Its not because they are Racist

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 294929
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 294929

www.theguardian.com

Cleaner sacked for eating leftover tuna sandwich takes legal action against City law firm

Gabriela Rodriguez cleaned the offices of Devonshires Solicitors for two years
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com


It's because they are cůn̈ts

If it was not for women like this these prats would not be so successful.

She ate a left over sandwich . Most normal people would be happy it never got wasted.

It come to the attention in lockdown how important cleaners, shelf stackers and delivery drivers are.

Very short memories some have.
 
¢o¢k food, as it was termed in one of our offices.

Because the delegates - for whom the food was provided - would rarely wash their hands after visiting the facilities, before tucking into the fayre....
 
I simply wouldn't have Mrs B cleaning for people like this.

If these women believe they are being racist, then don't work for them. A few ****ty toilets later they will see the error of their ways.
 
From the article:

“complaint from Devonshires Solicitors that leftover sandwiches were not being returned.

The union confirmed Rodriguez ate a £1.50 tuna sandwich she thought would be discarded after a meeting of lawyers.”



What does it mean “leftover sandwiches were not being returned”?
Returned from where?

and How did Rodriguez determine a sandwich had been discarded?
 
From the article

spokesperson for Devonshires Solicitors said: “Devonshires did not make a formal complaint against Gabriela and expressly told Total Clean not to take any action against her. Total Clean carried out their own investigation and the decision to dismiss Gabriela was taken without any input or influence from Devonshires whatsoever.

“This is a private matter between Total Clean and Gabriela but we have made clear to Total Clean that we would not object – as we never have done – to Gabriela attending and working on our premises if Total Clean changes its position.”

Unfortunately the organisation bringing the claim on behalf of the sacked worker needs to read up on the process. There doesn’t appear to be any claim against the client (the law firm) whatsoever.

It’s quite possible that the employer has errored. But we don’t know what happened during the investigation - perhaps she denied eating the sandwich, perhaps she was unable to communicate that she thought she was authorised to dispose of the waste food by eating it. Perhaps in fact she pilfered the sandwich before it was waste.

Grounds for dismissal exist only if she denied it.
 
The daily mail has the termination letter.

I think the employer is screwed if she has 2 years service. I suspect she doesn’t and that is why statutory protection is the try on. If so it will probably fail. As per the OP nothing racist about the conduct.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Revealed: The hard-hearted letter cleaning boss sent to single mother

Gabriela Rodrigues from Ecuador launched an unfair dismissal claim against cleaning agency Total Clean after she was sacked for eating a tuna and cucumber sandwich.
www.dailymail.co.uk

Law firm probably has a claim against the cleaning firm for damages
 
Notch7 said:
From the article:

“complaint from Devonshires Solicitors that leftover sandwiches were not being returned.

The union confirmed Rodriguez ate a £1.50 tuna sandwich she thought would be discarded after a meeting of lawyers.”



What does it mean “leftover sandwiches were not being returned”?
Returned from where?

and How did Rodriguez determine a sandwich had been discarded?
Click to expand...
It's a funking sandwich .
 
motorbiking said:
I think the employer is screwed if she has 2 years service. I suspect she doesn’t and that is why statutory protection is the try on. If so it will probably fail. As per the OP nothing racist about the conduct.
Click to expand...
www.theguardian.com

Cleaner sacked for eating leftover tuna sandwich takes legal action against City law firm

Gabriela Rodriguez cleaned the offices of Devonshires Solicitors for two years
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Two years service with that client alone apparently, although it's possible they rounded up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top