Religion & Spirituality2 mins ago
Has Disapline Gone Out Of The Window Even In The Work Place.
19 Answers
http:// www.dai lymail. co.uk/n ews/art icle-22 49901/M cDonald s-waitr ess-sac ked-spr inkling -extra- chocola te-pals -McFlur ry-give n-3k-co urt-set tlement .html
On the face of it it may all seem trivial, and if it was a first offence a verbal warning would seem enough, but in the end this amounts to stealing from her employer.
But the fact that she refused to accept the sack amazes me, hasn't the employer any rights left?
Her mother seems to be a rather nice person though.
/// Her mother, accountant Tessa Finch, added: 'We've been instructed not to say anything and I have to stand by that.
'But we had them firmly by the knackers and they had to pay
up.' ///
On the face of it it may all seem trivial, and if it was a first offence a verbal warning would seem enough, but in the end this amounts to stealing from her employer.
But the fact that she refused to accept the sack amazes me, hasn't the employer any rights left?
Her mother seems to be a rather nice person though.
/// Her mother, accountant Tessa Finch, added: 'We've been instructed not to say anything and I have to stand by that.
'But we had them firmly by the knackers and they had to pay
up.' ///
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Lol @ the mothers response. Nice.
I don't get the "she refused to accept the sack" bit. So if your employer tells you you've lost your job, you can say you don't agree and you won't be going anywhere...?
With regards to the actual "crime", no matter how you dress it up, it is theft. What next, extra fries?!
I don't get the "she refused to accept the sack" bit. So if your employer tells you you've lost your job, you can say you don't agree and you won't be going anywhere...?
With regards to the actual "crime", no matter how you dress it up, it is theft. What next, extra fries?!
It doesn't amount to stealing, at all........
As there is no 'standard' amount of sprinkles per item, as Sarah Finch explained, there will always be more on some than on others, the item she sold was one of those with 'more'.
Stupid over-reaction by McDs and her mother seems to have summed the situation up perfectly well.
As there is no 'standard' amount of sprinkles per item, as Sarah Finch explained, there will always be more on some than on others, the item she sold was one of those with 'more'.
Stupid over-reaction by McDs and her mother seems to have summed the situation up perfectly well.
-- answer removed --
I am willing to bet that there is more to this story than someone being sacked for just giving away too much topping.
Also it seems that the media is slanting the story as though the defendants were in the right because the franchisee company paid up.
This is probably not the case at all, if the employer was in the right but had no employment insurance to cover the legal bills, they were in a position where it was probably cheaper to pay off an employee rather than pay to defend it through the courts and win it but have to pay the large legal bill.
Not saying that this employee is one of them, but spurious claims by aggrieved ex employees is on the rise (in the hope of getting a pay off in this manner by their employer) which is why the government are attempting to bring in no fault dismissals.
Also it seems that the media is slanting the story as though the defendants were in the right because the franchisee company paid up.
This is probably not the case at all, if the employer was in the right but had no employment insurance to cover the legal bills, they were in a position where it was probably cheaper to pay off an employee rather than pay to defend it through the courts and win it but have to pay the large legal bill.
Not saying that this employee is one of them, but spurious claims by aggrieved ex employees is on the rise (in the hope of getting a pay off in this manner by their employer) which is why the government are attempting to bring in no fault dismissals.
If the story is to be believed, McDonalds via this particular franchise were way off the mark in sacking this girl on the grounds of gross misconduct over what it such a trivial offence - an offence difficult to quantify, by their own admission.
I would imagine their is much more to this story than meets the eye - but given the circumstances as explained - good result for her...
I would imagine their is much more to this story than meets the eye - but given the circumstances as explained - good result for her...
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.