tired_runner:

Makes me laugh that the workers are making it seem like they were merely wanting answers and were innocently waiting for them during work time when they're supposed to be out there handling dispatches and trouble tickets.

Yet, this same union had no problem filing a lawsuit alleging intentional subpar service in Brooklyn without first maybe working with management on improving that, if that were really true.

It's bratty double standards with a funny sense of indignation at its best.

The workers want a contract. They have been waiting for a contract for a year now. Sometimes workers have to fight back against the employer to get the message through. More power to them. Wildcat strikes should not be illegal and the Taft Hartley Act should be revoked.

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

Oh_No

Member

said by Kommie2:

said by tired_runner:

Makes me laugh that the workers are making it seem like they were merely wanting answers and were innocently waiting for them during work time when they're supposed to be out there handling dispatches and trouble tickets.

Yet, this same union had no problem filing a lawsuit alleging intentional subpar service in Brooklyn without first maybe working with management on improving that, if that were really true.

It's bratty double standards with a funny sense of indignation at its best.

The workers want a contract. They have been waiting for a contract for a year now. Sometimes workers have to fight back against the employer to get the message through. More power to them. Wildcat strikes should not be illegal and the Taft Hartley Act should be revoked.

They should only strike when the union democracy votes to have a strike.

You dont want rouge union members striking when the majority of the union members do not want a strike.
NOVA_UAV_Guy
Premium Member
join:2012-12-14
Purcellville, VA

NOVA_UAV_Guy to Kommie2

Premium Member

to Kommie2
said by Kommie2:

The workers want a contract. They have been waiting for a contract for a year now.

That's the problem. They've been waiting, like little spoiled children, for a contract. If they were serious about having a contract and wanted it more than anything else in the world, they would've had one by now.
said by Kommie2:

Sometimes workers have to fight back against the employer to get the message through.

Perhaps, but they also need to keep their fight to their own time. If a company has paid someone to work for an hour, then they owe the company 60 minutes of work, not 59. If these guys had no problem sitting around while on the clock, then the company should have no problem taking action in accordance to its own rules.

If their HR policies permitted the firing, and it was done within those guidelines, then these union members have learned a valuable and expensive lesson. (Well, hopefully they learned...)