Employee messes up......who pays the price???

Exchange messages with other users about virtually any other topic of interest. Please - no Want Ads, For Sale Ads, auction site support questions, whining, or griping. Be nice.

Moderators: Spider7115, COLT, FrancF, nunn

Missouri Mule K30
Posts: 2038
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: SouthEast Missouri

Re: Employee messes up......who pays the price???

Post by Missouri Mule K30 » Wed Apr 17, 2019 1:37 am

Warbirds wrote:
Tue Apr 16, 2019 10:21 pm
A few years back I had a group of hourly folks where I was their leader only by default because their engineering site lead medically retired unexpectedly. I knew their scope of business so I inherited that team for just a few months while a replacement was being found.

Well a long time operator (20+ years) didnt follow a procedure, a blatant mistake of complacency. Once we have our product built- a test reveals a failure in a big, ugly manner.

I get flown out to the sight with the Sr. VP of Operations (2nd only to the CEO & I had never even met before) because he is pissed and wants to personally walk the process in question to understand the breakdown.

In front of a dozen operators the king flies off the handle and orders me to fire the operator who made the mistake.

I refuse and again get screamed at-
“Fire that operator!!!”

We go back and forth and I hold my ground.

The operator doesn't get fired.

To this day- over 4 years later (and a few thousand miles away) my reputation with the hourly staff has followed me across the business.
I could have dropped the hammer and fired a loyal employee who got complacent- instead I took a public ass beating and did not back down.

The technicians trust me and now they have my back, and yes, they have saved my ass when they could have let the normal business rhythm crash the bus.

Not exactly apples to apples with your scenario- but leaders need to be loyal to their staff particularly when the chips are down. If you believe in that person, you have to invest in them & sometimes that means owning their mistakes as your own.

Best of luck.
I have saved many an azz, and so has a valued employee saved mine. And Teamwork is an invaluable asset with some reassurance that protocols are being met.

I have seen this before and a phone call to the ATFE having them call the USPS contact was all that it took to get the firearm to the receiver and booked in. Then ping pong back to seller. FFL TO FFL no other entity can take possession.

I believe that this was talked about a few years ago.

Ricci Wright
Posts: 7405
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2015 9:28 am

Re: Employee messes up......who pays the price???

Post by Ricci Wright » Wed Apr 17, 2019 6:39 am

If you can you might consider getting the rifle back instead of the $800.00 and having it repaired. Reimburse the customer and sell the rifle. It sucks either way but as they say that is the cost of doing business sometimes. I made a simple mistake a few months ago which was made much worse by the gun shop receiving the gun. I immediately reimbursed my customer and ate the $350.00. Not as much as your problem but it still sucked. Either way don’t let it bother you for too long. Stress kills.

Horse Plains Drifter
Posts: 33996
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 5:57 am

Re: Employee messes up......who pays the price???

Post by Horse Plains Drifter » Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:53 am

shootuadeal wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2019 12:04 am
I've never understood why we have to pay insurance to the shipping companies to begin with. It kind of pisses me off actually.

When you take your car to the mechanic do they tell you, you have to pay an extra $50 in case we drop your car off the hoist? Does your barber charge you a fee in case he snips the top of your ear off?

Basically they are saying...you have to pay us in case we F!#@ your box up in transit, if you don't we won't pay you for it.
I have always wondered the same thing. If you or I provide a service, for the fee charged it is expected it will be completed in an acceptable manner. WTH are we paying postage/shipping for if we have to pay extra to get it delivered in one piece?

Don McManus
Posts: 20396
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:36 am

Re: Employee messes up......who pays the price???

Post by Don McManus » Wed Apr 17, 2019 12:11 pm

mag00 wrote:
Tue Apr 16, 2019 9:43 pm
bailment
n. 1) the act of placing property in the custody and control of another, usually by agreement in which the holder (bailee) is responsible for the safekeeping and return of the property. Examples: bonds left with the bank, autos parked in a garage, animals lodged with a kennel, or a storage facility (as long as the goods can be moved and are under the control of the custodian). While most are "bailments for hire" in which the custodian (bailee) is paid, there is also "constructive bailment" when the circumstances create an obligation upon the custodian to protect the goods, and "gratuitous bailment" in which there is no payment, but the bailee is still responsible, such as when a finder of a lost diamond ring places it with a custodian pending finding the owner. 2) the goods themselves which are held by a bailee. Thus, the "bailor" (owner) leaves the "bailment" (goods) with the "bailee" (custodian), and the entire transaction is a "bailment."


No insurance required. They have to pay up. Question is how much to you wish to spend to force them to their legal obligation?

There may be some forms floating around that are not talked about but may be worth some digging. It's like if the police damage your goods in a search, you can recover the cost, but you need to file the proper forms. Your low level postal employees will be of no help, they will keep harping on insurance insurance insurance to divert your efforts from the proper legal path. Ebay tried that carp with me, I knew the law and just filed the correct paperwork and they complied.

Policy is not law. Read in the UCC (uniform commercial code)
An interesting argument, Mr. Magoo, but there is insurance in place, in Casey's case. I have not read the contract established when insurance is contracted through the Post Office, but the obvious point is if they had lost the rifle, they would obviously only be on the hook for the $ 800.00 insurance that was contracted. If the item is damaged in excess of the insured value, how can the contracted insurance carrier be on expected to pay for the full contracted value and then be forced to release the item?

With automobile insurance, the typical contract is based upon the value of the item being insured. If the damage is in excess of that value, the insurance company will pay the actual value and own the vehicle. If the previous owner wishes to retain ownership, a deal can be worked out whereby they purchase the vehicle back from the company, usually at a greatly reduced value. In this case the value is established by the policy, and it appears the Post Office has upheld its end of the deal by paying the declared value of the property to the shipper. One can make assumptions as to why it was insured for less than actual value, but I fail to see how that is the problem of the insurance carrier.
Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

Brad Steele

User avatar
mag00
Posts: 4388
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:21 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Employee messes up......who pays the price???

Post by mag00 » Wed Apr 17, 2019 12:41 pm

Don McManus wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2019 12:11 pm
mag00 wrote:
Tue Apr 16, 2019 9:43 pm
bailment
n. 1) the act of placing property in the custody and control of another, usually by agreement in which the holder (bailee) is responsible for the safekeeping and return of the property. Examples: bonds left with the bank, autos parked in a garage, animals lodged with a kennel, or a storage facility (as long as the goods can be moved and are under the control of the custodian). While most are "bailments for hire" in which the custodian (bailee) is paid, there is also "constructive bailment" when the circumstances create an obligation upon the custodian to protect the goods, and "gratuitous bailment" in which there is no payment, but the bailee is still responsible, such as when a finder of a lost diamond ring places it with a custodian pending finding the owner. 2) the goods themselves which are held by a bailee. Thus, the "bailor" (owner) leaves the "bailment" (goods) with the "bailee" (custodian), and the entire transaction is a "bailment."


No insurance required. They have to pay up. Question is how much to you wish to spend to force them to their legal obligation?

There may be some forms floating around that are not talked about but may be worth some digging. It's like if the police damage your goods in a search, you can recover the cost, but you need to file the proper forms. Your low level postal employees will be of no help, they will keep harping on insurance insurance insurance to divert your efforts from the proper legal path. Ebay tried that carp with me, I knew the law and just filed the correct paperwork and they complied.

Policy is not law. Read in the UCC (uniform commercial code)
An interesting argument, Mr. Magoo, but there is insurance in place, in Casey's case. I have not read the contract established when insurance is contracted through the Post Office, but the obvious point is if they had lost the rifle, they would obviously only be on the hook for the $ 800.00 insurance that was contracted. If the item is damaged in excess of the insured value, how can the contracted insurance carrier be on expected to pay for the full contracted value and then be forced to release the item?

With automobile insurance, the typical contract is based upon the value of the item being insured. If the damage is in excess of that value, the insurance company will pay the actual value and own the vehicle. If the previous owner wishes to retain ownership, a deal can be worked out whereby they purchase the vehicle back from the company, usually at a greatly reduced value. In this case the value is established by the policy, and it appears the Post Office has upheld its end of the deal by paying the declared value of the property to the shipper. One can make assumptions as to why it was insured for less than actual value, but I fail to see how that is the problem of the insurance carrier.
If you sign a contract to drive the getaway car for bank robbers...

How about signing a lease that has terms against the state law?

Also note that in a dispute where there is question etc, the scales weigh in favor of the party that did not draw up the contract.

Even still, if there is $800 cap, that is to fix the damage. The firearm wasn't lost, it needs to be returned to the owner. If it was lost or stolen LF has specific duties to report it as such or get in trouble.

Insurance companies set the policy, <----note "policy", not the law. Some think it is law because they have more money to fight you in court. The courts are complicit in this injustice especially when it comes to Blue Book values of vehicles.

So let's say you insure you pinto for minimum coverage. You hit a new expensive car. Your insurance only pays the victim the max of your policy. Do they get the other guys car? Do you get his car because your insurance paid out?

Let's revist LF's scenario. Suppose it was insured for $1,000,000. Would they write her a check? NOPE. Not for a million. You can only fudge the value a little bit and get away with this. The POST OFFICE is way out of line here. I would return the check and tell them to return the merchandise and you will send a bill for the repair, up to the limit of $800. (plus return of the original shipping).

User avatar
mag00
Posts: 4388
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:21 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Employee messes up......who pays the price???

Post by mag00 » Wed Apr 17, 2019 1:08 pm

http://www.tabberone.com/

This is a good read or site to peruse. May not be applicable to the current situation, in details, but is applicable in standing up to the man.

These folks have taken on the industry giants and won. Point is, you don't have to take the word of the big guy in this case, they are wrong and you can win if you plan a little and are educated on the process. I'm not a lawyer, stick to the facts and the actual law, not policy.

This is where LF needs to be careful. If you remember, her and I have difference of opinion on how to deal with troublesome buyers. That type of interaction cannot happen in this case or she/you will be sunk.

When I was selling on Amazon, a few folks would get suspended. They would come in crying and whining on how unfair etc. Well guess what? Amazon does not care about personal problems. They do care about how you will make your business better, and they want to see an outline with bullet points addressing your case.

People who followed the wise advise of the seasoned sellers, in most cases were re instated. Those who wrote out hard to read long sobs stories NEVER were re instated.

This is the classic little guy vs giant, go in prepared.

LF, sorry if I sound harsh at times. Just know that I like/care about you enough to not lie to you.
Here is a small list, just a starting point to be refined to your specific situation. You're probably a little bit past alot of this, but none the less, the principle of outline with how you want it to go will work from any stage of the process.
  • KISS
    be respectful
    outline quickly the issue
    cite the laws or regs to support you
    don't argue irrelevant issues
    tell them how to proceed (within the law)
    thank them for quick resolution ahead of time
    do not threaten
We're rooting for ya :ugeek:

Don McManus
Posts: 20396
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:36 am

Re: Employee messes up......who pays the price???

Post by Don McManus » Wed Apr 17, 2019 5:38 pm

mag00 wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2019 12:41 pm
Don McManus wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2019 12:11 pm
mag00 wrote:
Tue Apr 16, 2019 9:43 pm
bailment
n. 1) the act of placing property in the custody and control of another, usually by agreement in which the holder (bailee) is responsible for the safekeeping and return of the property. Examples: bonds left with the bank, autos parked in a garage, animals lodged with a kennel, or a storage facility (as long as the goods can be moved and are under the control of the custodian). While most are "bailments for hire" in which the custodian (bailee) is paid, there is also "constructive bailment" when the circumstances create an obligation upon the custodian to protect the goods, and "gratuitous bailment" in which there is no payment, but the bailee is still responsible, such as when a finder of a lost diamond ring places it with a custodian pending finding the owner. 2) the goods themselves which are held by a bailee. Thus, the "bailor" (owner) leaves the "bailment" (goods) with the "bailee" (custodian), and the entire transaction is a "bailment."


No insurance required. They have to pay up. Question is how much to you wish to spend to force them to their legal obligation?

There may be some forms floating around that are not talked about but may be worth some digging. It's like if the police damage your goods in a search, you can recover the cost, but you need to file the proper forms. Your low level postal employees will be of no help, they will keep harping on insurance insurance insurance to divert your efforts from the proper legal path. Ebay tried that carp with me, I knew the law and just filed the correct paperwork and they complied.

Policy is not law. Read in the UCC (uniform commercial code)
An interesting argument, Mr. Magoo, but there is insurance in place, in Casey's case. I have not read the contract established when insurance is contracted through the Post Office, but the obvious point is if they had lost the rifle, they would obviously only be on the hook for the $ 800.00 insurance that was contracted. If the item is damaged in excess of the insured value, how can the contracted insurance carrier be on expected to pay for the full contracted value and then be forced to release the item?

With automobile insurance, the typical contract is based upon the value of the item being insured. If the damage is in excess of that value, the insurance company will pay the actual value and own the vehicle. If the previous owner wishes to retain ownership, a deal can be worked out whereby they purchase the vehicle back from the company, usually at a greatly reduced value. In this case the value is established by the policy, and it appears the Post Office has upheld its end of the deal by paying the declared value of the property to the shipper. One can make assumptions as to why it was insured for less than actual value, but I fail to see how that is the problem of the insurance carrier.
If you sign a contract to drive the getaway car for bank robbers...

How about signing a lease that has terms against the state law?

Also note that in a dispute where there is question etc, the scales weigh in favor of the party that did not draw up the contract.

Even still, if there is $800 cap, that is to fix the damage. The firearm wasn't lost, it needs to be returned to the owner. If it was lost or stolen LF has specific duties to report it as such or get in trouble.

Insurance companies set the policy, <----note "policy", not the law. Some think it is law because they have more money to fight you in court. The courts are complicit in this injustice especially when it comes to Blue Book values of vehicles.

So let's say you insure you pinto for minimum coverage. You hit a new expensive car. Your insurance only pays the victim the max of your policy. Do they get the other guys car? Do you get his car because your insurance paid out?

Let's revist LF's scenario. Suppose it was insured for $1,000,000. Would they write her a check? NOPE. Not for a million. You can only fudge the value a little bit and get away with this. The POST OFFICE is way out of line here. I would return the check and tell them to return the merchandise and you will send a bill for the repair, up to the limit of $800. (plus return of the original shipping).
The USPS insures things for 'Declared Value'. The declared value, as established by the shipper, was $ 800.00. This is the contract that was signed when insurance was purchased. If the insurance company pays the value of an item, they should be able to keep it. If the USPS insured things for 'well, maybe up to half the value or whatever the shipper wants to say it is worth after we damage it', you would have a valid point.

Your third party example regarding my Pinto has no application here. Please know that my Pinto has full coverage and the state mandated liability minimum. My insurance company will pay out up to that minimum. If the other car was totaled, and the owner accepted the payout, my insurance company would own the car, not me. If the value of the car was greater than the minimum, the owner would come after me, and may end up with the Pinto. In this case, the insurance company paid out the value of the item as declared by the original owner. The buyer will then have to go to the original owner to be made whole, just as the owner of the expensive car I totaled with Pinto would have to do.

The Pinto is on its last legs, however. I would pretty much have to be stopped in the wrong spot and impacted at a high rate of speed for there to be enough energy to total anything other than say, my Yugo.
Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

Brad Steele

User avatar
mag00
Posts: 4388
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:21 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Employee messes up......who pays the price???

Post by mag00 » Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:07 am

You would be wrong. A contract to do illegal acts is not a contract. A contract that is in violation of the law is unenforceable.

If you sign your title over to me it is my car. If you sign it over under duress, different story. If you smash my car and are only insured to 1/10 of the damages and worth, I will be in court and you can fight out the balance with your insurance. I've had insurance companies try that on me, caveat emptor.

Read it before you sign it. If you don't agree, don't sign it until you negotiate what you will agree to.

I haven't seen the papers LF's worker signed when shipping. I have not seen the accompanying paperwork with the insurance payout. But I am pretty sure there was NO signature until the check showed up, maybe one to file the claim, and I have not seen that paperwork either.

And again I will remind you, that ups nor usps will pay a full claimed value if they don't have to, say 1,000,000 for a lost glock. If your Yugo or Pinto is hit, don't matter how much the guy who hit you is covered for, they will only pay book value, another insurance scam/policy. That is not law, and if you fight it can be compensated fairly.

With the amount of shipping LF does, she should self insure. Charge every transaction an insurance fee and put it in a separate account. If the post office or UPS break or damage item, you can still go after them even without insurance, because you create a legal bailment when you pay for their 3rd party service. They have a duty of "Reasonable Care" in handling your items. If you can show negligence, like the package run over, you will win. It's tough getting the post office into court, but it can be done. They gotta pay, it's the law. Making them pay may not be worth the time and effort, thus self insuring is the way to go.

By the logic/argument I'm hearing, if a package is not insured they do not have to deliver it. They can just keep it without any consequence. And there are a whole bunch of laws and precedence in regards the the "company" with the monopoly, writing ambiguous or unenforceable contracts.

Don McManus
Posts: 20396
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:36 am

Re: Employee messes up......who pays the price???

Post by Don McManus » Thu Apr 18, 2019 3:56 pm

You are throwing up so many straw men my allergies are kicking up.

I really have no idea whether you know what you are talking about, but the fact of the matter is that the shipper bought insurance and declared the value of the item being insured. The USPS did not establish the value. The shipper and purchaser of the insurance established the value.

By paying 100% of the declared value, the USPS has satisfied its obligation.

I suppose someone can weasel themselves around what was an upfront contract, but it does not change the basic fact that the USPS fully discharged its obligation to the shipper based upon the value as stated by the shipper.

The lesson here is to insure something for what it is worth. Had that been the case, there would have been the option for a pro-rated settlement based upon the amount of the damage. At $ 800.00, there is no money to be saved in trying to determine the residual value of the rifle. So, take the $800.00 or don't make an insurance claim. Don't expect someone else to waste a whole lot of time for your mistake or attempt to save a few bucks on insurance costs.
Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

Brad Steele

Post Reply