Woman Fired for Doing Work at Lunch Wins Unemployment Claim [Archive]

kiwi_2005

01-17-12, 06:13 PM

well okay punching in for lunch but still working? But still no need to fire her unless she has been warned many times before, never read the whole article so maybe she has.

During my shifts if I need to catch up and smoko has arrived I will grab a coffee and carry on working boss doesn't like it but he knows if you have to catch up you have to catch up, we all do it. I mean the only reason I take a break is to have a smoke & coffee anyways!

10yrs on the job a stressful job, obviously a good worker shouldn't of been fired maybe a warning.

Falkirion

01-17-12, 07:28 PM

The issue being the punch on, punch off system which that particular workplace uses? I'm unfamiliar with the system, don't have it where I work.

I don't see anything wrong with working through lunch. If the project needed to be done ASAP, wouldn't working through lunch be a good thing? Showing initiative etc?

Platapus

01-17-12, 08:10 PM

She's done nothing wrong. If she hadn't worked through lunch would they have paid her the overtime she needed because she had to work late to finish the project?

Depends on the company and the state. We have this issue at my company. Even though I work in North Virginia, my corporation headquarters is in CA. This means that we are constantly trying to figure out what laws pertain.

Our non-exempt employees are required by law to take 30 minute lunch. This can not be waived nor can they work through lunch. We were instructed not to ask any of our non-exempt employees any questions during their lunch break.

Many of the non-exempt employees were unhappy when this ruling came down. Many non-exempt employees worked through their lunch break and then took off 30 minutes early. But it is the law and whether we agree or disagree, we are obligated to follow this law.

vienna

01-17-12, 08:11 PM

I don't see anything wrong with working through lunch. If the project needed to be done ASAP, wouldn't working through lunch be a good thing? Showing initiative etc?

One would think so, but here in the U.S. workplaces, sometimes the obvious is the most overlooked...

When I posted this topic originally, I was curious as to how the response would be given the international demographic of these forums. In the U.S., much stock is put in following orders and policies and the maintaining of corporate structure (I recall a magazine article in the 1980s describing how moving up the corporate ladder involved keeping one's nose firmly in the posterior 'cheeks' of the person on the ladder rung above you). There are places where infractions are taken as virtually personal affronts, regardless of well-intentioned motives. I, personally, have had situations over the last 40+ years of employment where I have had to deal with 'superiors' who cared more their orders were followed than any benefit gained by a bit of 'stretching' of the rules. Fortunately, I have never really had a seriously adverse result from my 'waywardness" but, I have come close quite often...

Accesing work computers when you have declared you are not at work?

I've heard this one before (once or twice towards me) and I would agree if the access was for personal use, but she was doing company work on the company computer; it is not indicated in the article, but the question is begged: would she have been fired if she had't completed her project on time and was she actually afforded sufficient time to complete the projct in the first place?...

The article states at the time of her dismissal, she had marked her 10th anniversary at the company a month earlier. If there was no other reason to dismiss her, and the article does not cite one given by the employer in the court proceedings, it seems a frightful waste of a proven, apparently well-regarded employee merely to enforce a fairly arbitrary rule. The company might be better served to reconsider the tenure of the middle-manager who made the decision and cost the company so much time, money, and bad public realtions...

Agiel7

01-18-12, 03:20 AM

Worked as a checker at a grocery store for a year to help me through college. At one point they told us to take an extra 15 minutes on our lunch breaks, the reasoning being that they're fined $100 if our time-cards (we used an electronic card reader rather than old-timey punch cards) said we came back even so much as a second early. Eventually, they told us to take a an extra 15 minutes on top of that.

Tribesman

01-18-12, 03:21 AM

never read the whole article so maybe she has.

'nuff said.

obviously a good worker shouldn't of been fired maybe a warning.
ooops you identified the problem with your coments already, try following through on them.
Maybe then you would have noticed that she never contested the firing at all, it was only about the reciept of welfare/social security.

@Falkiron
I don't see anything wrong with working through lunch.
Depends on the set up and depends on if you can be procesuted for violating labour laws or sued by the employee for unpaid overtime.

kraznyi_oktjabr

01-18-12, 03:32 AM

Maybe then you would have noticed that she never contested the firing at allOkay and what that really tells? Do it tell that she was wrong? No. Just that she opted not to take that path for reason which I don't know. Maybe she saw that as not worth of effort and time? What she would have gained with that anyway?

Tribesman

01-18-12, 03:41 AM

Okay and what that really tells?
It tells that it wasn't about the actual firing.
It tells that they could have fired her for any reason or no reason at all and it would have been fine to sack her as long as it wasn't breaking discrimination laws.

kiwi_2005

01-18-12, 04:15 AM

'nuff said.

ooops you identified the problem with your comments already, try following through on them.
Maybe then you would have noticed that she never contested the firing at all, it was only about the reciept of welfare/social security.

:roll:

You forgot to add 'Your Welcome'

Your welcome.

Tribesman

01-18-12, 04:32 AM

You forgot to add 'Your Welcome'

You are certainly most welcome , it is always welcome when someone makes a comment on something without reading any more than the title, its even more welcome when they comment again but say they don't know anything about it ....and then choose to comment even further after that.
Pure comedy is always welcome.

kiwi_2005

01-18-12, 04:55 AM

You are certainly most welcome , it is always welcome when someone makes a comment on something without reading any more than the title, its even more welcome when they comment again but say they don't know anything about it ....and then choose to comment even further after that.
Pure comedy is always welcome.

Are you finish?

I'm glad it made you smile I always aim to try and put a smile on peoples faces pure comedy I'll remember that. And yes I did end up reading the whole article silly me what was I thinking.

August

01-18-12, 08:20 AM

Are you finish?

Why do you even bother kiwi?

At least stop quoting him so the rest of us don't have to read it.

Tribesman

01-18-12, 08:45 AM

August the troll does another drive by trolling:yeah:.

Hottentot

01-18-12, 11:17 AM

August the troll does another drive by trolling:yeah:.

I don't see why you even bother, Tribesman. I keep him on ignore for a reason. If the rest of you did the same he'd eventually scuttle back to whatever dark troll cave he came from.

August

01-18-12, 12:24 PM

I don't see why you even bother, Tribesman. I keep him on ignore for a reason. If the rest of you did the same he'd eventually scuttle back to whatever dark troll cave he came from.

If socialists don't like me I must be doing something right.

Sailor Steve

01-18-12, 12:29 PM

I don't see why you even bother, Tribesman. I keep him on ignore for a reason. If the rest of you did the same he'd eventually scuttle back to whatever dark troll cave he came from.
I would say you're being a little selective in your support of accusations of trolling.

August

01-18-12, 12:33 PM

I would say you're being a little selective in your support of accusations of trolling.

A little? :DL

kraznyi_oktjabr

01-18-12, 12:55 PM

I don't see why you even bother, Tribesman. I keep him on ignore for a reason. If the rest of you did the same he'd eventually scuttle back to whatever dark troll cave he came from.Deja vu again? :stare: Where have I heard that before...?

Don't put me in the same sentence as that jerk. I keep him on ignore for a reason. If the rest of you did the same he'd eventually scuttle back to whatever dark troll cave he came from.The thread (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=190582&page=2). :doh:

Hottentot

01-18-12, 12:56 PM

I would say you're being a little selective in your support of accusations of trolling.

Then allow me to explain.

Those words, except for the paraphrased first sentence, were letter to letter August's own (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1805860&postcount=29). It's not the first time and I reckon not the last either he has waged his cute little anti-Tribesman crusade, speaking about "the rest of us", wondering why people reply to him and, in the past as demonstrated, also suggesting the "rest of us" should put him on ignore list. It strikes me as extremely arrogant to continuously do so, no matter how much you disagree with someone. Hence the little imitation.

As for Tribesman, I have questioned (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1551083&postcount=19) his (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1721938&postcount=40) style (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1710707&postcount=73) in the past and will continue to do so. Just because I didn't happen to do it in this thread doesn't mean I condone it. I just don't go trumpeting about the people on my ignore list and suggest that everyone else should also ignore him so we would eventually get rid of him. That would be silly. If really pissed off, I'd simply put him on my ignore list and let the world keep revolving.

Edit: funny. Now I'm a socialist too. Do I even want to hear what that is based on?

Gargamel

01-18-12, 01:04 PM

Trolling aside, tribesman is still wrong. In at will states you cannot challenge a firing anyways, outside of extreme circumstances. The only true recourse you have is to challenge for unemployment. Which that works out to be the same as challenging the firing, since the board decides whether you should have been fired or not, and the emPloyer still has to pay benefits or not.

Sailor Steve

01-18-12, 01:10 PM

As for Tribesman, I have questioned his style in the past and will continue to do so. Just because I didn't happen to do it in this thread doesn't mean I condone it.
I did not recall that. I've always considered you to be one of the better posters on here, and I should have trusted that judgement. You have my apologies.

As the old saying goes, "Speak in haste, repent at leisure."

Hottentot

01-18-12, 01:13 PM

I did not recall that. I've always considered you to be one of the better posters on here, and I should have trusted that judgement.

That means a lot coming from you.

You have my apologies.

Naturally accepted, if there ever was need to apologize in the first place. Part of discourse is explaining when someone demands it, and I'm not stranger to that.

:salute:

AVGWarhawk

01-18-12, 01:24 PM

I love this thread!

:up:

August

01-18-12, 03:28 PM

I'd simply put him on my ignore list and let the world keep revolving.

I'd be quite happy to do that but you fanbois keep quoting his troll posts which bypasses the board filters. So as long as I have to read his tripe anyways i'll keep commenting on it.

If you don't like that then feel free to do what you think is appropriate.

Tribesman

01-18-12, 04:35 PM

Trolling aside, tribesman is still wrong.
Really?
In at will states you cannot challenge a firing anyways, outside of extreme circumstances.
The "extreme circumstances" I mentioned as being the only grounds for challenging an actual firing:yep:
The only true recourse you have is to challenge for unemployment.
No, a challenge on the very limited grounds is a seperate issue entirely, challenging for unemployment only covers if the firing was of a type where you can get unemployment or cannot get it, it doesn't challenge the actual firing at all.

since the board decides whether you should have been fired or not
No the board decides on if the firing was for one of the reasons that makes you ineligible for welfare payments.

For someone who made a claim that I was wrong you have done a very very bad job on the subject matter:rotfl2:

@Hottentot
It's not the first time and I reckon not the last either he has waged his cute little anti-Tribesman crusade
Word for word its just yet another one of his very regular trolls, just popping into topics and throwing silly insults while making no comments about the subject matter at all.

Edit: funny. Now I'm a socialist too. Do I even want to hear what that is based on?
Its just August the trolls very partisan politics coming into play, a bit like when Zeewolf calls everyone Jewish.

@the troll
So as long as I have to read his tripe anyways i'll keep commenting on it.

But you don't, you just repeat the same old mindless nonsense again and again.

Gargamel

01-18-12, 10:02 PM

Ok yup. I stand corrected. Troll. Pretty sure restating the previous comments as new arguments is a tool of the troll.

Hottentot

01-19-12, 12:52 AM

I'd be quite happy to do that but you fanbois keep quoting his troll posts which bypasses the board filters. So as long as I have to read his tripe anyways i'll keep commenting on it.

The fact that he has "fanbois" has never made you question your hate for him, but instead just give yet another label to those who haven't done as you constantly order them to do?

For someone who made a claim that I was wrong you have done a very very bad job on the subject matter

OK, the rest aside, was this necessary? I often find myself writing similar endings to my posts. Then I stop for a while and ask myself the same question: "is this necessary? Does it make my post better? Does it make my argument stronger?" Usually I find the answer is not and that ridiculing people just makes my own post look dumber.

In these cases I'm often reminded of some of the wisest words I have ever heard in the university during a lecture: "We should have no reason to be mean to those who are wrong. Since we already know they are wrong, there really is no need."

kraznyi_oktjabr

01-19-12, 02:46 AM

OK, the rest aside, was this necessary? I often find myself writing similar endings to my posts. Then I stop for a while and ask myself the same question: "is this necessary? Does it make my post better? Does it make my argument stronger?" Usually I find the answer is not and that ridiculing people just makes my own post look dumber.

In these cases I'm often reminded of some of the wisest words I have ever heard in the university during a lecture: "We should have no reason to be mean to those who are wrong. Since we already know they are wrong, there really is no need."^This

Tribesman

01-19-12, 05:11 AM

Pretty sure restating the previous comments as new arguments is a tool of the troll.
Pretty sure that restating an arguement because someone doesn't understand is restating an arguement because someone doesn't understand.
Nothing portrayed as new at all, though there is plenty portrayed as "you clearly don't really know what you are talking about" and "you obviously didn't read the statements you are taking issue with did you"

So....
Ok yup. I stand corrected.
Yet you still seem to have a problem with that:yep:

Troll
Just like August, it is you who is being the troll.

@Hottentot
OK, the rest aside, was this necessary?
Was it accurate?
I do understand your point though, it is one SS and several other very good posters often raise.

A simple question for you though.
Take the first two elements I put in this topic.
1 "did she?"...should that simple question not give pause to people carrying on in the same vein(especially if they havn't even read the story they are talking about)?
2 "a quote from the lady herself".....does that quote not set the alarm bells ringing as the statement wouldn't stand without qualifiers even if she was just talking about herself in her own home, let alone at a workplace.

Hottentot

01-19-12, 05:44 AM

Was it accurate?

Most of what you say actually is accurate. Which is exactly why in my opinion you don't need to make such additions: you can usually make your point in a convincing manner anyway, whereas ridiculing people just earns you enemies.

And believe me, I know the temptation and am prone to falling for it in a face-to-face debate when there is much less time for consideration. My postcount here may not be high, but it would be counted in at least well over a thousand if I had posted all those messages that I ultimately have ended up deleting after realizing that they would do nothing except serve my own amusement for a second or two. Fortunately this form of discussion gives me plenty of time to think before speaking, so that I wouldn't always speak what I think. Or at least I can say it in a more reasonable way from which we can continue.

should that simple question not give pause to people carrying on in the same vein [...] does that quote not set the alarm bells ringing I'd say yes, once more you made a good argument. Then if someone ignores an argument and does not come up with an alternative, it's his/her shame and should speak for the poster well enough (generally speaking).

I'm sure the audience in Subsim is smart enough to notice such things. But this case is somewhat like a good book that can be ruined if the author thinks the readers are stupid and explains everything in such detail that nothing is left for them to think independently. By underlining things too strongly, you eventually end up turning the attention from the other poster to yourself, which seems counter-productive.

AVGWarhawk

01-19-12, 06:00 AM

I love this thread.

Hottentot

01-19-12, 06:14 AM

I love this thread.

Group hug? Some could definitely use one.

kraznyi_oktjabr

01-19-12, 06:22 AM

Most of what you say actually is accurate. Which is exactly why in my opinion you don't need to make such additions: you can usually make your point in a convincing manner anyway, whereas ridiculing people just earns you enemies.When I see ridiculing remarks I tend to dismiss whole post as nonsense without putting much effort to reading it. If person wants others to take himself seriously instead of "hey that is troll" views such remarks do no good.

Just my 2 cents. :salute:

Betonov

01-19-12, 10:15 AM

I guess Hottentot gained the moral victory here. Nicely played.

Now, will someone please tell me how is someone going to make a point, considering the issue happened in a multistate country in which every state has its own laws, on a multinational forum ?????

Tribesman

01-19-12, 11:34 AM

Now, will someone please tell me how is someone going to make a point, considering the issue happened in a multistate country in which every state has its own laws, on a multinational forum ?????
Common sense.
Take a newspaper article and treat it like it is from the Daily Mail and is talking about the EU. All the needed detail will be there but not necasarily as it is being portrayed.

Betonov

01-19-12, 03:03 PM

Sailor Steve

01-19-12, 04:26 PM

All this argument over whether she was in the right or in the wrong. It seems to me that the article is about the fact that the court agreed with her and awarded her the unemployment payments. One thing the court noted was that she didn't challenge the firing itself.

Platapus

01-19-12, 07:23 PM

Man you kids can kill a thread fast these days. :nope:

Gargamel

01-19-12, 10:39 PM

Common sense.
Take a newspaper article and treat it like it is from the Daily Mail and is talking about the EU. All the needed detail will be there but not necasarily as it is being portrayed.

Not sure if I'm understanding this, might be the langauge barrier and all ( you are English correct?). But I read from the above, you should apply your own local standards to happenings in other parts of the world, and that becomes the truth?

Tribesman

01-20-12, 01:57 AM

( you are English correct?).
No.

But I read from the above, you should apply your own local standards to happenings in other parts of the world, and that becomes the truth?
No, apply common sense when reading news reports as there will be things that are true, things that are not true and things that are true but not as they seem.
Common sense in this story should have kicked in with her statement that I quoted as it just doesn't work like that.
As for your local/their local standards, all that was needed for her local standards was already present.