I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

r

"Robatoy" wrote:

I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864


That's at least a 1,000 "Ah Sh*ts".

And the corporate culture seems to continue it's "F**K YOU" attitude
towards it's employees.

No wonder an employee doesn't want to get involved.

Lew

On May 8, 9:27*am, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote:
I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

That's at least a 1,000 "Ah Sh*ts".

And the corporate culture seems to continue it's "F**K YOU" attitude
towards it's employees.

No wonder an employee doesn't want to get involved.

Lew

It's not as if she ate the damn thing herself... even...

I wonder what that TimBit ( 16 cents) will end up costing TimHortons
by the time the dust settles...
My call? Fire the three managers! Hang them in a public square! Tattoo
the words: "I'm a public relations cluster****!!!" on their foreheads!

Re-hired:

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422936

lol like that helps

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
On May 8, 9:27 am, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote:
I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

That's at least a 1,000 "Ah Sh*ts".

And the corporate culture seems to continue it's "F**K YOU" attitude
towards it's employees.

No wonder an employee doesn't want to get involved.

Lew

It's not as if she ate the damn thing herself... even...

I wonder what that TimBit ( 16 cents) will end up costing TimHortons
by the time the dust settles...
My call? Fire the three managers! Hang them in a public square! Tattoo
the words: "I'm a public relations cluster****!!!" on their foreheads!

On May 12, 7:41*pm, "Mike Richardson"
wrote:
Re-hired:

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422936

Shaaa...like last week already...

"Mike Richardson" wrote:
Re-hired:

Only a fool would take that deal.

Lew

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

r


Well I agree this is silly. Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, is not mentioned in the article. I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

On May 8, 9:49*am, "Leon" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message

...

I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

r

Well I agree this is silly. *Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, *is not mentioned in the article. *I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

Exactly... why hang her on a 16 cent TimBit? Obviously they didn't
quite think this thing through.
Tim Hortons is a corporate cluster****. Their coffee sucks too. Their
donuts are nothing but fat and sugar.
My middle daughter worked at Tim Hortons when she was in highschool.
The policy was not to charge cops and EMS types for products. Policy.
I don't like that outfit. (In case you didn't notice.)

"I cannot tell a lie. *I* put that envelope under that pile of
garbage..."

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
On May 8, 9:49 am, "Leon" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message

...

I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

r

Well I agree this is silly. Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, is not mentioned in the article. I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

Exactly... why hang her on a 16 cent TimBit? Obviously they didn't
quite think this thing through.
Tim Hortons is a corporate cluster****. Their coffee sucks too. Their
donuts are nothing but fat and sugar.
My middle daughter worked at Tim Hortons when she was in highschool.
The policy was not to charge cops and EMS types for products. Policy.
I don't like that outfit. (In case you didn't notice.)

"I cannot tell a lie. *I* put that envelope under that pile of
garbage..."

I absolutely LOVE that song!

And now I'll go back over to the group W bench

On May 8, 10:02*pm, "The Davenport's" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message

...
On May 8, 9:49 am, "Leon" wrote:



"Robatoy" wrote in message

...

I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

r

Well I agree this is silly. Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, is not mentioned in the article. I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

Exactly... why hang her on a 16 cent TimBit? Obviously they didn't
quite think this thing through.
Tim Hortons is a corporate cluster****. Their coffee sucks too. Their
donuts are nothing but fat and sugar.
My middle daughter worked at Tim Hortons when she was in highschool.
The policy was not to charge cops and EMS types for products. Policy.
I don't like that outfit. (In case you didn't notice.)

"I cannot tell a lie. *I* put that envelope under that pile of
garbage..."

I absolutely LOVE that song!

And now I'll go back over to the group W bench

It is a pretty good song, but THIS is much better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

Damnit Robatoy, I sat and watched that whole damn thing waiting for the
punchline. Guess I was the punchline.

SteveP.
www.stellarbuilders.net

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
On May 8, 10:02 pm, "The Davenport's" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message

...
On May 8, 9:49 am, "Leon" wrote:



"Robatoy" wrote in message

...

I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

r

Well I agree this is silly. Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, is not mentioned in the article. I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

Exactly... why hang her on a 16 cent TimBit? Obviously they didn't
quite think this thing through.
Tim Hortons is a corporate cluster****. Their coffee sucks too. Their
donuts are nothing but fat and sugar.
My middle daughter worked at Tim Hortons when she was in highschool.
The policy was not to charge cops and EMS types for products. Policy.
I don't like that outfit. (In case you didn't notice.)

"I cannot tell a lie. *I* put that envelope under that pile of
garbage..."

I absolutely LOVE that song!

And now I'll go back over to the group W bench

It is a pretty good song, but THIS is much better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

"Leon" wrote in message
...

Well I agree this is silly. Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, is not mentioned in the article. I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

Exactly what I was thinking. I suspect she had other "issues" relative
to her job performance and had possibly/probably been warned.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out this isn't the whole story.

Dave in Houston

On May 8, 10:09*am, "Dave in Houston" wrote:
"Leon" wrote in message

...

Well I agree this is silly. *Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, *is not mentioned in the article. *I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

* * Exactly what I was thinking. *I suspect she had other "issues" relative
to her job performance and had possibly/probably been warned.



I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out this isn't the whole story.


Unfortunately for Tim Hortons it *is* the whole story. Besides..
whatever happened to the benefit of the doubt?
If there were other issues, why chose this idiotic one?

"Robatoy" wrote

Unfortunately for Tim Hortons it *is* the whole story. Besides..
whatever happened to the benefit of the doubt?

From a PR perspective, you are absolutely correct. Perception is
everything. Even if firing was justified for other reasons, this petty and
moronic act will do much damage to their reputation. If there is some
backbone or intelligence in this company, somebody could turn this thing
around and actually gain from it. Doesn't sound like that is likely though.

If there were other issues, why chose this idiotic one?

This is exactly the kind of thing that is discussed in business schools.
Not that it matters much in the real world. Corporate management of many
companies is unfeeling or caring. Even if it costs the company business.

"Lee Michaels" wrote

This is exactly the kind of thing that is discussed in business schools.

.... and "business schools" are arguably at the root of many such problems.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 3/27/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
On May 8, 10:09 am, "Dave in Houston" wrote:
"Leon" wrote in message

...

Well I agree this is silly. Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, is not mentioned in the article. I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

Exactly what I was thinking. I suspect she had other "issues" relative
to her job performance and had possibly/probably been warned.



I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out this isn't the whole story.


Unfortunately for Tim Hortons it *is* the whole story. Besides..
whatever happened to the benefit of the doubt?

Well, the news article left out the reasons that might have given the store
the benefit of the doubt. I don't doubt the store may be of equal blame
but with out hearing the whole story the news agency has published a biased
article against the company.


If there were other issues, why chose this idiotic one?

Because the whole truth no longer matters if it may down play a sensational
head line.

The media only tells what will improve their ratings, never the rest of the
story. Does Paul Harvey even broadcast anymore?



--
Mike
Watch for the bounce.
If ya didn't see it, ya didn't feel it.
If ya see it, it didn't go off.
Old Air Force Munitions Saying
IYAAYAS
"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
On May 8, 10:09 am, "Dave in Houston" wrote:
"Leon" wrote in message

...

Well I agree this is silly. Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, is not mentioned in the article. I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

Exactly what I was thinking. I suspect she had other "issues" relative
to her job performance and had possibly/probably been warned.



I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out this isn't the whole story.


Unfortunately for Tim Hortons it *is* the whole story. Besides..
whatever happened to the benefit of the doubt?
If there were other issues, why chose this idiotic one?

"asmurff" wrote in message

Does Paul Harvey even broadcast anymore?

Almost every day on KTRH 740 AM here in Houston, although Ron Chapman has
been pinch hitting for him lately... basically, been listening to Paul
Harvey since I was in college in the 60's, when I drove home for lunch
everyday at noon to his voice on the radio

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 3/27/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Dave in Houston wrote:

Exactly what I was thinking. I suspect she had other "issues"
relative to her job performance and had possibly/probably been warned.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out this isn't the whole story.

I'd certainly want more information before deciding if she had it coming or
not. However trivial this incident was, if she had a history of giving away
product (perhaps to friends?) and had been warned about it before then maybe
they were justified in firing her. I've had to fire a few people over the
years, it was never on a first offense or even a second, but once someone
convinced me they either were not capable of doing the job or just didn't
give enough of a crap, then my responsibility to the business says they have
to go. The smart policy is to issue written warnings and document them
every time, if somebody takes exception to being fired a file full of
warnings is hard to explain away.

DGDevin wrote:
Dave in Houston wrote:

Exactly what I was thinking. I suspect she had other "issues"
relative to her job performance and had possibly/probably been
warned. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out this isn't the
whole story.

I'd certainly want more information before deciding if she had it
coming or not. However trivial this incident was, if she had a
history of giving away product (perhaps to friends?) and had been
warned about it before then maybe they were justified in firing her.
I've had to fire a few people over the years, it was never on a
first
offense or even a second, but once someone convinced me they either
were not capable of doing the job or just didn't give enough of a
crap, then my responsibility to the business says they have to go.
The smart policy is to issue written warnings and document them
every
time, if somebody takes exception to being fired a file full of
warnings is hard to explain away.

There's a statement about it on the Tim Hortons web site--seems that
they agree that the firing was inappropriate.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke wrote:

There's a statement about it on the Tim Hortons web site--seems that
they agree that the firing was inappropriate.

That might be the case, there are lots of idiotic managerial droids out
there. Or they might be trying to avoid more bad publicity, you never know
these days.

On Thu, 8 May 2008 16:50:57 -0700, "DGDevin"
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:

Exactly what I was thinking. I suspect she had other "issues"
relative to her job performance and had possibly/probably been warned.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out this isn't the whole story.

I'd certainly want more information before deciding if she had it coming or
not. However trivial this incident was, if she had a history of giving away
product (perhaps to friends?) and had been warned about it before then maybe
they were justified in firing her. I've had to fire a few people over the
years, it was never on a first offense or even a second, but once someone
convinced me they either were not capable of doing the job or just didn't
give enough of a crap, then my responsibility to the business says they have
to go. The smart policy is to issue written warnings and document them
every time, if somebody takes exception to being fired a file full of
warnings is hard to explain away.

No history of giving away food. No (required by law) documented
warnings for anything - just a manager with a personal grudge against
an employee who stood up to her for another employee, apparently.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

"DGDevin" wrote in message

I'd certainly want more information before deciding if she had it coming
or not.

Agreed

However trivial this incident was, if she had a history of giving away
product (perhaps to friends?) and had been warned about it before then
maybe they were justified in firing her.

Agreed - although not supporteb by the current reports.

I've had to fire a few people over the years, it was never on a first
offense or even a second, but once someone convinced me they either were
not capable of doing the job or just didn't give enough of a crap, then my
responsibility to the business says they have to go.

OK - not a bad position to take but all it shows it that You are
contientious and reasonable - not the Tims manager.

The smart policy is to issue written warnings and document them
every time, if somebody takes exception to being fired a file full of
warnings is hard to explain away.


No Duh!

But how often does anyone actually do this? If we did there would be a lot
less work for labout lawyers.

"Doug Brown" wrote in message

The smart policy is to issue written warnings and document them
every time, if somebody takes exception to being fired a file full of
warnings is hard to explain away.


No Duh!

But how often does anyone actually do this? If we did there would be a
lot less work for labout lawyers.

Even there you have to be careful. What caught my eye was "file full of
warnings". That can cause problems. You need a policy that outlines the
steps. Example: Verbal warning, 1st written warning, 2nd written warning
with suspension, 3rd violation = termination.

If you have repeated warnings but choose not to fire a person when warranted
by policy, you've created an exception and it can be tough to close that
loophole. You can have a time period where the warnings expire so you can
get a second warning, say every 90 days, but if it is 89 days, you can fire
the person.

Best is to have a written policy of work rules given to each person when
hired (have them sign a receipt) and the policy is applied equally to
everyone.

On May 8, 9:49*am, "Leon" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message

...

I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

r

Well I agree this is silly. *Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, *is not mentioned in the article. *I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

I have got to congratulate Tim Hortons on one VERY fast reaction and
superb damage control effort.
I receiver 2 e-mails in response to my e-mails and they basically
said: "Yup somebody screwed up, we're on it..."
And an immediate apology to all those offended.

My coffee is still WAY better.
AND that manager should be fired.

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
On May 8, 9:49 am, "Leon" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message

...

I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

r

Well I agree this is silly. Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, is not mentioned in the article. I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

I have got to congratulate Tim Hortons on one VERY fast reaction and
superb damage control effort.
I receiver 2 e-mails in response to my e-mails and they basically
said: "Yup somebody screwed up, we're on it..."
And an immediate apology to all those offended.


Good on you Robatoy and good on them for looking into the matter.
Obviousely "damage control".


My coffee is still WAY better.
AND that manager should be fired.

Agreed he had a whole day to think about it and still shot from the hip.

On Thu, 8 May 2008 16:33:01 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:

On May 8, 9:49Â*am, "Leon" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message

...

I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

r

Well I agree this is silly. Â*Silly too, is what is not a sensational news
story, Â*is not mentioned in the article. Â*I don't think I would be so
gullible as to believe that this was not the straw that broke the camels
back.

Stupid is the call to fire her over this particular infraction.

I have got to congratulate Tim Hortons on one VERY fast reaction and
superb damage control effort.
I receiver 2 e-mails in response to my e-mails and they basically
said: "Yup somebody screwed up, we're on it..."
And an immediate apology to all those offended.

My coffee is still WAY better.
AND that manager should be fired.


APPARENTLY the employee in question had stood up for some other
employee in a conflict with the "boss" who then had it in for her.
The TimBit was the excuse. Totally against canadian labour regulations
and everything else - common sense and common courtesy included.

I suspect the manager(s) involved will be disciplined severely - and
may VERY well lose her (their) job(s).
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote in message
APPARENTLY the employee in question had stood up for some other
employee in a conflict with the "boss" who then had it in for her.
The TimBit was the excuse. Totally against canadian labour regulations
and everything else - common sense and common courtesy included.

I suspect the manager(s) involved will be disciplined severely - and
may VERY well lose her (their) job(s).
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

I hope I clipped this correcltly.

As one radio pundit said today --- $16 for a Timbit and $16,000,000.00 of
bad PR/

Couldn't agree more!

Doug Brown wrote:
clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote in message
APPARENTLY the employee in question had stood up for some other
employee in a conflict with the "boss" who then had it in for her.
The TimBit was the excuse. Totally against canadian labour
regulations and everything else - common sense and common courtesy
included.

I suspect the manager(s) involved will be disciplined severely -
and
may VERY well lose her (their) job(s).
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

I hope I clipped this correcltly.

As one radio pundit said today --- $16 for a Timbit and
$16,000,000.00 of bad PR/

Couldn't agree more!

16 bucks for a TimBit? Geez, I knew inflation was bad but that's
ridiculous.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Robatoy wrote in news:9670ca79-b34f-40bc-95c1-
:

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

She was probably on the store's kill list because she had a good work ethic
and made the other employees look bad.

Jim Willemin wrote:

Robatoy wrote in news:9670ca79-b34f-40bc-95c1-
:

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

She was probably on the store's kill list because she had a good work
ethic and made the other employees look bad.

Huh? What store management has that kind of attitude? Other employees
maybe, but not store management.


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Mark & Juanita wrote:

Jim Willemin wrote:

Robatoy wrote in
news:9670ca79-b34f-40bc-95c1-
:

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

She was probably on the store's kill list because she had a good work
ethic and made the other employees look bad.

Huh? What store management has that kind of attitude? Other
employees
maybe, but not store management.



Making the managers look bad is also a possibility.

"Robatoy" wrote in message
I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

Sounds a (Tim)bit like the "zero tolerance" policy in our public schools
down thissaway, the sole purpose of which is not public good, but to relieve
incompetent administrators from the consequences of making decisions.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 3/27/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On May 8, 10:15*am, "Swingman" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message
I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

Sounds a (Tim)bit like the "zero tolerance" policy in our public schools
down thissaway, the sole purpose of which is not public good, but to relieve
incompetent administrators from the consequences of making decisions.

MMmmmm... never quite looked at it that way. I guess it is safe to
assume that the managers will be okay then... after all, that is all
that seems to matter. Screw the serfs.

There was just an update on the radio that one of the managers
admitted that the employee in question had never been written up for
anything in 3 years.

Tim Hortons's stuff is **** anyway.

"Robatoy" wrote in message

Swingman wrote:
Sounds a (Tim)bit like the "zero tolerance" policy in our public schools
down thissaway, the sole purpose of which is not public good, but to
relieve
incompetent administrators from the consequences of making decisions.

MMmmmm... never quite looked at it that way. I guess it is safe to
assume that the managers will be okay then... after all, that is all
that seems to matter. Screw the serfs.

A "manager" will never be fired for enforcing a rule or policy, no matter
how ridiculous. He is, after all, "just doing his job".

.... there you have the hidden agenda/thrust behind a "zero tolerance"
policy.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 3/27/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Swingman wrote:


"Robatoy" wrote in message

Swingman wrote:
Sounds a (Tim)bit like the "zero tolerance" policy in our public schools
down thissaway, the sole purpose of which is not public good, but to
relieve
incompetent administrators from the consequences of making decisions.

MMmmmm... never quite looked at it that way. I guess it is safe to
assume that the managers will be okay then... after all, that is all
that seems to matter. Screw the serfs.

A "manager" will never be fired for enforcing a rule or policy, no matter
how ridiculous. He is, after all, "just doing his job".


Depends upon the company for whom one works and the vision of upper level
management. My job certainly would qualify me as "management" and I while
I might not be fired over following a rule or policy at the expense of
customer relations, I guarantee you that such an action would be severely
career limiting and would be reflected in my yearly performance review
results.



... there you have the hidden agenda/thrust behind a "zero tolerance"
policy.


Zero-tolerance may have no consequences to employees of a government run
organization that, because of tax policies has little serious competition,
it does not work for businesses that have competition.




--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Robatoy wrote:

On May 8, 10:15*am, "Swingman" wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message
I don't care if there *is* more to the story... it is an outrage.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/422864

Sounds a (Tim)bit like the "zero tolerance" policy in our public
schools down thissaway, the sole purpose of which is not public good,
but to relie
ve
incompetent administrators from the consequences of making decisions.

MMmmmm... never quite looked at it that way. I guess it is safe to
assume that the managers will be okay then... after all, that is all
that seems to matter. Screw the serfs.

There was just an update on the radio that one of the managers
admitted that the employee in question had never been written up for
anything in 3 years.

Tim Hortons's stuff is **** anyway.



Sounds a bit like Dickens.

"Robatoy" "Robatoy" wrote in message
Tim Hortons's stuff is **** anyway.

'seriously clipped.'

I agree - can't stand Timmies coffee or doughtnuts. But I am (seriously)
coflicted. My son is in uniform and as we all know - Timmies is the
national coffee shop. Where do I go? what do I buy? Oh, the agony.

"Swingman" wrote

Sounds a (Tim)bit like the "zero tolerance" policy in our public schools
down thissaway, the sole purpose of which is not public good, but to
relieve
incompetent administrators from the consequences of making decisions.


Public school zero tolorance policies are not limited to your neck of the
woods. Some wild things that permanantly stain a student's record happen
all the time over nothing. I wish some outraged parents would sue the
*******s. A couple big judgements would reintroduce a little sanity into the
process.

"Swingman" wrote:

Sounds a (Tim)bit like the "zero tolerance" policy in our public
schools
down thissaway, the sole purpose of which is not public good, but to
relieve
incompetent administrators from the consequences of making
decisions.

The "Peter Principle" personified.

Lew