zlacker

[parent] [thread] 13 comments
1. LatteL+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-03-31 18:45:49
Devils advocate: if you're sent home on full pay and told not to come in, and you come in, that's fireable (doubly so with coronavirus happening). If you do that, you need some strong evidence that it's retaliation. You have away the benefit of the doubt...
replies(2): >>sudosy+Q4 >>beeran+ts
2. sudosy+Q4[view] [source] 2020-03-31 19:12:53
>>LatteL+(OP)
Except when the only reason you're being told not to come in is to prevent you from organizing a strike.
replies(2): >>koheri+U6 >>PunchT+Id
◧◩
3. koheri+U6[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-03-31 19:23:57
>>sudosy+Q4
Except that the employee in this case admits that he was indeed exposed to someone with COVID-19.
replies(2): >>sudosy+re >>oresta+bl
◧◩
4. PunchT+Id[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-03-31 20:00:28
>>sudosy+Q4
no, that individual was exposed to someone confirmed positiv with covid-19. one of the workers he worked with. both public and private sources confirmed it to me.

if you ask me, that's a pretty dick move for someone. Can't you wait your strike protest after your 14 days of quarantine? just 14 days.

replies(4): >>sudosy+je >>gpm+We >>harryV+Jf >>pwinns+jl
◧◩◪
5. sudosy+je[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-03-31 20:03:58
>>PunchT+Id
Why is he the only one being quarantined then? And from what I'm seeing, the exposure was the 11th, so 14 days would already be up.
◧◩◪
6. sudosy+re[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-03-31 20:04:33
>>koheri+U6
The employee admits that he was exposed to someone on March 11th. That's already 17 days ago, so the quarantine would be up.
replies(1): >>koheri+mW1
◧◩◪
7. gpm+We[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-03-31 20:08:09
>>PunchT+Id
14 days had already passed, and then some, from exposure to the time he came in and was fired.
◧◩◪
8. harryV+Jf[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-03-31 20:11:56
>>PunchT+Id
He was exposed 18 days ago though.
◧◩◪
9. oresta+bl[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-03-31 20:40:49
>>koheri+U6
Quarantined 18 days later, and no one else who came in contactvwas quarantined. Say it all.
◧◩◪
10. pwinns+jl[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-03-31 20:41:20
>>PunchT+Id
From March 11 to March 30 was considerably more than 14 days.
11. beeran+ts[view] [source] 2020-03-31 21:22:42
>>LatteL+(OP)
Also devil's advocate:

With everyone throwing a fit about pastors and churches gathering together during this, where's the outcry over this guy seemingly rounding up groups of employees to picket?

Is it ok to protest dangerous work conditions by actively creating dangerous protest conditions?

replies(1): >>darkar+Za2
◧◩◪◨
12. koheri+mW1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-04-01 13:52:29
>>sudosy+re
You are assuming he didn't get sick. If he caught covid-19, he could easily be contagious for more than 2 weeks.
◧◩
13. darkar+Za2[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-04-01 15:03:42
>>beeran+ts
> With everyone throwing a fit about pastors and churches gathering together during this, where's the outcry over this guy seemingly rounding up groups of employees to picket?

Where did it say he was rounding up groups of employees and picketing?

> throwing a fit

Who is throwing a fit? I thought they were fining and/or arresting pastors that break the law and threaten the safety of entire communities?

replies(1): >>beeran+U93
◧◩◪
14. beeran+U93[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-04-01 20:21:40
>>darkar+Za2
What is the need for him to be on-site, if not for personal contact with other employees? He admits it's for organizing.

(Honest question, I'm not familiar with how organization/ unionization works, or if there's another legitimate reason.)

Have you seen people's reactions to the churches that are still meeting in person? Check out op/eds and letters to the editor in Tampa, Baltimore, and Baton Rouge, just to start. Twitter if you want to see the ugly that is expected from Twitter. But throwing a fit is an understatement.

[go to top]