TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- TA got me fired..
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

that ROYALLY sucks ass dude - sorry to hear!
I better knock this out at work then too!

haha.. you're a dumbass mark. it's all good though. you needed out of there.

P.S. You weren't still working at Future Shop, were you?

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie P.S. You weren't still working at Future Shop, were you?

;-D

Sorry Mark, but you're wrong about the law. Even if it's written like that, it's not followed in the courts. There have been dozens, probably hundreds of high-profile cases regarding firings for surfing, blogging, porn, etc. Every single time (feel free to post a relevant example if this is incorrect) the judge has said, tough shit.

It just doesn't matter if he was formally warned, or warned at all. Not in cases involving web surfing, at least. Courts consider this to go under the "abuse" category, the category of unscrupulous behaviour that also includes things like information theft and sabotage and other immediately-firable offences. I realize it's not as severe in most cases, but that's just the way it is. If he were playing Solitaire or Minesweeper for 5 hours a day or making personal phone calls, they'd have to issue a warning and have a documentation trail, but not 'net abuse. Maybe it's just that the legal system hasn't caught up to technology yet, as it hasn't in so many other areas. Or maybe it's because you need warnings and documentation to prove things like excessive personal phone calls, but for web surfing it's all right there in the server logs.

This is even more cut-and-dry if the company has an internet usage policy. Not every company does, but if one does, and if the policy specifies "immediate termination" or anything similar, then no law can circumvent that. Employees know the policy, and they know they can be monitored. Although I don't believe that any respectable company would terminate an employee without warning for minor violations of its usage policy, they are still within their rights to do so.

As for circumstances... colour me cynical but I don't believe that anybody with a high-paying job or years of tenure has the time to goof off on tranceaddict at work, or the lack of motivation to do something constructive instead.

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie P.S. You weren't still working at Future Shop, were you?

hell no! lol, rogers wireless

quote:

Originally posted by Turntabulls hell no! lol, rogers wireless

Oh...well fuck 'em anyways.

god that sucks

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie Oh...well fuck 'em anyways.

haha, i have another job lined up anyways.. lol i was planning on quitting there soon.. ah well! one week off for me with severance pay and vacation pay! who wants to party? lol

*~*
you know you can't really blame TA you can truly only blame yourself and learn from your mistakes NOT to surf whiel you are at work - heck they are paying you to do a job - not to post on TA IMO!

Sorry to hear that dood, i hope you find a job where they actually pay you to go on TA ; )

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut ...

if there is a formal policy on net use/abuse, sure...and most companies who grant net access to employees are current enough with their employment agreements to have such a policy. Now that it's been mentioned that he was at Rogers, I'm *positive* they have one, lol.

a article that skims the surface:

http://www.canada.com/topics/techno...82-734fd529184d

quote:

- Spending excessive time during work hours on the Internet can be cause for discharge, after appropriate warnings.

blogging, downloading, and posting something like "I work at ________ and..." may invite liability, as the author also notes, but isn't that materially different than simple surfing?

In the absence of a net usage policy, and with no formal warnings, do you believe that I could be justifiably fired for reading the Toronto Star's website for 10-15 minutes at work with my morning coffee, particularly if my job performance was otherwise satisfactory? I *highly* doubt it. Granted, I doubt even more that someone would be fired if that were the case...but you know what I mean.

I would bet that the high profile cases you mention are NOT for simple web surfing of 'normal' sites and rather involve blogging, downloading, file sharing, compromising sensitive info, visiting inappropriate sites, etc.

this got to be the dumbest thread ever

you need to snap out of the www.tranceaddict.com addiction. look at the threads being posted here, 95% of them are just post whoring.

ouch i am sorry to hear that, i am sure youll find something new soon! Goodluck and dont surf the net when they give you a warning

i hear they're hiring here

quote:

Originally posted by El Kay Dee this got to be the dumbest thread ever

lol @ barney

quote:

Originally posted by richard raiban lol @ barney

listen uhhhhhhhh fred....uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

quote:

Originally posted by Turntabulls hell no! lol, rogers wireless

In the office or the store?

quote:

Originally posted by Turntabulls oh i know.. my father is a judge. lol

NICE...u'll be just fine without that job

quote:

Originally posted by TheVrk NICE...u'll be just fine without that job

lol, just wait untill he finds out though!

I got warned at my last job. Apparently, surfing on message boards was JUST banned a few months prior to my warning.

At my current job, as long as I get my stuff done, I take breaks for stress relief.

way to go buddy

quote:

Originally posted by smuncky i hear they're hiring here

hahahahah

I've heard that McDonalds's has no sense of humour...

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.