Garbage Man Jailed For Starting Work Too Early.

[Greenday]

And I'm not saying the employer shouldn't get super fined into oblivion. They absolutely should. They should get fined hard enough that the managers/owner will think twice before doing it again.

I just believe that everyone involved needs to take responsibility for their actions. The company sent people out, they should be punished. The guy in this story broke the law, he should be punished.

[Gravekeeper]

Yikes, people. This is a lot of speculation and not much else. Dude's given some interviews now so here's his side:

The employee was aware of the law.

So it is not some obscure rule he violated. He was aware of it. He assumed it did not apply to the "one stop" he made where he got caught because he had seen construction workers there early in the morning before. He said he wanted get there before the construction workers because its easier to pick up the trash before they arrive.

He also ( perhaps inadvertently ) revealed that this is the motivation behind the early pick ups. Its easier to pick up trash early in some areas before businesses start opening and traffic starts becoming an issue. So it is a matter of saving time/money and the money saved seems to outweigh the fines levied.

So yeah, to recap.

The employees of the company do know the law. Its not some obscure thing taking them by surprise. But its in their and the company's best interest to pick up trash early in certain areas where traffic/congestion becomes a problem later. The employee in question is either stupid ( Making an assumption about a route he should know after 3 months on the job ) or got caught red handed ( Thought he could get away with the early stop but a pissed off resident snapped a picture of his truck so the city was able to ID him ) and is now feigning stupid naivety. Either way he expected to go to court with the company rep, accept another fine for it and go home.

Bur seeing as he only got caught because an angry resident had the foresight to take a pic of his truck its unlikely it was just this one stop he was running too early on.

[Rageaholic]

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.

In a way, yes. All he did was break a noise ordinance. Even if you want to argue that he should face some punishment for it, the punishment should not be a month in jail (or any jail time for that matter).

[Titi]

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.

So the employee keeps the garbage truck at his house? He personally has the keys? The answer to that is NO! So he went to work, got his truck and his work assignment from MANAGEMENT! If there is ANY personal responsibility it is on the MANAGER who gave him that assignment. It doesn't matter if he knew the laws MANAGEMENT obviously knew and used him as scapegoat (because I think they used the new guy, who didn't know about it.)

He didn't plan his map, it was planned. They just thought that he would just be personally fined (and not the company) and certainly NOT 30 DAYS IN JAIL.

[Gravekeeper]

So the employee keeps the garbage truck at his house? He personally has the keys? The answer to that is NO! So he went to work, got his truck and his work assignment from MANAGEMENT! If there is ANY personal responsibility it is on the MANAGER who gave him that assignment. It doesn't matter if he knew the laws MANAGEMENT obviously knew and used him as scapegoat (because I think they used the new guy, who didn't know about it.)

As I just said 2 posts up, he knew the law. Might want to rein in the outrage. ;p

[s_stabeler]

The employee was aware of the law.

.

OK, this changes things. If the employee knows it it illegal and doesn't care? then fuck them. The jail time is justified in that case. ( especialyl if the employee did it because thye thought thye would just get a slap on the wrist.

I should make it clear here that this is due to a change in the circumstances- specifically, that the garbageman did in fact know it was illegal.

[TheHuckster]

I'll have to agree with s_stabler. I still think the management should have a harsher penalty because they were the ones directly responsible for the breaking of the law, and until the guy was arrested, they were the ones who were nonchalantly paying fine after fine.

[wolfie]

It's kind of your responsibility to know the laws of your job. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking it. Clearly the company should be fined to hell for it, but since when is "Well, my boss told me to do it so it's not my fault." acceptable?

Because, you should totally expect your boss to give you orders to do something illegal... >_>

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.

Employees should be expected to obey the law. Of course, the usual source for them to find out what laws cover the workplace is THROUGH THE EMPLOYER. If the employer says "Your shift starts at 05:00", it's reasonable to assume that there's no law saying that you aren't allowed to start work until 07:00.

In any case, if someone is penalized for breaking a law while doing their job, whoever ordered them to break the law should receive a bigger penalty. Don't know about the law where this happened, but around here "Counseling to commit an offense" is a separate crime, and if more than one person in management repeatedly orders employees to break the law (highly probable due to the number of fines the company received) that would fall under conspiracy. What DOES NOT make sense in this case is to order the worker jailed while the people giving the orders get off scot-free for this incident.

Considering the routine violation of the law, what would make sense would be for the municipality to notify the company that this behaviour will STOP NOW or their contract will be pulled and put up for re-bid - hit them in the pocketbook.

[Ginger Tea]

There are some jobs where you do need to know the laws pertaining to your job, most obvious is bar tending and serving alcohol to minors, or more specifically NOT serving to them.

Do employees of Kwiki marts have to go on courses or are they just told "If they look under X card them." or even simpler "Card everybody even me when I'm that side of the till."
Their handbook might spell out the law and ramifications as well as company policy which if broken would not be breaking an actual law.

For example I've read a few times about people entering a store conversing with either a friend or just someone they struck up a conversation with and parting ways to different aisle.

The one purchasing alcohol is denied as they entered with someone perceived to be a minor and is unable to provide ID, this might be because they are still shopping.
Is this a CYOA store policy or state/federal law? TBH I had never looked into it as I do not live in America so I don't brush up on all intricacies' of laws, especially if I am never to run afoul of them.

Customers seem oblivious to the carding requirements all the time, so I don't see any one stopping to think "Hmm if I walk into the shop with my younger brother I wont be able to be served" and it also forces parents in supermarkets into a catch 22, leave the kids in the car at risk of child abandonment charges or have that one anal cashier who wont serve alcohol to a parent because they have a baby or small child with them.

Yes some parents or their children slip up and the cashier now knows that the sale is intended for minors and can shut it down there and then.

---

Last I remember Greeday's job was within the realms of explosive forensics, that one I can see an employee having to be informed of any laws pertaining to their job, but everyone else?

My last employment I had to go on 'mandatory' 3 year refreshers, I say mandatory in quotes as I can't off hand remember if it was a legal requirement or just preferred, though I am 70% leaning to legal without looking it up.

Most of the things I did other companies didn't, these were just best practices and not actual enforceable laws (yet). No one working front of house at BK wore hair nets (no idea about back end) yet everyone (including bald people) working in my company wore them even when food was sealed for dispatch (my department), I didn't notice any at the local chippy when I was last in.

Should environmental health do a spot check, if hair nets are just best practice, the lack of them wouldn't be fineable, it might mark them down, not in a punishable way more of a could do better.

We were told how we as an individual could be held liable should what we did cause harm to the consumer, but as I worked in dispatch it wasn't applicable to me, had I worked in the kitchen or the high risk area, it would if it was traced back to me (by our production date being cross referenced with the rota). QA would occasionally come up and they would find out who was working that shift and then find out who did the weigh up or which chef signed off on the meal in question and pass on their concerns, so should they have ever needed to find someone due to a graver incident than it tasted a bit blander than usual they had a paper trail.

The thing is though, although I attended 3 of these courses in the 9 years I worked there, my first wasn't until I had been there for nearly a year and only full time employees were sent, ideally anyone entering the food industry should have a valid certificate and job agencies dealing with food as a core business, should require anyone who signs up can not start until passing at least a basic test based around common sense.

Our multiple choice questions were always AFTER the refresher not before, it would be nice to know what people knew in regards to food hygiene then tell them where they went wrong and why then just have scores based of information given to you 10 minutes before a test. One I might add was very hard to fail.

Disclaimer:
After expansion I was more or less left on my own (liked that aspect) and rarely had to venture into the actual production area without reason.

Not once did I think I was being asked to break a law, as TBH I don't think anyone ever asked us to do anything of the sort. When I was working there about a year lead supervisor wanted to go home and we were waiting on a deep container of puree food to cool down and it was not getting anywhere near.

I commented that it being a large container meant it would take too long for the core to reach the required level, but we portioned it into shallower trays and put it back in the blast chillers and lo it came down far quicker.

End result, that particular product was poured into those containers from then on and we never had an issue with the temperature should they leave that job till last causing people to hang around for it.

Had I signed it out with a false temperature it would be on me as I would knowingly bring a hot product out to be portioned, sealed and later stored over night in a refrigerated room, that's not something I would sign off on, you want it out quicker so we can all go home, that's on you, I aint doctoring shit.

Though I would be an accomplice should I know it's hot and let my supervisor do so anyway, me being lower on the rung wouldn't clear me of wrong doings.

---

So had we not found that the bin man knew what he was doing was against the law, I would be with those saying "Why is he up in the docks?" fines are not working, so why is management not the one facing jail time?

Those that plan the routes and schedules flaunting laws and bylaws should be held accountable, but without further reading, I cant say if he would have been fired had he not left the depot, what if any, back up he would receive from unions etc.

[Rageaholic]

As I just said 2 posts up, he knew the law. Might want to rein in the outrage. ;p

That does change things. Though I still don't think he deserves jail time for this.

[Gravekeeper]

That does change things. Though I still don't think he deserves jail time for this.

Well, not many do seeing as he was cleared of the jail time. Like Andara mentioned though it seems like the frustrated result of the company's behaviour towards the fines. Which is to say completely ignoring them and going about its dickery.

It should be noted the problem goes as far back as at least 2013 and that the company in question is actually a national corporation. This isn't some naive little local/state company with no idea what city ordinances are. It knows full well it just doesn't give a shit because $.

It should also be noted they did not retain an attorney for the employee. He was sent to court with a company rep ( not legal representation ) and plead guilty. I would assume on instruction from the rep as the rep said he was just expecting yet another fine. So this was pretty routine for them.

This company has a history of corporate fuckery, environmental violations and labour related fuckery going back over a decade.

[Greenday]

That does change things. Though I still don't think he deserves jail time for this.

I could see jail time if he specifically was repeatedly breaking the law. But it's his first time in court for it so just slap him with a few hundred dollars worth of fines and be done with it.