Originally Posted by
amcnd
We dont have one because we dont have a max number of attendance violations tell discipline... sapa has said we don't want one tell it becomes a problem.. why put a “number” on violations when right now we dont have a number.. think of it from that prospective...
Right, like not wanting a scope clause until you need one. How has that worked out? Anyway, think of a contractual commuter policy as a set rule that each side knows ahead of time what each is required to do. No having to explain yourself to anyone after the fact and hope they aren’t having a constipation day. Commuter policy, you follow the rule, nothing happens, no explanations, life is good.
Originally Posted by
HuntinFishin
That is a very logical perspective I can respect that. So there are no steps of discipline that are cumulative towards termination. If there is no number is the flip side that the company just as well could terminate on your first infraction? I they felt they wanted to could they? I doubt they would mind you , on just one infraction, but could they? Do you get any commuter hotels paid for like some other union regionals I have heard of.
All Skywest employees are at-will employees. They can theoretically show up to work everyday for ten years and the very next day, let them go.