Garbage Man Jailed For Starting Work Too Early.

[EricKei]

The prosecutor specifically said that the cases he's handled before (and I'm guess he makes sure to handle a LOT of them) resulted in fines against companies....That's why they don't work against individual workers. The companies just get them and never speak of them again. This worker's employer apparently had been hit a lot, and it did no good -- which means, they knew that they were violating the law, and never told any of their employees this, likely in the name of getting trash picked up more quickly -- in other words, less money spent on payroll.

[Greenday]

How huge is the company and the group that this work for that his company has been fined enough that they arrested someone and he never heard about all the previous run ins with the cops?

And yes, ignorance is absolutely not an excuse. As someone who picks up garbage for a living, it's his responsibility to know laws involved. That's lazy as hell. If you serve alcohol or tobacco to minors because your boss didn't tell you that you couldn't, should that be an acceptable excuse? No. So why is this different? Because it's not a super well known law? Because he's a garbageman and not some white collar wall street schmuck?

[Panacea]

We don't know if that's the case. The employee hasn't offered any sort of explanation or defence aside from just saying it was his first offence.

He may not have known about the ordinance. He'd only been there 3 months.

Honestly, I don't see the big deal. According to the story, 911 "lights up" when the garbage men come "too early." That implies to me they're up anyway, so what's the beef?

Unless they want to put the cans on the curb as they leave for work, and not the night before.

It just seems to be a silly thing to make such a fuss over.

[TheHuckster]

Honestly, I don't see the big deal. According to the story, 911 "lights up" when the garbage men come "too early." That implies to me they're up anyway, so what's the beef?

No, it implies that they were awakened by the loud trucks outside. Why else would they be complaining?

Not that 911 is really the correct number to call when garbage trucks wake you up, but that's a different ball of wax.

But, really, if the garbage collection company is truly ignoring every fine thrown at them, it's time to either up the fines or start hauling people to jail... but I'd start with the management.

As someone who picks up garbage for a living, it's his responsibility to know laws involved. That's lazy as hell.

You're absolutely right. When I start a job, the first thing I do is go to city hall, read the 1,000 page book of ordinances, translate all the legalese, and then find whatever obscure law that may or may not be enforced but conflicts with my assigned tasks so I can skirt out of work. If I can't find one for the municipality, I look at the 1,000 page book for the county, then the state, and then finally the federal laws.

There's usually a law there somewhere that works. The last one I got out of bartending duty because the city had a law on the books against filling glassware with non-water liquids during a full moon.

And the worst part is, when I tell my friends that, they still call me lazy! Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

The management should be the ones facing a judge for willingly ignoring the law that they knew they were breaking. They had the knowledge that they were breaking the law, but intentionally disregarded it.

Don't get me wrong. I think the suspect in this case should have been told that what he was doing was illegal, and should be cited for it. I don't see how a jail sentence makes any sense here, especially if the prosecutors KNEW that there was a more guilty party in this case, specifically the management who were basically saying "fuck you" to the legal system by ignoring every citation given to them.

[AmbrosiaWriter]

If you serve alcohol or tobacco to minors because your boss didn't tell you that you couldn't, should that be an acceptable excuse? No. So why is this different? Because it's not a super well known law? Because he's a garbageman and not some white collar wall street schmuck?

That's a HORRIBLE metaphor.

Your example is a federal law that applies to the ENTIRE COUNTRY.

This is a tiny by-law probably buried in the annuals of the city hall (seriously, I've looked at my town's laws, they are NOT easy to parse nor are they easy to locate laws on specific things.)

If he doesn't live in the area that the law applies to, it is very likely he's never even considered there could be specific laws aimed solely at when garbage could be picked up. It's not exactly a common occurrence.

Just like it's illegal in some places for one to have sex with the lights on. Who the hell would think to even LOOK for something like that? Sure, if someone were to be arrested for it, it could be struck down as unconstitutional, but it could end up being a grand old fight depending on how strict and conservative particular authority figures are.

Are you telling me if two people got arrested for having sex with the lights on you'd sit there trumpeting "Well you should've known that was a law!"

Because it's a law. Right?

[Greenday]

That's a HORRIBLE metaphor.

Your example is a federal law that applies to the ENTIRE COUNTRY.

This is a tiny by-law probably buried in the annuals of the city hall (seriously, I've looked at my town's laws, they are NOT easy to parse nor are they easy to locate laws on specific things.)

If he doesn't live in the area that the law applies to, it is very likely he's never even considered there could be specific laws aimed solely at when garbage could be picked up. It's not exactly a common occurrence.

Just like it's illegal in some places for one to have sex with the lights on. Who the hell would think to even LOOK for something like that? Sure, if someone were to be arrested for it, it could be struck down as unconstitutional, but it could end up being a grand old fight depending on how strict and conservative particular authority figures are.

Are you telling me if two people got arrested for having sex with the lights on you'd sit there trumpeting "Well you should've known that was a law!"

Because it's a law. Right?

In this day and age, with internet access readily accessible everywhere (Including Atlanta), there's really no excuse. Sure he could have gone to city hall. He also could have gone to his town's website which I'm pretty sure Atlanta has since it's a major city.

I don't understand the problem with assigning personal responsibility. Work with alcohol? You are responsible for knowing laws about serving alcohol. Drive a taxi? You are responsible for knowing laws about driving a taxi. Sell cars? You are responsible for knowing laws about selling cars. Why is this different? Just sounds like laziness to me. I have to know the laws pertinent to my job. Why should this guy get a free pass?

[Kheldarson]

In this day and age, with internet access readily accessible everywhere (Including Atlanta), there's really no excuse. Sure he could have gone to city hall. He also could have gone to his town's website which I'm pretty sure Atlanta has since it's a major city.

I don't understand the problem with assigning personal responsibility. Work with alcohol? You are responsible for knowing laws about serving alcohol. Drive a taxi? You are responsible for knowing laws about driving a taxi. Sell cars? You are responsible for knowing laws about selling cars. Why is this different? Just sounds like laziness to me. I have to know the laws pertinent to my job. Why should this guy get a free pass?

Because this is an amazingly obscure law? I mean, hell, my trash guys pick up between 5 and 6 am. Frankly, I can't think of a single place I've lived, including more suburban areas, where they didn't start their run during that time zone. So, hey, if I move to an area and have to take a sanitation job and my boss says, you start your run at 5, why would I think there'd be a problem?

[TheHuckster]

In this day and age, with internet access readily accessible everywhere (Including Atlanta), there's really no excuse.

This happened in a suburb of Atlanta (Sandy Springs) which has its own municipal laws ordinances.

Sandy Springs Code of Ordinances

Let's say you pick up garbage in Sandy Springs. Find me every single ordinance that is pertinent to your job on that site. Then, do the same for the county and the state. Hell, I searched high and low and can't even find the relevant ordinance that this guy supposedly breached.

You can keep giving us your holier-than-thou attitude that you know every law pertinent to your job, but unless you're a certified attorney and/or have a lot of time and patience on your hands to browse every nook and cranny of every law book that falls in your jurisdiction, you can't actually be telling the truth. And you can't just do it once, either. You have to keep on top of it because new laws are drafted every year. That's what attorneys might do to keep their jobs current. It is unreasonable to expect everyone to have full knowledge of every law that's over them, and it's for that reason we have lawyers and attorneys to give employers advice on this kind of stuff.

Again, I would have been fine with a citation, or possibly even a fine. Sentencing this guy to jail was unreasonable, and I'm glad they dropped that part.

[Andara Bledin]

Sandy Springs ordinances are actually listed over at Municode.com which you can reach by clicking the Municipal Code link from the Sandy Springs site. Then, if you know to search by "collection" it's the first result.

But Greenday's argument is still bollocks. I can pretty much guarantee that he's broken the law while in the performance of his job duties. We all have. There are so many laws on the books, with many of them contradictory, that it's essentially impossible not to.

One should be able to trust one's employer to not instruct them to break the law. It is not unreasonable to give an employee a pass for doing something not obviously illegal when so instructed by their employer. This whole "personal responsibility" mantra is just holier-than-thou superiority wankery.

[s_stabeler]

In this day and age, with internet access readily accessible everywhere (Including Atlanta), there's really no excuse. Sure he could have gone to city hall. He also could have gone to his town's website which I'm pretty sure Atlanta has since it's a major city.

I don't understand the problem with assigning personal responsibility. Work with alcohol? You are responsible for knowing laws about serving alcohol. Drive a taxi? You are responsible for knowing laws about driving a taxi. Sell cars? You are responsible for knowing laws about selling cars. Why is this different? Just sounds like laziness to me. I have to know the laws pertinent to my job. Why should this guy get a free pass?

To use an analogy, say the bank decides to tell it's employees to enter an "authorization code" when a customer deposits money into their bank account, which skims off 10% of the deposit, and the money skimmed off goes to the bank. The employees aren't told what the code does, either by the bank, or by the system. Would it be fair to prosecute the teller for fraud?

Or, to put it more basically: the garbageman was not the person who decided when the trucks go out. The company did- so prosecute the COMPANY, NOT the driver.

[Rageaholic]

Just like it's illegal in some places for one to have sex with the lights on. Who the hell would think to even LOOK for something like that? Sure, if someone were to be arrested for it, it could be struck down as unconstitutional, but it could end up being a grand old fight depending on how strict and conservative particular authority figures are.

Are you telling me if two people got arrested for having sex with the lights on you'd sit there trumpeting "Well you should've known that was a law!"

Because it's a law. Right?

Yeah. That's why the whole ignorance should damn well be an excuse in certain situations. We've probably all broken some obscure law at one point so should be all be fined or jailed just because we didn't bother to check?

And the law isn't exactly easy to understand (like the 10 commandments). It's a different language that can easily be misinterpreted. Especially when there's all these obscure laws that most people wouldn't bother to think about.

[Greenday]

So because it's an obscure law, it's okay to not have any personal responsibility. That's basically all I'm getting from the conversation. If I break a law doing my job, that's my fault. No one forced me into doing anything.

[Andara Bledin]

So because it's an obscure law, it's okay to not have any personal responsibility. That's basically all I'm getting from the conversation. If I break a law doing my job, that's my fault. No one forced me into doing anything.

That's all you're getting because that's all you want to get.

Nobody is saying to toss personal responsibility because obscurity, that's a ridiculous straw man.

What is being said is that as an employee, one should not have to or be expected to second guess every instruction their employer gives them, particularly when the instruction is not only not something typically against the law and when it is a part of the job where the employer should be aware of all relevant regulations.

So, fuck the stupid employer in this case who was so comfy just getting slaps on the wrist because it cost less to be fined than to obey the law and don't fuck the poor peon who was just doing an activity that is not typically illegal but for timing.

[TheHuckster]

So because it's an obscure law, it's okay to not have any personal responsibility. That's basically all I'm getting from the conversation. If I break a law doing my job, that's my fault. No one forced me into doing anything.

Do you have no fault to direct to the management who knowingly asked the worker to do something against the law?

What is being said is that as an employee, one should not have to or be expected to second guess every instruction their employer gives them, particularly when the instruction is not only not something typically against the law and when it is a part of the job where the employer should be aware of all relevant regulations.

This.

As a worker, I have expectations that the managers (you know, those people who supposedly have enough experience and knowledge to achieve such positions and make good decisions) are keeping the company within the laws.

Now, obviously, there are limitations to this expectation. If a manager asks me to break the speed limit or do shady things that I should definitely question, then it is up to me to either refuse or get a second opinion from someone else as to whether that's legit or not.

But if someone gets their schedule that says "working 5am to 10am" or whatever it may be, that's simply such an innocuous and trivial thing that's so easy to overlook, because surely the management knows the municipal laws... which they did and deliberately broke.

But, again, this is a very eye-opening story. From now on, every decision I make, including something as innocuous as going to work at 5 in the morning, is going to be met with the ultimate scrutiny. I will study every single law to ensure I'll never be thrown into jail. Because, as you say, to do otherwise is lazy as hell.

[Hyena Dandy]

So because it's an obscure law, it's okay to not have any personal responsibility. That's basically all I'm getting from the conversation. If I break a law doing my job, that's my fault. No one forced me into doing anything.

That's not at all what's being said. What's being said is, as stated, you typically DO have an excuse of "I was told to do this thing that a reasonable person could not be aware is illegal, by what I had every right to assume was a person who had knowledge of the situation."

If your boss tells you "Go do that," and you have no reason to suspect "That" is a criminal act, then you shouldn't get in trouble for doing it. When it comes to, say, selling cigarettes to children the law against that is fairly well known. A reasonable person would be expected to know that you can't do that. It's highly publicized, and at any place that sells cigarettes, there's usually required to be a sign.

Is it unreasonable to assume that when you're given your daily schedule by your company, the company knows whether or not they can do that?