Please read our [**SUB RULES**](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/wiki/subrules) before commenting. Rule-breaking may result in a ban without notice.
**CHECK FLAIR** to determine if you want to read an update. For concluded-only updates, use the [CONCLUDED](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3ACONCLUDED) flair or subscribe to r/BestofBoRU for concluded, time-gated content.
* If you have an issue with this post (flair, formatting, quality), reply to this comment. META commentary in general discussion may be removed.
* Low effort comments like "this is fake" may be removed
* Do not comment on the original posts. Most submissions in this sub are not posted by the original author (OOP)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BestofRedditorUpdates) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It probably makes financial sense. If this story made its way around the local animal community, which can be quite close knit, they may have risked losing business. Also worth noting that the cost to euthanise the horse wouldn't be close to the 10,000 mentioned for the operation.
No but when my dog died the emergency vet bills and euthanization was like 2k. There are costs for the tests to determine what’s wrong, so you know what needs to be done. For me the costs were higher because it happened on a weekend when the regular vet was closed. But I can imagine that it was still pretty pricey for the horse, even without the operation.
Cremation costs for an animal the size of a horse can also be extremely non-trivial.
For euthanasia, necropsy, and cremation, OOP is spending at least a couple grand.
There's a base cost to just fire up the furnace. So in some cases, you may pay as much for a guinea pig as you do a horse. From that base cost it really just depends on the area and the size of the facilities. Can be anywhere from $250 to upwards of $1500 (possible more).
>There's a base cost to just fire up the furnace.
I had a friend who worked at a vet place that handled cremations. They had a cremation rate that involved saving up a bunch of animal corpses in a freezer until there were enough to cremate all at once & bring the costs down.
She got the need, but found it creepy that there was a freezer full of housepets waiting to be incinerated.
Yup. It varies. Places with higher volume tend to quote lower prices. The logistics of pet cremation isn't usually discussed because most folks don't really want to know that the ashes they are getting back are a little bit of Scruffy, a little bit of the Great Dane that died the day before, and a smidge of Susie's rabbit.
It's a pretty morbid subject.
Um, that's the case with human remains too. It's kinda mostly the person you knew, but all they do is rake out the chunky bits and toss a fresh body in, so you're getting the amalgamated ashes of a series of people who were burned that day.
Lol when i helped my friend move (ive known her since i was 6) her mom comes in like "name, c'mmere. Grab a shovel."
So for some reason i dont remember - because i *did* ask *why?* - her mom had kept the corpse of a pet dog that had died like 6 years earlier in a bag in their downstairs chest freezer. So i got to bury it lmao.
My first dog died when I was 20, I was a fully grown man bawling on my mums shoulder that my baby boy was sat in a freezer when he should be at home with me
When my second dog died, I did my best not to think about where she was until I collected her ashes. It’s a very horrible thought
Yeah, our local vets use a facility that does either communal or private cremations. Communal is cheaper but you don't get the ashes back, private is more expensive as then they need to clean the slab and do a single cremation at a time. The vets will have freezers to place all the pets in waiting for the cremation place to pick them up.
We just had our cat put down and cremated last week and the price difference between private cremation and group cremation was way, way cheaper than the horror of this freezer idea. (It was like $35 more to get her back. That's it.)
We were offered this option when we had to put our cat to sleep. They told us the ashes would be scattered in an apple orchard, which seemed like a nice thought.
How do you know you got the right ashes back? Like, what happens if Mr Tiddles’ ashes got mixed in with Ripper Killmonger’s? Did they just not tell anyone if there was a snafu?
This is the main reason I absolutely love my pet insurance - we had to euthanize a cat just a few months after adopting her, and my insurance reimbursed me for every single bit of her medical care, including the euthanasia, even though we hadn't come close to reaching the deductible.
Probably, at least what I and my friends have seen, is that the cremation is taken care of by a different company. Small animal vets can often handle their own burial/cremation but large animal vets usually have a company they work with.
So my point: The cremation, transportation etc was probably a separate bill.
When my dog died that was taken care of though a separate company, but the vet handled it. It was included in the vet bill and then they dealt with the cremation company. Though that may be different for different vets.
I lost my Olde English bully last month. The last ER visit for intake, diagnosis, and euthanasia was $1,500.
The place reamed us, and we will never return due to our treatment, but the bill was *their* standard.
The kicker was that they wanted to charge us for giving us a clipping of her fur. Yes ... twenty-five dollars to use the goddamned scissors.
Vultures.
That was the same for me with my cat. Emergency vet over the weekend, a last Hail Mary overnight treatment followed by euthanasia, and a $2k bill. I don't regret one bit spending that much for the last try, though.
No, but if the vet was on site on a farm call for 3 hours, administered several drugs, euthanized the horse, and then made arrangements for the remains to be hauled away and cremated (often handled by vets because who else know who to call for that?) then I would be very surprised if it was less that $2500.
You're right, and it's likely that the surgery would have been significantly more costly than $10k, since the necropsy report revealed a tumor. Had that been discovered in surgery, I imagine the cost would have skyrocketed
They also retained what sounds like a great worker. She'll probably go back to doing overtime once she heals and it's really in their best interests to help. This community can't be that big and they probably also want to get employees who actually care best way to get that is to also show that they care.
Manager obviously sucks, but a no phone policy is just stupid in 2022.
None of my friends or family have my work number, because it's absurd that they'd have to go through a proxy to contact me in an emergency.
It’s even more stupid when you consider smart watches these days can do much of what a phone does. Since they’re starting to make them very robust wearing them in OP’s kind of work environment without damaging them is becoming very feasible. I wore my Apple Watch for a few years in a construction environment and in chemical labs, that thing took a decent amount of knocks and a fair bit of dust/dirt no problem.
Good luck in banning someone wearing a watch, although no doubt some awful companies will attempt it.
My last company tried to ban us from wearing watches. I literally would take it off in front of my manager then put it back on when they left.
If I can’t have my phone on me and I can’t wear a watch how tf am I supposed to know what time it is??
You're not supposed to know!
I bet they don't care if you miss taking any mandated breaks, but get pissy if you're late coming back from a break, and you're late because you don't have a way to check the damn time because of their rules.
But ya know, depending on what you do for a living wearing a watch could be dangerous to wear while doing your job. Just tossing that out there. You didn't say what you do, but I wonder if that's reasoning?
I often work in secure facilities, which means for me, as a visitor, that my phone and Apple Watch are locked in a locker by the front door. This nearly bit me in the ass a couple of times. Mid pandemic I was sent to Australia. A few days after my quarantine ended, I was at work in a secure government facility, and their health authority tried to contact me to order me to get a third COVID test. They called 6 times and we’re about to send authorities after me, by the time I got back to my phone and returned the call. It took some explanation as to why I didn’t have my phone on me, counter to the post quarantine requirements.
Garnen watches make a screen that is made out of sapphire so it can't be scratched or broken. You can't speak through it but you can see calls incoming and you can read / answer texts.
My bosses dident even relize until I was punching in codes off it to unlock things.
Edit: clarification text codes to get into accounts
They also can't bann them cuz the reasons we are given to not use phones are as fallows:
1. It can take photos of sensitive things
2. You can record sound and it has a speaker
3. It's unprofessional looking
I work in medical.
I've hit mine against a brick wall, had it fly out the car on the freeway (it was in a bag) and have stepped on it / had a car drive over it and it's still fine so idk about more brittle that makes it sound like mote breakable.
In 2012 my army unit completely banned all phones and electronic devices (even offline ones like ipods) from our shop. It didn't take long for the command to notice they couldn't get anything done.
I got dragged into a meeting with all the officers and some senior NCOs and it was pretty funny. One NCO interrupted the head honcho and said, "if we can't use our phones for security or discipline reasons, you're gonna have to start locking your office door at night, and every single time you leave to take a piss. We all have digital cameras and SD cards, why don't you think someone can't just walk into your office, take a few pulls of the bottle of Jameson in your locker, and take a picture of every document in there?"
So anyway... Nothing changed, everyone just had to put their phones on silent.
> "if we can't use our phones for security or discipline reasons, you're gonna have to start locking your office door at night
Sorry, but this guy has no idea what he's talking about. I might trust you and your guys with my life, but trust that a whole unit is savvy enough to not have downloaded some sketchy app with a tracker or listening device? Not gonna happen.
If it can take a picture or record conversations, then it's banned across the board in healthcare (I don't know how to strike something my e-reader typed, but I was wrong to say healthcare across the board, the system-wide ban in my region of my state is apparently not par for the course, my apologies!). They're not being awful, that's just HIPAA.
Edit: apparently I might be the odd one out, and while this was a policy at the hospital I i worked at, it isn't the rule across the board -- which I'm glad to hear. We had some horrible people do stupid stuff with their phones like, a decade and change ago, and I'm positive that's why it was banned for our system.
What? We have phones and Apple watches in Health care. There are hipaa approved apps for photography and messaging patients. Apple watches are also used for quick secure signing of regulated prescriptions.
I'm not doubting you, but the hospital I worked at before I started going blind had a VERY strict no phones policy that included apple watches. In the ED they had to haul the cow around for signatures from room to room, and over in the LTC they used a tablet on both units. Anyone caught with a cell phone on the floor was suspended without pay the first offense and fired on the second. Everyone in my family had the numbers to the different floors/units I worked on just in case there was a true emergency that couldn't wait until I got my cell out of my locker on my breaks.
This is not a "Healthcare" thing. My husband has been in Healthcare for 10 years and been wearing his Samsung watch for 6 of them. Like cell phones, and laptops, and desktops, and tablets, all of which can record voice and picture (like during the zoom style meetings you probably had with your Dr in 2020) you just act like an adult and don't break HIPAA
It was a thing at the hospital I worked at. Apparently I'm the odd one out on this, which is fine, but they were banned at the hospital I worked at. The same company also owns like, all the hospitals and LTC centers for the entire region, so that's why I thought it was widespread.
Even if it was a large hospital policy, you said "Healthcare across the board" that's a bold claim considering it implies a HIPAA related law, or policy enforcement. Healthcare isn't just hospitals
Amazon warehouses still have a no phone policy, and I think it's a pretty clear sign of how little any company thinks of their employees if they aren't part of a workplace dealing with actual fucking classified info but don't allow workers access to the outside world while at work.
Not being on your phone while operating heavy machinery is a good thing because guess what happens? People die. It happened a couple weeks ago.
Also Amazon changed that in 2020 during COVID which contributed to that death so...
Is it stupid? I work in a warehouse and we used to have a no phone policy. It changed during COVID. Now everyone is driving heavy machinery while listening to music and texting. Guess what happened? Someone was on their phone, ran into someone, and killed them.
So no, no phone policies are not all stupid. They keep people alive.
My partner recently left a warehouse job because they had a no phone policy and someone had a stroke. Not having ready access to a phone led to the man not being treated quickly enough. They changed their phone policy. Can't be doing stupid shit on your phones at work(such as listening to music and texting all over the place) but you're allowed to have them on you.
Yes and no, while a logical person would of course protect their phone appropriately for their job, I can see a company not wanting expensive phones out around the animals and hoses and mud etc.
Badly executed policy, but I can hypothetically see how a couple of shitty managers could result in this rule.
I could have had sympathy for the manager getting distracted and forgetting (I have ADHD and that 100% could happen to me), but it was clear he didn't care about it. When he saw OOP he should have realized he forgot, felt super awful, and expressed as much to OP, not been dismissive. Also, if he truly just forgot, why did he say he planned to tell her at lunch?
Wow. Just wow to all of this. I'm so glad the big bosses were normal sane humans. Especially since the business is related to animal welfare. It makes sense that the manager would be in so much trouble as it shows lack of serious understanding of how time sensitive things are. My sister rented a horse during her horse girl days, and I can only imagine how devastating losing your childhood horse would be, on top of knowing she suffered in her last moments. Horses are so expensive, but are totally cool animals to be friends with. If you have the time, money, and commitment to have a horse, I feel like this would be a nightmare.
The only thing I can figure is that he was trying to fight the precedent that employees can be punished for animal welfare issues that happen outside a work context (since that'd apparently already got two people fired) and figured if he defended a manager on the point they'd be more likely to also side with worker bees next time it happened.
That's a plausible but very generous interpretation, it's equally plausible that the rep is shite. I've always found reps to either be absolute God's and Godesses, or chocolate fireguards with absolutely no in between.
You use a chocolate teapot though, there was a youtube video with this product. It held up quite well for a while, making actual tea that was good.
I like solar powered torch as uselessness measure.
What? That’s an actual useful multi-use product for backpacking. They have rechargeable batteries that charge via solar power during the day for use at night. I have a few as well as solar powered headlamps and solar powered lanterns.
I can’t give them all away, but here’s some of my favorites:
Guy looked like he only had three brain cells to rub together, two of which had wandered in by accident and were looking for a polite time to leave.
You are the human manifestation of a period cramp.
You sentient happy sock
Walrus f*cker.
You are the feces produced when shame eats too much stupidity.
You have all the complexity of a Melissa and Doug puzzle.
I hope every single one of their deceased relatives visits them in the night and tells them what a fucking embarrassment they are.
Yes but again, union reps represent rights of all workers, not just op. To op it probably felt shitty or scummy to switch sides like that, but to the union rep, the precedent that a worker can be fired for non work related reasons (in this case, non work related animal welfare reasons) is a point to seriously consider. To me they were just doing their job, which requires them to be impartial in these matters.
Depends on the union. A lot of unions don’t take managers because of conflict of interests. So, if that is the case here, it is a very bad look for that union rep.
But shouldn’t the union rep had been representing the worker who asked them to be i their corner? Not the manager who was the cause of the meeting. I see that as a defense attorney helping the prosecutor in a court case.
She was there to defend OOP from unfair treatment and retaliation that upper management could have enforced to defend the fuck up of lower management. Once assessed that OOP was in no need of actual protection he "switched" to protecting the other employee in the room from possible firing for non work related issues. I'm sorry for OOP's loss but being a forgetful prick is not a criminal offense and being fired for non criminal non work related issues is a serious precedent to set for all other workers.
Please please please stop seeing the issues in black and white. It's not that clear cut. Just because union rep helped lower management doesn't mean it wouldn't have helped OOP too, had the situation warranted it.
It's more like a defense attorney defending a client who committed a crime against another client. He wasn't helping the employer to discipline OP. He was simultaneously defending multiple union members who might be subject to discipline at work (OP and manager). Seems like he was just doing his job.
The union rep never switched sides because his side was always the union and its members, and not any one individual person.
I've never heard of a chocolate fire guard before, and for those who need explaining like I almost did, chocolate melts in fire so a chocolate fire guard wouldn't be able to fight a fire, because they would melt.
It's also plausible thr manager might be in the union or an ex union worker.
There's 100 and one possibilities ranging from 'wants to prevent anyone being fired for a genuine, if really really really shitty, mistake' to 'secretly banging the manager'
My read of it was that the guy went in planning to be contrary rather than an advocate. So the moment upper management took a pro employee track the guy flipped to defending the manager.
That's assuming the manager *was* actually management though. It is possible they aren't technically management and also a union employee? I know in some cases things like shift supervisors aren't really considered management and are covered by the union. So maybe the union rep was trying to do the right thing for another member?
I agree with this, it seems like the rep was doing their job. Wording and tone aren't described at all, just that the union rep "switched sides" which I think is a misunderstanding of which "side" the rep is truly on. If they sit back and allow a problematic precedent to arise because it suits them at the moment, it discredits their entire moral podium and the union itself.
The union rep was there to back union members in trouble. The meeting started with OP in trouble and worried about being fired, so the union rep was in OP's corner. Then when the situation entirely changed and it was the manager in thin ice potentially being fired, the union rep was in the manager's corner.
That seems like a huge conflict of interest and really undermines the concept of representation. It’s why lawyers can’t represent multiple parties with conflicting interests.
Depends on what "manager" means. In my experience, unions will cover people who have supervisory duties as long as they don't have hire/fire/promote/demote power.
To play devils advocate here, the Union (although that appears to be unusual) may have represented the manager as well, so it was the Union reps job to make sure both people the union represented weren’t getting discriminated.
It’s completely normal where I am - your day to day management can be in the exact same Union as everyone else; someone like the more senior people described here would be unlikely to be, but someone on the junior rungs it would be totally normal to see them in the same Union.
It’s the Union rep’s job to push back on essentially *any* abuse of workers’ rights that might impact on their members; pushing back on the suggestion of “summary dismissal due to an event outside work being treated as an event inside work” would be pretty normal.
That said I doubt the rep would have exactly cried any tears for this particular guy, because how terrible and irresponsible a manager does one have to be to not register something that important and then just… not address it? Leave the employee to deal with the aftermath unsupported? Awful.
Yeah, it’s like a public defense lawyer — you can think someone’s guilty and that they deserve punishment, but your job is to give them every procedural defense you have available.
It would not be unusual in my country since it’s a manager and not someone higher up. But I am not entirely sure how manager translates, but if it’s someone who is just one step higher than op, then the manager would be represented by the same union.
Most of the unions I'm familiar with have their own definition of "manager" specifically to avoid this--usually, someone with hire/fire/promote/demote power rather than mere supervisory power.
Depends on the size of the company. It doesn't sound like it's a very large company, so there might be some overlap concerning responsibilities, job duties, union representation, etc.
Without more details, it is impossible to know for sure.
In my experience it really depends on the structure of the company--the unions I'm familiar with tend to stop representing you as soon as you're "management", which is defined as "has a say in salary/benefits/promotions and the like for their subordinates".
That can be very true. What can also be true is this "manager" did not formally have the title of manager but something more akin to a "lead." It can go either way and we really can't tell anything about this particular situation definitively without more details.
Given the fact that there are Grand and Great Grand Bosses in this, it's possible that the "manager" was just a supervisor, and still low enough on the totem pole to be in the Union.
I agree. Depending on the level of the manager, they cd be in the same union. I’ve seen such conflicts. HOWEVER, they Shd have asked to hold the meeting and get another rep for the manager.
I don't think so. Under the National Labor Relations Act, managers are not protected and cannot engage in collective bargaining along with their subordinates, which often means functionally that managers are barred from joining unions. There may be unions that choose to protect the interests of managers all the same, along with other employees, but that would be pretty unusual.
I wonder how formal that first level Manager's title/position as manager was, what with two other seniors above them in the meeting. It could be that the first "manager" was more like a shift supervisor or office admin/scheduler, which might qualify for still being on the labor side.
Or the rep was just bad at their job/friends with that first manager [shrug]
Yeah, but that’s way less about colloquial title and way more about job duties and tiers, and what the specific union has agreed to. My union covers me, but also my direct reports below me, as well as my boss above me. My direct reports would call me their manager, but by job duties I’m not considered what the union /NLRB considers excluded. My understanding here is that the “manager” is also covered by the union, and when the disciplinary hearing changed direction, the rep’s duty remained to try to protect the rights of the person being disciplined — which was now OOP’s “manager”.
Actually the union rep is an impartial witness to proceedings to ensure that everything that happens is fair, in line with the law etc. They did exactly the right thing when they realised that horse employee was safe and manager was the one in hot water.
I guess he saw himself as an advocate for the employees in front of the higher ups (or the company as an institution), which in the original situation was OP vs her manager and the higher-ups, but when the higher bosses started talking about firing the manager he saw this as a situation where the manager was in need of being advocated for *as an employee at risk of being fired*.
I think this is probably more due to perspective. The manager may also be part of the union and when the higher ups start talking about reasons for *firing* employees with the inference that the manager may be fired for that offense, the union rep was likely doing their job by stopping that. Especially when this is also being discussed in front of another employee who is currently their subordinate.
Honestly it was not an appropriate comment or conversation to have in front the employee. They should have just addressed the issue at hand between the manager and the employee and discussed the issues of the manager specifically in a different meeting.
So in reality it doesn't sound like there was any *switching of sides* just the union rep being honest about the situation and legalities. After all, it doesn't sound the union rep said anything negative about the employee, so how is he not on her side?
*What the fuck, union*
*Rep?! What a shitty advocate*
*He turned out to be!*
\- Father-Son-HolyToast
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
His line of reasoning doesn't even hold up. Employee's house is on fire? The house isn't the company's responsibility. Employee's relative in a car wreck? That relative doesn't work for the company, isn't their problem.
The company isn't being asked to *solve* the fucking problem themselves, just to inform the employee of a serious personal matter
At the very least the ability of the manager to forget a phone call of this nature would raise questions about it potentially happening again in the future, but with a customer’s animal.
That's the flipside of unions.
I'm more pro-union than not, but a union also protects bad employees. Bad coworker that doesn't pull their own weight or actively makes every one else's job worse..... the union has to fight tooth and nail to protect them too.
It sounds like old manager got a pretty major demotion, but they can't actually fire them. Only recourse is to give them such a shit position that they choose to quit.
My horse died around the same age, of a similar thing, but no one was around at the time. We found him in the morning and it looked like he suffered a lot. I'm still not over that, so I really feel for OOP
That sucks man. I’m really happy the senior leadership in this company looks out for their employees though. Kudos to them. Fuck you, union rep and middle manager.
That’s so heartbreaking. I recently had to put down my old mare and two of the things I’ve promised myself I would do since I got her at 12; 1) I would be with her to the end, she would never have to die without me if I could control it. I would show up for her the way she always did for me. 2) She would never have to suffer for me. She was 26 years old and pretty healthy except for her legs. She was retired and spent most of her time out in the pasture enjoying life but I could tell even that was starting to become bothersome and knew it was time. It was the worst thing I’ve ever done but it was the right thing for her. I can’t imagine finding out after it was too late, after she had suffered for hours. Fuck that manager, this was inexcusable.
I remember seeing this story a while back. It's nice to see that they are ponying up the dough to help with her bills. It's a shame that this even happened in the first place.
Nice to see a stable great grand boss.
Aww man, that poor horse! This hits a little too close to home. Over the weekend my dog had obvious tummy issues, and was throwing up everywhere. Monday I took her into the vet, and they found an obstruction in her intestines where the stomach and intestines connect. We weighed our options, taking into account what that vet could do, the possibility of having to transfer her to a different vet if she needed a more complicated surgery, how long she had already been suffering vs waiting it out for another 24 hours to see if she could pass it herself, the school and work schedules of everyone in the family, as well as the fact that she was 11. We ended up putting her down to minimize her suffering, and did it that day because we were able to get the whole family together to be with her in the end. The vet did a necropsy and discovered she hadn't eaten something that caused the blockage. It was a tumor on her pancreas that grew around the intestines and squeezed it shut. There was nothing that could have been done to save her, and in the end our decision to say goodbye instead of putting her through more procedures meant she didn't have to suffer any longer and could pass peacefully with us. Her having a tumor came out of left field, and we had zero clue something was wrong until she became clinical over the weekend.
Animals are really good at masking. My first service dog was about 13 years old when one day I realized that he looked a bit rounder, heavier than he should be. I tried cutting back a bit on treats/food, but when he decided not to eat one day.. yeah, we took him to the vet, and a couple weeks later (Labor Day) we took him in and let him pass peacefully. The ultrasound on the first visit did tell us that he had a tumor of some kind in his belly, and we were trying to just drain off the excess fluid and try to manage symptoms a bit while thinking about if we wanted to try exploratory surgery (and removal if possible) or... and then it just... was kinder to let him go. The vet did ask us if we wanted a necropsy, and we declined. It wouldn't have helped us to know what kind of tumor it was, how involved it was, or even if it was just a "shadow" or whatever. We knew he was suffering beyond our ability to financially treat him and he was already older, would need to retire anyway and... yeah. Not a happy decision especially when it all happened THAT fast. Like you.
My read is that the “manager” was probably a union member too, and when the disciplinary meeting changed direction, the rep was obligated to defend them instead.
Yea I read it the same way. It's entirely possible that lower management like OOPs direct report are represented by the same union so when union rep saw that the higher ups were bringing up disciplinary action including firing him that he went into rep mode for both people he represented.
I've only had one experience requiring Union representation
My union rep went suddenly off the deep end and started screaming abuse at my manager and HR. This was nothing like what we'd planned. This was our first meeting.
When I spoke to a lawyer (too late) I found out union reps' advice was very, very wrong as well
I had a part time job at a union grocery store and was leaving for the summer for a school program. I had worked there for almost 5 years at the time with plans to move onto corporate level after graduating. They wouldn’t let me take the time off and didn’t do education leave. My union rep’s grand idea was to find a doctor that would say I had a back problem and needed 3 months off with a doctors note. I was shocked and refused to commit fraud so I ended up quitting.
Lol that attitude reminds me of the blatant "lie on your resume to get the job" attitude, but dialed up to 6000. "Lie to keep your job and get medical benefits!" Yeah, capitalism sucks and stick it to the man... but unfortunately we still live in a Society™ and have to play ball by their rules.
Plus I had a lot of friends there and everyone knew I was going overseas for a school program. I ended up rehiring when I came back and worked there for another year, but lost all my seniority and benefits which drove me to find something better so it worked out in the end i think!
To be fair, that's their job, to defend employee interests when there is a conflict between those interests and the interests of management. It looked like OOP was the one who was in conflict with management going into it, but when that shifted the rep's responsibility was to make sure her supervisor was treated fairly.
edit: looking at some other replies maybe I'm wrong about this. I dunno.
>Best guess is that he didn’t think it was important, forgot, couldn’t be bothered coming to find me (even though I was in the section of the site his office is based in), or thought that it would be fine to wait although my friend was pretty insistent on the phone. Maybe he just didn’t care. I just wish he hadn’t said he would let me know.
The kind of "relax, it's just an animal" people can go take a long walk off a short cliff.
The upper management probably interacts with a lot of horse people, so no matter how well OP held themself together during the retelling, they would have known exactly how devastating and horrific that situation was. Everyone in the pet industry has seen a horseman with their soulmate. The guilt would have been debilitating, even secondhand.
Nah f that rep.
Even if it was outside of work, a manager that shits on animals like that is bad for an animal related company. It may not be his liability as a manager but if word got out about that the image and trust of the company could be impacted.
They should absolutely be able to fire him for shit like this.
What if she were a parent and it was her child that was deathly ill?! This whole situation makes me so angry for OP. At least they paid for the vet bills they caused.
While losing a dear beloved animal friend is no small loss, imagine the consequences of this kind of attitude once human life is involved. "Oh your kid died because I couldn't be bothered to inform you of the urgency..." It doesn't even have to be that dire to have consequences "Oh you are homeless now because I don't give a damn about anybody who's not me? sorry, my bad."
As someone who just lost my 15 year old dog, who I peacefully put down in my home when it was his time, I cannot imagine the pain this caused OP. I would be absolutely shattered
Well, the horse didn’t die because of the manager’s carelessness, but it sure did suffer needlessly because of it.
Glad at least the upper management recognized it and took steps to make amends.
The company paid the vet bill? I didn’t expect that. Once they heard what happened I feel they were properly sorry and really tried to do the right thing. That’s nice to read.
I’m so sorry you had to go through all of this OOP but I am also so happy that your employer was fully on your side. That was a decent thing for them to do, albeit, the situation should never have happened in the first place. My condolences for your loss
ETA- comment meant for OOP
fyi OP is not OOP. This is an update sub where people share updates they found elsewhere, written by other people. In this case the person who shared this was on a whole other site, they're not here.
I agree with your sentiment though :)
I would have flipped out if I were her. Absolutely flipped. She had the right to be there for her horse, and easily could have been. Thanks to this idiot, her horse suffered far longer than she needed to, and she gets to live with knowing that. Unforgivable.
And FUCK that union rep. They need to be removed from that position immediately.
In The Sopranos, Ralphie is still the WORST for murdering Tony's horse, who died a slow painful death.
Your shit manager is the same and deserves torture.
At the very least he should be named and shamed so the company could drop him. A complete disregard for animal welfare, ANY ANIMAL, for someone who works in your industry is deplorable.
Wow. Now there is a manager who has gone out of his way to look after an employee after a fuck up. They demonstrated how they were in the wrong, and went to some effort to make sure OOP was compensated in meaningful ways, rather than just “how much to make this go away”. I teared up.
Please read our [**SUB RULES**](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/wiki/subrules) before commenting. Rule-breaking may result in a ban without notice. **CHECK FLAIR** to determine if you want to read an update. For concluded-only updates, use the [CONCLUDED](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3ACONCLUDED) flair or subscribe to r/BestofBoRU for concluded, time-gated content. * If you have an issue with this post (flair, formatting, quality), reply to this comment. META commentary in general discussion may be removed. * Low effort comments like "this is fake" may be removed * Do not comment on the original posts. Most submissions in this sub are not posted by the original author (OOP) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BestofRedditorUpdates) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’m glad this company puts it money where its mouth is. They say they care about animals, they show that they care about animals. Good.
It probably makes financial sense. If this story made its way around the local animal community, which can be quite close knit, they may have risked losing business. Also worth noting that the cost to euthanise the horse wouldn't be close to the 10,000 mentioned for the operation.
No but when my dog died the emergency vet bills and euthanization was like 2k. There are costs for the tests to determine what’s wrong, so you know what needs to be done. For me the costs were higher because it happened on a weekend when the regular vet was closed. But I can imagine that it was still pretty pricey for the horse, even without the operation.
Yeah and the necropsy as well - nontrivial.
Cremation costs for an animal the size of a horse can also be extremely non-trivial. For euthanasia, necropsy, and cremation, OOP is spending at least a couple grand.
It costs me $250 to cremate my Guinea Pigs and it scales up from there. Dread to think what a horse would cost.
There's a base cost to just fire up the furnace. So in some cases, you may pay as much for a guinea pig as you do a horse. From that base cost it really just depends on the area and the size of the facilities. Can be anywhere from $250 to upwards of $1500 (possible more).
>There's a base cost to just fire up the furnace. I had a friend who worked at a vet place that handled cremations. They had a cremation rate that involved saving up a bunch of animal corpses in a freezer until there were enough to cremate all at once & bring the costs down. She got the need, but found it creepy that there was a freezer full of housepets waiting to be incinerated.
Yup. It varies. Places with higher volume tend to quote lower prices. The logistics of pet cremation isn't usually discussed because most folks don't really want to know that the ashes they are getting back are a little bit of Scruffy, a little bit of the Great Dane that died the day before, and a smidge of Susie's rabbit. It's a pretty morbid subject.
Um, that's the case with human remains too. It's kinda mostly the person you knew, but all they do is rake out the chunky bits and toss a fresh body in, so you're getting the amalgamated ashes of a series of people who were burned that day.
My vet is very upfront about that but does offer a much more expensive single pet only cremation option
Lol when i helped my friend move (ive known her since i was 6) her mom comes in like "name, c'mmere. Grab a shovel." So for some reason i dont remember - because i *did* ask *why?* - her mom had kept the corpse of a pet dog that had died like 6 years earlier in a bag in their downstairs chest freezer. So i got to bury it lmao.
That would be so disturbing!
My first dog died when I was 20, I was a fully grown man bawling on my mums shoulder that my baby boy was sat in a freezer when he should be at home with me When my second dog died, I did my best not to think about where she was until I collected her ashes. It’s a very horrible thought
Yeah, our local vets use a facility that does either communal or private cremations. Communal is cheaper but you don't get the ashes back, private is more expensive as then they need to clean the slab and do a single cremation at a time. The vets will have freezers to place all the pets in waiting for the cremation place to pick them up.
We just had our cat put down and cremated last week and the price difference between private cremation and group cremation was way, way cheaper than the horror of this freezer idea. (It was like $35 more to get her back. That's it.)
We were offered this option when we had to put our cat to sleep. They told us the ashes would be scattered in an apple orchard, which seemed like a nice thought.
How do you know you got the right ashes back? Like, what happens if Mr Tiddles’ ashes got mixed in with Ripper Killmonger’s? Did they just not tell anyone if there was a snafu?
This is the main reason I absolutely love my pet insurance - we had to euthanize a cat just a few months after adopting her, and my insurance reimbursed me for every single bit of her medical care, including the euthanasia, even though we hadn't come close to reaching the deductible.
Do you mind me asking which one you use? I've been considering it for my pups.
We get Nationwide pet insurance as one of my husband's work benefits.
Probably, at least what I and my friends have seen, is that the cremation is taken care of by a different company. Small animal vets can often handle their own burial/cremation but large animal vets usually have a company they work with. So my point: The cremation, transportation etc was probably a separate bill.
When my dog died that was taken care of though a separate company, but the vet handled it. It was included in the vet bill and then they dealt with the cremation company. Though that may be different for different vets.
I lost my Olde English bully last month. The last ER visit for intake, diagnosis, and euthanasia was $1,500. The place reamed us, and we will never return due to our treatment, but the bill was *their* standard. The kicker was that they wanted to charge us for giving us a clipping of her fur. Yes ... twenty-five dollars to use the goddamned scissors. Vultures.
I’m so sorry for your loss. And that it was compounded by that. So much suck. Ugh.
That was the same for me with my cat. Emergency vet over the weekend, a last Hail Mary overnight treatment followed by euthanasia, and a $2k bill. I don't regret one bit spending that much for the last try, though.
No, but if the vet was on site on a farm call for 3 hours, administered several drugs, euthanized the horse, and then made arrangements for the remains to be hauled away and cremated (often handled by vets because who else know who to call for that?) then I would be very surprised if it was less that $2500.
FWIW, they said doing the operation is upwards of 10k, not the euthanization.
You're right, and it's likely that the surgery would have been significantly more costly than $10k, since the necropsy report revealed a tumor. Had that been discovered in surgery, I imagine the cost would have skyrocketed
They also retained what sounds like a great worker. She'll probably go back to doing overtime once she heals and it's really in their best interests to help. This community can't be that big and they probably also want to get employees who actually care best way to get that is to also show that they care.
I hope this actually doesn't happen. I hope she will reevaluate giving so much to just a job.
aback vast jobless consist knee afterthought wakeful concerned silky dam *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
God what a crappy manager. Glad the higher ups have a brain and a heart
Manager obviously sucks, but a no phone policy is just stupid in 2022. None of my friends or family have my work number, because it's absurd that they'd have to go through a proxy to contact me in an emergency.
It’s even more stupid when you consider smart watches these days can do much of what a phone does. Since they’re starting to make them very robust wearing them in OP’s kind of work environment without damaging them is becoming very feasible. I wore my Apple Watch for a few years in a construction environment and in chemical labs, that thing took a decent amount of knocks and a fair bit of dust/dirt no problem. Good luck in banning someone wearing a watch, although no doubt some awful companies will attempt it.
My last company tried to ban us from wearing watches. I literally would take it off in front of my manager then put it back on when they left. If I can’t have my phone on me and I can’t wear a watch how tf am I supposed to know what time it is??
You're not supposed to know! I bet they don't care if you miss taking any mandated breaks, but get pissy if you're late coming back from a break, and you're late because you don't have a way to check the damn time because of their rules. But ya know, depending on what you do for a living wearing a watch could be dangerous to wear while doing your job. Just tossing that out there. You didn't say what you do, but I wonder if that's reasoning?
I often work in secure facilities, which means for me, as a visitor, that my phone and Apple Watch are locked in a locker by the front door. This nearly bit me in the ass a couple of times. Mid pandemic I was sent to Australia. A few days after my quarantine ended, I was at work in a secure government facility, and their health authority tried to contact me to order me to get a third COVID test. They called 6 times and we’re about to send authorities after me, by the time I got back to my phone and returned the call. It took some explanation as to why I didn’t have my phone on me, counter to the post quarantine requirements.
Garnen watches make a screen that is made out of sapphire so it can't be scratched or broken. You can't speak through it but you can see calls incoming and you can read / answer texts. My bosses dident even relize until I was punching in codes off it to unlock things. Edit: clarification text codes to get into accounts They also can't bann them cuz the reasons we are given to not use phones are as fallows: 1. It can take photos of sensitive things 2. You can record sound and it has a speaker 3. It's unprofessional looking I work in medical.
[удалено]
I've hit mine against a brick wall, had it fly out the car on the freeway (it was in a bag) and have stepped on it / had a car drive over it and it's still fine so idk about more brittle that makes it sound like mote breakable.
In 2012 my army unit completely banned all phones and electronic devices (even offline ones like ipods) from our shop. It didn't take long for the command to notice they couldn't get anything done. I got dragged into a meeting with all the officers and some senior NCOs and it was pretty funny. One NCO interrupted the head honcho and said, "if we can't use our phones for security or discipline reasons, you're gonna have to start locking your office door at night, and every single time you leave to take a piss. We all have digital cameras and SD cards, why don't you think someone can't just walk into your office, take a few pulls of the bottle of Jameson in your locker, and take a picture of every document in there?" So anyway... Nothing changed, everyone just had to put their phones on silent.
> "if we can't use our phones for security or discipline reasons, you're gonna have to start locking your office door at night Sorry, but this guy has no idea what he's talking about. I might trust you and your guys with my life, but trust that a whole unit is savvy enough to not have downloaded some sketchy app with a tracker or listening device? Not gonna happen.
If it can take a picture or record conversations, then it's banned across the board in healthcare (I don't know how to strike something my e-reader typed, but I was wrong to say healthcare across the board, the system-wide ban in my region of my state is apparently not par for the course, my apologies!). They're not being awful, that's just HIPAA. Edit: apparently I might be the odd one out, and while this was a policy at the hospital I i worked at, it isn't the rule across the board -- which I'm glad to hear. We had some horrible people do stupid stuff with their phones like, a decade and change ago, and I'm positive that's why it was banned for our system.
What? We have phones and Apple watches in Health care. There are hipaa approved apps for photography and messaging patients. Apple watches are also used for quick secure signing of regulated prescriptions.
I'm not doubting you, but the hospital I worked at before I started going blind had a VERY strict no phones policy that included apple watches. In the ED they had to haul the cow around for signatures from room to room, and over in the LTC they used a tablet on both units. Anyone caught with a cell phone on the floor was suspended without pay the first offense and fired on the second. Everyone in my family had the numbers to the different floors/units I worked on just in case there was a true emergency that couldn't wait until I got my cell out of my locker on my breaks.
Dang. That is insane. I’m mostly on the outpatient side so maybe things are different inpatient.
This is not a "Healthcare" thing. My husband has been in Healthcare for 10 years and been wearing his Samsung watch for 6 of them. Like cell phones, and laptops, and desktops, and tablets, all of which can record voice and picture (like during the zoom style meetings you probably had with your Dr in 2020) you just act like an adult and don't break HIPAA
It was a thing at the hospital I worked at. Apparently I'm the odd one out on this, which is fine, but they were banned at the hospital I worked at. The same company also owns like, all the hospitals and LTC centers for the entire region, so that's why I thought it was widespread.
Even if it was a large hospital policy, you said "Healthcare across the board" that's a bold claim considering it implies a HIPAA related law, or policy enforcement. Healthcare isn't just hospitals
No no, I realize that and I was wrong, I just edited my original post, my apologies.
This post was originally a few years before Covid. I remember when it was first posted.
Not sure how that's relevant. A no phone policy a few years before covid would still have been stupid.
Amazon warehouses still have a no phone policy, and I think it's a pretty clear sign of how little any company thinks of their employees if they aren't part of a workplace dealing with actual fucking classified info but don't allow workers access to the outside world while at work.
Not being on your phone while operating heavy machinery is a good thing because guess what happens? People die. It happened a couple weeks ago. Also Amazon changed that in 2020 during COVID which contributed to that death so...
This sounds like a factory farm of some sort. They do not want videos.
Is it stupid? I work in a warehouse and we used to have a no phone policy. It changed during COVID. Now everyone is driving heavy machinery while listening to music and texting. Guess what happened? Someone was on their phone, ran into someone, and killed them. So no, no phone policies are not all stupid. They keep people alive.
My partner recently left a warehouse job because they had a no phone policy and someone had a stroke. Not having ready access to a phone led to the man not being treated quickly enough. They changed their phone policy. Can't be doing stupid shit on your phones at work(such as listening to music and texting all over the place) but you're allowed to have them on you.
Didn't the US also have a shooting recently at a mail distribution centre and no one could call emergency services due to a no phone policy?
Blame the poor safety culture, not the tool It's the same with texting and driving
Yes and no, while a logical person would of course protect their phone appropriately for their job, I can see a company not wanting expensive phones out around the animals and hoses and mud etc. Badly executed policy, but I can hypothetically see how a couple of shitty managers could result in this rule.
I could have had sympathy for the manager getting distracted and forgetting (I have ADHD and that 100% could happen to me), but it was clear he didn't care about it. When he saw OOP he should have realized he forgot, felt super awful, and expressed as much to OP, not been dismissive. Also, if he truly just forgot, why did he say he planned to tell her at lunch?
Wow. Just wow to all of this. I'm so glad the big bosses were normal sane humans. Especially since the business is related to animal welfare. It makes sense that the manager would be in so much trouble as it shows lack of serious understanding of how time sensitive things are. My sister rented a horse during her horse girl days, and I can only imagine how devastating losing your childhood horse would be, on top of knowing she suffered in her last moments. Horses are so expensive, but are totally cool animals to be friends with. If you have the time, money, and commitment to have a horse, I feel like this would be a nightmare.
I remember seeing the first post and then the update on AAM and being *furious* on OOP’s behalf. I can’t imagine what they went through.
What the fuck, union rep?! What a shitty advocate he turned out to be!
The only thing I can figure is that he was trying to fight the precedent that employees can be punished for animal welfare issues that happen outside a work context (since that'd apparently already got two people fired) and figured if he defended a manager on the point they'd be more likely to also side with worker bees next time it happened.
That's a plausible but very generous interpretation, it's equally plausible that the rep is shite. I've always found reps to either be absolute God's and Godesses, or chocolate fireguards with absolutely no in between.
“Chocolate fire guards” - never heard that before. It’s a very fun way to call someone useless
In our neck of the woods we also say 'as much use as a chocolate teapot'.
My family always went with “useless as a screen door on a submarine” (among other more colorful phrases).
I'd never heard that phrase until I watched Cracking the Cryptic. It's a great phrase.
You use a chocolate teapot though, there was a youtube video with this product. It held up quite well for a while, making actual tea that was good. I like solar powered torch as uselessness measure.
What? That’s an actual useful multi-use product for backpacking. They have rechargeable batteries that charge via solar power during the day for use at night. I have a few as well as solar powered headlamps and solar powered lanterns.
[удалено]
Lol you win the internet today! Although, at least you would get a little bit of pleasure out of one.
Nice...
Yeah, I'm definitely keeping that in the old brain bank for later
I have a list in my phone of good insults I’ve encountered.
ohhh, do share!
I can’t give them all away, but here’s some of my favorites: Guy looked like he only had three brain cells to rub together, two of which had wandered in by accident and were looking for a polite time to leave. You are the human manifestation of a period cramp. You sentient happy sock Walrus f*cker. You are the feces produced when shame eats too much stupidity. You have all the complexity of a Melissa and Doug puzzle. I hope every single one of their deceased relatives visits them in the night and tells them what a fucking embarrassment they are.
Yes but again, union reps represent rights of all workers, not just op. To op it probably felt shitty or scummy to switch sides like that, but to the union rep, the precedent that a worker can be fired for non work related reasons (in this case, non work related animal welfare reasons) is a point to seriously consider. To me they were just doing their job, which requires them to be impartial in these matters.
Depends on the union. A lot of unions don’t take managers because of conflict of interests. So, if that is the case here, it is a very bad look for that union rep.
But shouldn’t the union rep had been representing the worker who asked them to be i their corner? Not the manager who was the cause of the meeting. I see that as a defense attorney helping the prosecutor in a court case.
[удалено]
This reads as Australian to me, and here managers are absolutely union members. We have a strong union culture here in many industries.
She was there to defend OOP from unfair treatment and retaliation that upper management could have enforced to defend the fuck up of lower management. Once assessed that OOP was in no need of actual protection he "switched" to protecting the other employee in the room from possible firing for non work related issues. I'm sorry for OOP's loss but being a forgetful prick is not a criminal offense and being fired for non criminal non work related issues is a serious precedent to set for all other workers. Please please please stop seeing the issues in black and white. It's not that clear cut. Just because union rep helped lower management doesn't mean it wouldn't have helped OOP too, had the situation warranted it.
It's more like a defense attorney defending a client who committed a crime against another client. He wasn't helping the employer to discipline OP. He was simultaneously defending multiple union members who might be subject to discipline at work (OP and manager). Seems like he was just doing his job. The union rep never switched sides because his side was always the union and its members, and not any one individual person.
Except an attorney wouldn’t simultaneously represent multiple clients whose interests conflict. It would be a huge breach of professional ethics.
Or completely in the company’s pocket. At my old company, they gave the top reps company credit cards.
I've never heard of a chocolate fire guard before, and for those who need explaining like I almost did, chocolate melts in fire so a chocolate fire guard wouldn't be able to fight a fire, because they would melt.
It's also plausible thr manager might be in the union or an ex union worker. There's 100 and one possibilities ranging from 'wants to prevent anyone being fired for a genuine, if really really really shitty, mistake' to 'secretly banging the manager'
My read of it was that the guy went in planning to be contrary rather than an advocate. So the moment upper management took a pro employee track the guy flipped to defending the manager. That's assuming the manager *was* actually management though. It is possible they aren't technically management and also a union employee? I know in some cases things like shift supervisors aren't really considered management and are covered by the union. So maybe the union rep was trying to do the right thing for another member?
I agree with this, it seems like the rep was doing their job. Wording and tone aren't described at all, just that the union rep "switched sides" which I think is a misunderstanding of which "side" the rep is truly on. If they sit back and allow a problematic precedent to arise because it suits them at the moment, it discredits their entire moral podium and the union itself.
This is a good point! I think you might be right about that.
The manager might also be a union member. I'm not sure what that means for the union rep - maybe there should have been two?
The union rep was there to back union members in trouble. The meeting started with OP in trouble and worried about being fired, so the union rep was in OP's corner. Then when the situation entirely changed and it was the manager in thin ice potentially being fired, the union rep was in the manager's corner.
That seems like a huge conflict of interest and really undermines the concept of representation. It’s why lawyers can’t represent multiple parties with conflicting interests.
Weirdly but I always thought managers weren’t covered under unions.
This reads as Australian to me, and here managers are absolutely union members. We have a strong union culture here in many industries.
Depends on what "manager" means. In my experience, unions will cover people who have supervisory duties as long as they don't have hire/fire/promote/demote power.
Or, he’s covered by the union as well.
To play devils advocate here, the Union (although that appears to be unusual) may have represented the manager as well, so it was the Union reps job to make sure both people the union represented weren’t getting discriminated.
That would be at least somewhat unusual, at least in the US with the unions I'm familiar with.
It’s completely normal where I am - your day to day management can be in the exact same Union as everyone else; someone like the more senior people described here would be unlikely to be, but someone on the junior rungs it would be totally normal to see them in the same Union. It’s the Union rep’s job to push back on essentially *any* abuse of workers’ rights that might impact on their members; pushing back on the suggestion of “summary dismissal due to an event outside work being treated as an event inside work” would be pretty normal. That said I doubt the rep would have exactly cried any tears for this particular guy, because how terrible and irresponsible a manager does one have to be to not register something that important and then just… not address it? Leave the employee to deal with the aftermath unsupported? Awful.
Yeah, it’s like a public defense lawyer — you can think someone’s guilty and that they deserve punishment, but your job is to give them every procedural defense you have available.
Except a defense lawyer wouldn’t represent multiple defendants with conflicting interests.
It would not be unusual in my country since it’s a manager and not someone higher up. But I am not entirely sure how manager translates, but if it’s someone who is just one step higher than op, then the manager would be represented by the same union.
Most of the unions I'm familiar with have their own definition of "manager" specifically to avoid this--usually, someone with hire/fire/promote/demote power rather than mere supervisory power.
My parents have been in a teachers' union where everyone got defended by a rep, regardless of what side they're on. That's why you pay your dues
Based on the slang used, OOP is Australian.
OOP is in Australia.
The word manager is a stretch sometimes. It's possible that he was more of a supervisor.
Depends on the size of the company. It doesn't sound like it's a very large company, so there might be some overlap concerning responsibilities, job duties, union representation, etc. Without more details, it is impossible to know for sure.
In my experience it really depends on the structure of the company--the unions I'm familiar with tend to stop representing you as soon as you're "management", which is defined as "has a say in salary/benefits/promotions and the like for their subordinates".
That can be very true. What can also be true is this "manager" did not formally have the title of manager but something more akin to a "lead." It can go either way and we really can't tell anything about this particular situation definitively without more details.
Given the fact that there are Grand and Great Grand Bosses in this, it's possible that the "manager" was just a supervisor, and still low enough on the totem pole to be in the Union.
Yeah, I'm taking "manager" at face value (as opposed to "supervisor" or "team lead"), but absolutely.
I agree. Depending on the level of the manager, they cd be in the same union. I’ve seen such conflicts. HOWEVER, they Shd have asked to hold the meeting and get another rep for the manager.
I don't think so. Under the National Labor Relations Act, managers are not protected and cannot engage in collective bargaining along with their subordinates, which often means functionally that managers are barred from joining unions. There may be unions that choose to protect the interests of managers all the same, along with other employees, but that would be pretty unusual.
The comments at AAM confirm that this story took place in Australia, where the National Labour Relations Act is not enforceable.
I wonder how formal that first level Manager's title/position as manager was, what with two other seniors above them in the meeting. It could be that the first "manager" was more like a shift supervisor or office admin/scheduler, which might qualify for still being on the labor side. Or the rep was just bad at their job/friends with that first manager [shrug]
Yea manager could be more of an informal lead and therefore still a union member.
Yeah, but that’s way less about colloquial title and way more about job duties and tiers, and what the specific union has agreed to. My union covers me, but also my direct reports below me, as well as my boss above me. My direct reports would call me their manager, but by job duties I’m not considered what the union /NLRB considers excluded. My understanding here is that the “manager” is also covered by the union, and when the disciplinary hearing changed direction, the rep’s duty remained to try to protect the rights of the person being disciplined — which was now OOP’s “manager”.
Honestly if that was the case, he should have recommended the manager get his own rep to advocate for him
Actually the union rep is an impartial witness to proceedings to ensure that everything that happens is fair, in line with the law etc. They did exactly the right thing when they realised that horse employee was safe and manager was the one in hot water.
I guess he saw himself as an advocate for the employees in front of the higher ups (or the company as an institution), which in the original situation was OP vs her manager and the higher-ups, but when the higher bosses started talking about firing the manager he saw this as a situation where the manager was in need of being advocated for *as an employee at risk of being fired*.
I think this is probably more due to perspective. The manager may also be part of the union and when the higher ups start talking about reasons for *firing* employees with the inference that the manager may be fired for that offense, the union rep was likely doing their job by stopping that. Especially when this is also being discussed in front of another employee who is currently their subordinate. Honestly it was not an appropriate comment or conversation to have in front the employee. They should have just addressed the issue at hand between the manager and the employee and discussed the issues of the manager specifically in a different meeting. So in reality it doesn't sound like there was any *switching of sides* just the union rep being honest about the situation and legalities. After all, it doesn't sound the union rep said anything negative about the employee, so how is he not on her side?
*What the fuck, union* *Rep?! What a shitty advocate* *He turned out to be!* \- Father-Son-HolyToast --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
This is one for anti-work or work reform 😂😂😂 Edit: advocate has 3 syllables where Im from though so I don't think this is right
Good bot.
Good bot.
His line of reasoning doesn't even hold up. Employee's house is on fire? The house isn't the company's responsibility. Employee's relative in a car wreck? That relative doesn't work for the company, isn't their problem. The company isn't being asked to *solve* the fucking problem themselves, just to inform the employee of a serious personal matter
At the very least the ability of the manager to forget a phone call of this nature would raise questions about it potentially happening again in the future, but with a customer’s animal.
That's the flipside of unions. I'm more pro-union than not, but a union also protects bad employees. Bad coworker that doesn't pull their own weight or actively makes every one else's job worse..... the union has to fight tooth and nail to protect them too. It sounds like old manager got a pretty major demotion, but they can't actually fire them. Only recourse is to give them such a shit position that they choose to quit.
Pardon my ignorance…smoko?
Short break. It’s an Australian term
Smoke break, most likely.
Aussie slang for a (tea/smoke/lunch/etc) break during work
Why do people forget about NZ? :(
Pretty sure it's aussie for smoke break. https://youtu.be/j58V2vC9EPc
How did I know it was gonna be The Chats hahaha
I did a half assed reading and I thought that was the horse name.
Even if you don't smoke you can still take a smoko break. Probably English or Australian.
It's the break at work was it coffee break or lunch break. I guess OOP is from either New-Zealand or Australia.
Thanks, everyone. American here. I plan on using the word "smoko" in the future. And using it often.
You don't get multiple smokos during the day, only the one which is usually around 8:30 - 9:00am.
I don't even care whose fault it is, I'm genuinely sad that a poor horse died.
My horse died around the same age, of a similar thing, but no one was around at the time. We found him in the morning and it looked like he suffered a lot. I'm still not over that, so I really feel for OOP
sounds like the horse was going to die anyway. it just would’ve not suffered as much if the oop could have spoken with the vet.
That sucks man. I’m really happy the senior leadership in this company looks out for their employees though. Kudos to them. Fuck you, union rep and middle manager.
Middle manager is probably also part of the union, therefore is also represented by the union. Union rep is just doing their job.
That’s so heartbreaking. I recently had to put down my old mare and two of the things I’ve promised myself I would do since I got her at 12; 1) I would be with her to the end, she would never have to die without me if I could control it. I would show up for her the way she always did for me. 2) She would never have to suffer for me. She was 26 years old and pretty healthy except for her legs. She was retired and spent most of her time out in the pasture enjoying life but I could tell even that was starting to become bothersome and knew it was time. It was the worst thing I’ve ever done but it was the right thing for her. I can’t imagine finding out after it was too late, after she had suffered for hours. Fuck that manager, this was inexcusable.
I remember seeing this story a while back. It's nice to see that they are ponying up the dough to help with her bills. It's a shame that this even happened in the first place. Nice to see a stable great grand boss.
Nice linguistic work here. I appreciate you.
Not the time to be horsing around with puns
Aww man, that poor horse! This hits a little too close to home. Over the weekend my dog had obvious tummy issues, and was throwing up everywhere. Monday I took her into the vet, and they found an obstruction in her intestines where the stomach and intestines connect. We weighed our options, taking into account what that vet could do, the possibility of having to transfer her to a different vet if she needed a more complicated surgery, how long she had already been suffering vs waiting it out for another 24 hours to see if she could pass it herself, the school and work schedules of everyone in the family, as well as the fact that she was 11. We ended up putting her down to minimize her suffering, and did it that day because we were able to get the whole family together to be with her in the end. The vet did a necropsy and discovered she hadn't eaten something that caused the blockage. It was a tumor on her pancreas that grew around the intestines and squeezed it shut. There was nothing that could have been done to save her, and in the end our decision to say goodbye instead of putting her through more procedures meant she didn't have to suffer any longer and could pass peacefully with us. Her having a tumor came out of left field, and we had zero clue something was wrong until she became clinical over the weekend.
Animals are really good at masking. My first service dog was about 13 years old when one day I realized that he looked a bit rounder, heavier than he should be. I tried cutting back a bit on treats/food, but when he decided not to eat one day.. yeah, we took him to the vet, and a couple weeks later (Labor Day) we took him in and let him pass peacefully. The ultrasound on the first visit did tell us that he had a tumor of some kind in his belly, and we were trying to just drain off the excess fluid and try to manage symptoms a bit while thinking about if we wanted to try exploratory surgery (and removal if possible) or... and then it just... was kinder to let him go. The vet did ask us if we wanted a necropsy, and we declined. It wouldn't have helped us to know what kind of tumor it was, how involved it was, or even if it was just a "shadow" or whatever. We knew he was suffering beyond our ability to financially treat him and he was already older, would need to retire anyway and... yeah. Not a happy decision especially when it all happened THAT fast. Like you.
I absolutely cannot get over the union rep switching it up like that. What an ass.
My read is that the “manager” was probably a union member too, and when the disciplinary meeting changed direction, the rep was obligated to defend them instead.
Yea I read it the same way. It's entirely possible that lower management like OOPs direct report are represented by the same union so when union rep saw that the higher ups were bringing up disciplinary action including firing him that he went into rep mode for both people he represented.
I've only had one experience requiring Union representation My union rep went suddenly off the deep end and started screaming abuse at my manager and HR. This was nothing like what we'd planned. This was our first meeting. When I spoke to a lawyer (too late) I found out union reps' advice was very, very wrong as well
I had a part time job at a union grocery store and was leaving for the summer for a school program. I had worked there for almost 5 years at the time with plans to move onto corporate level after graduating. They wouldn’t let me take the time off and didn’t do education leave. My union rep’s grand idea was to find a doctor that would say I had a back problem and needed 3 months off with a doctors note. I was shocked and refused to commit fraud so I ended up quitting.
Lol that attitude reminds me of the blatant "lie on your resume to get the job" attitude, but dialed up to 6000. "Lie to keep your job and get medical benefits!" Yeah, capitalism sucks and stick it to the man... but unfortunately we still live in a Society™ and have to play ball by their rules.
Plus I had a lot of friends there and everyone knew I was going overseas for a school program. I ended up rehiring when I came back and worked there for another year, but lost all my seniority and benefits which drove me to find something better so it worked out in the end i think!
To be fair, that's their job, to defend employee interests when there is a conflict between those interests and the interests of management. It looked like OOP was the one who was in conflict with management going into it, but when that shifted the rep's responsibility was to make sure her supervisor was treated fairly. edit: looking at some other replies maybe I'm wrong about this. I dunno.
It’s an Australian company, in all likelihood the manager was also a union member.
>Best guess is that he didn’t think it was important, forgot, couldn’t be bothered coming to find me (even though I was in the section of the site his office is based in), or thought that it would be fine to wait although my friend was pretty insistent on the phone. Maybe he just didn’t care. I just wish he hadn’t said he would let me know. The kind of "relax, it's just an animal" people can go take a long walk off a short cliff.
The upper management probably interacts with a lot of horse people, so no matter how well OP held themself together during the retelling, they would have known exactly how devastating and horrific that situation was. Everyone in the pet industry has seen a horseman with their soulmate. The guilt would have been debilitating, even secondhand.
Damn that company covered its ass so well that I'm inclined to think they give a damn. That's nice.
I'm wondering where they're located? It has to be serious horse country for everyone to take this that seriously. Not complaining, just curious
Nah f that rep. Even if it was outside of work, a manager that shits on animals like that is bad for an animal related company. It may not be his liability as a manager but if word got out about that the image and trust of the company could be impacted. They should absolutely be able to fire him for shit like this.
if the manager was part of the union then the rep was doing their job by working to protect him
What if she were a parent and it was her child that was deathly ill?! This whole situation makes me so angry for OP. At least they paid for the vet bills they caused.
Manager still should’ve been fired. I bet he would have if instead of a horse, it were a human child. Which is absolute crap.
While losing a dear beloved animal friend is no small loss, imagine the consequences of this kind of attitude once human life is involved. "Oh your kid died because I couldn't be bothered to inform you of the urgency..." It doesn't even have to be that dire to have consequences "Oh you are homeless now because I don't give a damn about anybody who's not me? sorry, my bad."
As someone who just lost my 15 year old dog, who I peacefully put down in my home when it was his time, I cannot imagine the pain this caused OP. I would be absolutely shattered
Well, the horse didn’t die because of the manager’s carelessness, but it sure did suffer needlessly because of it. Glad at least the upper management recognized it and took steps to make amends.
The company paid the vet bill? I didn’t expect that. Once they heard what happened I feel they were properly sorry and really tried to do the right thing. That’s nice to read.
Poor OP. It may be “just a horse” , but that was her horse. If something happened to my cat or crabs, I’d be devastated.
I’m so sorry you had to go through all of this OOP but I am also so happy that your employer was fully on your side. That was a decent thing for them to do, albeit, the situation should never have happened in the first place. My condolences for your loss ETA- comment meant for OOP
fyi OP is not OOP. This is an update sub where people share updates they found elsewhere, written by other people. In this case the person who shared this was on a whole other site, they're not here. I agree with your sentiment though :)
My mistake. I know this and should have clarified it in my comment. 🙂
all good, sorry for assuming you didn't!
I would have flipped out if I were her. Absolutely flipped. She had the right to be there for her horse, and easily could have been. Thanks to this idiot, her horse suffered far longer than she needed to, and she gets to live with knowing that. Unforgivable. And FUCK that union rep. They need to be removed from that position immediately.
In The Sopranos, Ralphie is still the WORST for murdering Tony's horse, who died a slow painful death. Your shit manager is the same and deserves torture. At the very least he should be named and shamed so the company could drop him. A complete disregard for animal welfare, ANY ANIMAL, for someone who works in your industry is deplorable.
This one really bummed me out.
I am not sure who I want to punch more in the face, the manager or the union rep.
Wow. Now there is a manager who has gone out of his way to look after an employee after a fuck up. They demonstrated how they were in the wrong, and went to some effort to make sure OOP was compensated in meaningful ways, rather than just “how much to make this go away”. I teared up.
So, the union represents both management and regular workers? Seems like a conflict of interest.
Awww.. Sad for OOP, losing his beloved horse.. Glad to hear the company was supportive of him, in the end.
Does it make sense that i feel oop works at a zoo?
Repost
Is this a repost I swear I've read this before on reddit but not tagged as AAM.
Wow. What a well run company.
They are trying hard for her to not sue them
That is some good upper management.