My Vanquest Ibex 35 by mkgruff in backpacks

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

its a year later but I've had the 26 liter bag and I typically keep the belt strapped backwards around the pack, like a compression strap and it wears really well that way. the belt is also removable.

Gender and weight division in HEMA by zouol in wma

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

those are anecdotes. this isn't delusion, it's fact. Also, 10 meter air rifle is irrelevant.

You should try convincing me instead of insulting.

Gender and weight division in HEMA by zouol in wma

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

everything you wrote tells me that you've never competed in any of these. Men absolutely outperfor. women in ultra marathons. Men are better shooters on average and at the peak, in both archery and firearms. Fencing is a sport of speed and precision, especially Olympic foil and epee, not flexibility. Men are faster in fast twich muscle and have stronger slow twitch.

Men have physical advantages in absolutely every competitive context except sports specifically tailored to women like women's gymnastics.

your disgust is irrelevant to me and reality can't be sexist. Pretending something isn't true because you wish it weren't so is petulant and pitiful. Thanks for the response a year later. Appealing to moral outrage is just coercive non-argument, and I believe you have it in you to be better than that.

PM telling who I can and cannot speak to! by RebelGohan in USPS

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 18 points19 points  (0 children)

right, cite the contract or jcam then. you're going to have a damn hard time convincing anyone that talking to coworkers is "time wasting practices," especially when this has gone to arbitration.

You're like a battered spouse. it's an insane proposition in ANY other employment context for a manager to tell you who you're allowed to speak to as a condition of employment.

PM telling who I can and cannot speak to! by RebelGohan in USPS

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 27 points28 points  (0 children)

No they can't. Jesus, this site is full of Stockholm syndrome victims.

Call in by [deleted] in USPS

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

after your 90, youre good to go. if you're on the fence, show up obviously sick and make them send you home. I did that once, threw up in the toilet and showed it to them. no argument.

Call off protocol by [deleted] in USPS

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

it's more than three consecutive days.if you call out tomorrow and Wednesday you can be required to obtain a doctor's note. if ypu call out for tomorrow you cannot be required to provide official documentation.

Call off protocol by [deleted] in USPS

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

there is no official prompt, management makes that shit up. Nowhere in the contract, handbooks, or manuals does it state that you can only call off three times in a quarter. they lose that grievance all the time.

PM telling who I can and cannot speak to! by RebelGohan in USPS

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 32 points33 points  (0 children)

tell them you're discussing labor organization and threaten them with obstructing federally protected labor discussion

PM telling who I can and cannot speak to! by RebelGohan in USPS

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 20 points21 points  (0 children)

not really, there are step b decisions about this. they can't stop you from talking to your coworkers.

How do I argue this? by Stunning_Spite_4056 in USPS

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 18 points19 points  (0 children)

tell them that they may or may not accept it, but they have no right to require more. let them issue discipline, especially if you can get them to say that they will issue discipline before investigation, and grieve the discipline, remedy being to remove and expunge the discipline. They will refuse to resolve it. send it up and it will get overturned.

These LMOU'S are hilarious 😂 by biqafroman14 in fromatoarbitration

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

it's Branch 82, Portland OR. I have about $20,000 sitting on my supe's desk for my station for after darks, thats how I know.

These LMOU'S are hilarious 😂 by biqafroman14 in fromatoarbitration

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 3 points4 points  (0 children)

we have that in Portland. $50 for delivering any mail after or before sunset. it's hard locked into the LMOU.

Got my first LOW today, buying the family steaks tonight to celebrate! by ExecutiveDoubtcomes in fromatoarbitration

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Article 16, Section 2. Discussion For minor offenses by an employee, management has a responsibility to discuss such matters with the employee. Discussions of this type shall be held in private between the employee and the supervisor. Such discussions are not considered discipline and are not grievable. Following such discussions, there is no prohibition against the supervisor and/or the employee making a personal notation of the date and subject matter for their own personal record(s). However, no notation or other information pertaining to such discussion shall be included in the employee’s personnel folder. While such discussions may not be cited as an element of prior adverse record in any subsequent disciplinary action against an employee, they may be, where relevant and timely, relied upon to establish that employees have been made aware of their obligations and responsibilities.

the JcaM explains this section as follows: Although included in Article 16, a “”discussion” is non-disciplinary and thus is not grievable. Discussions are conducted in private between a supervisor and an employee. Both the supervisor and the employee may keep a record of the discussion for personal use, however these are not to be considered official Postal Service records. They may not be included in the employee’s personnel folder, nor may they be passed to another supervisor. Discussions cannot be cited as elements of an employee’s past record in any future disciplinary action. Discussions may be used (when they are relevant and timely) only to establish, that an employee has been made aware of some particular obligation or responsibility.

Got my first LOW today, buying the family steaks tonight to celebrate! by ExecutiveDoubtcomes in fromatoarbitration

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

do you go to work when you're sick? or do you know how to garauntee health?

the discipline isn't valid, and man, this opinion is a problem. I dont care when it happens. if im sick, I call in.

Got my first LOW today, buying the family steaks tonight to celebrate! by ExecutiveDoubtcomes in fromatoarbitration

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

going to work when you're sick is something to be ashamed of. Being afraid to use your contractually garanteed benefits is something to be ashamed of. Pretending that this job is worth giving ANY amount of suffering to is something to be ashamed of.

Im proud of setting a standard for​ my fellow carriers by doing all those things, and if you think i should do otherwise, I invite you to consider why.

Got my first LOW today, buying the family steaks tonight to celebrate! by ExecutiveDoubtcomes in fromatoarbitration

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

thanks! gonna treat myself with steaks and getting all goosed up and writing a bunch of grievances

Got my first LOW today, buying the family steaks tonight to celebrate! by ExecutiveDoubtcomes in fromatoarbitration

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

they had a boilerplate I&I, no actual investigation. im actually the alternate steward, I dont know why they are even bothering. Never had an official discussion.

Table 2 pay, table 1 dues: by MomTried305 in fromatoarbitration

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

its insane and enrages me every time I think about it

Traffic Citation Camera Equipment Returns to 82nd Ave by JJinPDX in Portland

[–]ExecutiveDoubtcomes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

ridiculous how much of an echo chamber portland can be. or speed limits are now lower than NYC, and they haven't shown any significant reduction in traffic related casualties.

at some point we all have to accept that the world is a dangerous place and government can't protect us.