Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So this is why we still have unions in America, right? To protect perverts?
University of New Hampshire professor Edward Larkin “took it out”–to use a Seinfeld metaphor–exposing himself to a woman and her child in a grocery store parking lot. But a union arbitrator ruled that the university cannot not fire him over the incident:
Larkin admitted he exposed himself to a mother and her daughter in a grocery store parking lot and was convicted of a felony. It happened in Milford, NH in 2009.
So this is why we still have unions in America, right? To protect perverts?
University of New Hampshire professor Edward Larkin “took it out”–to use a Seinfeld metaphor–exposing himself to a woman and her child in a grocery store parking lot. But a union arbitrator ruled that the university cannot not fire him over the incident:
Larkin admitted he exposed himself to a mother and her daughter in a grocery store parking lot and was convicted of a felony. It happened in Milford, NH in 2009.
This isn't a “morale delinquencies of a grave nature”?????
An arbitrator isn't part of a union. He's a third party neutral--not part of the union or the university--that's brought in to decide contractual disputes in states where they're used. He's more like an independent judge. In this case, he was a stupid judge. There has to be more to the story, because I don't know of any union contract where the employer is forced to keep someone on staff who's committed a felony. I'm betting the union isn't thrilled about this guy either.
An arbitrator isn't part of a union. He's a third party neutral--not part of the union or the university--that's brought in to decide contractual disputes in states where they're used. He's more like a judge.
And this "judge" doesn't think a man exposing himself to a mother and her daughter in a parking lot is not a morale delinquency of a grave nature?
And this "judge" doesn't think a man exposing himself to a mother and her daughter in a parking lot is not a morale delinquency of a grave nature?
Just WTF has America turned into?
Hey--I'm agreeing with you, but as I said, he's not part of the union OR the university--he's a paid, neutral outsider that they bring in because their job isn't to show favoritism to either side--they're supposed to just rule on the case based on the contract. In this case it sounds like he let his twisted personal feelings get in the way.
It reminds me of the judge in Texas who made terrible decisions on child abuse cases, and was running for higher office until his special needs daughter decided to post a video of him beating her with a belt and screaming at her. Personal beliefs (and behavior) have a way of influencing professional lives. You have to wonder what's going on in the arbitrators personal life that leads him to make a decision like that. Perverts can be judges (and arbitrators) too...
So this is why we still have unions in America, right? To protect perverts?
University of New Hampshire professor Edward Larkin “took it out”–to use a Seinfeld metaphor–exposing himself to a woman and her child in a grocery store parking lot. But a union arbitrator ruled that the university cannot not fire him over the incident:
Larkin admitted he exposed himself to a mother and her daughter in a grocery store parking lot and was convicted of a felony. It happened in Milford, NH in 2009.
An arbitrator isn't part of a union. He's a third party neutral--not part of the union or the university--that's brought in to decide contractual disputes in states where they're used. He's more like an independent judge. In this case, he was a stupid judge. There has to be more to the story, because I don't know of any union contract where the employer is forced to keep someone on staff who's committed a felony. I'm betting the union isn't thrilled about this guy either.
Why was he a stupid judge? You're assuming the contract must expressly allow arrests of this nature not to effect his employment ...as if the only employment rights allowed are only in the contract?
If the company wanted to fire people for these sorts of things they should have put that in the contract.
Hey--I'm agreeing with you, but as I said, he's not part of the union OR the university--he's a paid, neutral outsider that they bring in because their job isn't to show favoritism to either side--they're supposed to just rule on the case based on the contract. In this case it sounds like he let his twisted personal feelings get in the way.
It reminds me of the judge in Texas who made terrible decisions on child abuse cases, and was running for higher office until his special needs daughter decided to post a video of him beating her with a belt and screaming at her. Personal beliefs (and behavior) have a way of influencing professional lives. You have to wonder what's going on in the arbitrators personal life that leads him to make a decision like that. Perverts can be judges (and arbitrators) too...
No you have no idea what the contract says or what State law allows.
You are just arguing for an outcome you agree with.
Don't pretend you know the contract or the law. Otherwise you would have given a legal argument.
So this is why we still have unions in America, right? To protect perverts?
University of New Hampshire professor Edward Larkin “took it out”–to use a Seinfeld metaphor–exposing himself to a woman and her child in a grocery store parking lot. But a union arbitrator ruled that the university cannot not fire him over the incident:
Larkin admitted he exposed himself to a mother and her daughter in a grocery store parking lot and was convicted of a felony. It happened in Milford, NH in 2009.
This isn't “morale delinquencies of a grave nature”?????
Please.
I can remember when a Democratic Congressman got caught with 90k in his freezer. What happened? Did his colleagues come out and say that the bastard was corrupt? NO....instead, this:
"Many Republicans and Democrats contend that the unprecedented raid on a congressional office was unduly aggressive and may have breached the constitutional separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government that are meant to shelter lawmakers from administrative intimidation."[19] Tensions escalated to the point where – according to AP – Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, his deputy Paul McNulty, and possibly FBI Director Robert Mueller "were said to be ready to quit if the Justice Department was asked to return the Jefferson documents ... [while the] House was threatening to go after the Justice Department's budget".[20]
LOL...i didn't see any widespread condemnation of Congress for protecting a crook. But let a union demand due process for an employee accused of doing something bad, it's time to go nuts.
Gimme a break. If the guy did something wrong, he'll be fired. Stop with the anti-union hyperbole.
For the most part, yes. In this particular case, definitely yes!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
