**I am NOT OOP, OOP is u/thedudeistjedi**
**Originally posted to r/antiwork**
**Previous BoRUs: [#1](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/s/5lBJ2EwVwA), [#2](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/s/lCmJOxh3sA)**
**[New Update]: my wife got fired today**
**Thanks to u/Direct-Caterpillar77 for letting me know about the latest update**
**NEW UPDATE MARKED WITH** ----
**Trigger Warnings:** >!abuse of power, scapegoating!<
-----
**RECAP**
[Original Post](https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/s/xGN8JJ6hdT): **May 6, 2026**
Long time lurker here. My wife works at a unionized manufacturing plant and got walked out yesterday. The new HR director has been looking for excuses to trim the roster, but he couldn't fire her legally for attendance because she still has two tardies left in her bank.
So instead, they bypassed the point system and hit her with a conduct violation for an improper call-off. I have been up all night digging through her paperwork and the union contract, and I am pretty sure I caught HR and her supervisor completely screwing themselves. I just wanted to get a second opinion on the logic here before we go to the union.
Here is the breakdown of how management handled this.
Last week, she called the security desk at 6 AM to call off. The guard clicked Tardy on the drop-down menu, but right next to it in the return date box, the guard actually typed NSD, which stands for Next Scheduled Day. You cannot be tardy for a shift you literally said you are not returning for until tomorrow. HR just ignored the NSD part so they could fire her for being a no-show after allegedly saying she would be tardy.
Her supervisor went into the system two days later hunting for her time punches to prove she did not show up. He waited two days to build a paper trail for a conduct charge instead of just reading the security log that already said she was not coming in. It looks like they were looking for a reason to fire her rather than just following the attendance policy.
They rushed the paperwork so fast to get her out the door that the official termination form has the wrong shift and the wrong supervisor listed on it. They did not even look at her file before they signed the papers.
To make it a fire able offense, they had to prove she was a repeat offender. They cited a write-up from January. Her crime in January was calling off and saying PTO instead of Personal. The best part is the union filed a grievance on that January write-up, and it was never actually settled. During the firing meeting yesterday, the supervisor and the steward were literally arguing because neither of them knew if that January issue was still open. HR fired her based on a past warning they cannot even prove is legally active.
I think tardy is a state of being, not a reason for an absence. If the security log says her return was NSD, that means the company knew she was not coming in.
Does she have a case to get her job back with back pay? It feels like they bypassed the entire union attendance system just to fire her over a contractor typo and an unsettled grievance from four months ago.
[Security Log Image](https://imgur.com/a/CJ3YdGJ)
**Transcript of the Image**
Name: [Redacted]
Called: 5/3/2026 @ 6:27
Call-Off Shift: 5/3/2026 0700-1500
Reason: Tardy
Return: NSD
Officer: S/O S[redacted]
**end of transcript**
Here is the actual security log from the morning of 5/3. My wife called at 6:27 AM, which is nearly a half hour before her 7:00 AM shift began. Look at the "Return" line. The security officer manually typed "NSD", which stands for Next Scheduled Day. This is the smoking gun because it proves the company had actual notice that she would not be coming in for the full shift.
Management is trying to bypass the union attendance point system by claiming this was an "improper call-off" or "no-show" conduct violation. They are basing that entire charge on the fact that the guard selected "Tardy" from a dropdown menu for the reason. But look at the logic here. You cannot be "Tardy" for a shift you have already confirmed you aren't returning for until tomorrow.
**edit:** I want to clarify a few things that have come up in the comments. A union representative was physically present during the termination meeting and has reportedly filed a grievance over this firing. However, the meeting itself revealed a massive procedural failure. Management and the rep spent a significant amount of time arguing over a previous grievance from January which involved a dispute over whether my wife said "PTO" or "Personal" during a call-off. When she asked for a definitive answer on whether that January case was actually settled or closed, neither side could provide one. It appears the company is using an unresolved ghost grievance as the foundation for this termination. Because of the confusion and the sloppy paperwork, we are calling the union hall tomorrow
**edit 2:** I appreciate the concern from everyone telling me to delete this, but the post stays up. A lot of folks are giving advice based on standard at-will employment, but my wife is a dues-paying union member protected by a Just Cause contract. We aren't hiding from management because management is the one who screwed up the paperwork. If the company tries to retaliate against a union worker because her husband posted their own contradictory security logs on the internet, they are opening themselves up to an Unfair Labor Practice charge and a massive retaliation suit. Deleting this now only serves to protect the HR director who botched the termination, and I am not giving them that cover. The documents speak for themselves, and the union is handling the rest.
**edit 3:** The part that makes this really fishy to me as I am sitting here is 5/3, the day in question where she called off. Her brother had already been out for two days by my memory, and 5/3 when he went to urgent care was the third day he had been absent. For my wife, it was the first day, and the night before she had been up all night vomiting and expelling the back end, and she spent all of 5/3 in bed. He went to the doctors, was there for hours, got a CT scan, and got a medical excuse for his absence because his stomach bug was exacerbated by pancreatitis, I think it was. The day I got the Facebook message from her father was the day he went to the doctors, as her dad was keeping us updated if it was something dangerous and contagious, because we probably would have gone to the doctors too. Her brother was sick, but her father is medically fragile, as he is recovering from bladder cancer and had a hip replacement. Her dad had asked me not to come inside the main house unless it was absolutely necessary. Her brother and father live in the house while our family occupies a camper on the property.
For context, my wife was a PLI *(editor's note: Performance-Linked Incentive)* and her brother was a warehandler. My wife was a warehandler too until a few months ago when she signed off on the bid, but she would upgrade to warehandler to fill the role as needed to help out. Since she has been on days, specifically the same shift as her mother and brother, she had not been calling off a lot at all, I think May was only the second time since January. The two days he was out before her were upgrade days where she filled his role, then the boss only had a shortage because that third day she was not there. When she came back, she warehandled the day she went back, and threw a whole stink about it the whole day too. She had gone back to work but still was not feeling one hundred percent, even though the nausea had subsided, and the day after that they went hunting for punches.
The day the boss sent out the email asking if she has any punches was two days after the doctors, and the company did not know I was entirely privy to the doctor’s visit. They seem to forget we all live on the same property, mom, brother, and my wife. This makes it feel like they did not care about attendance or disruption to the floor, it seems like they cared about winning a power struggle They waited two days to see that the brother was protected by a CT scan and medical documentation, then it looks like they targeted my wife because they thought she was timid. They ignored her 6:27 AM notification and the manual NSD security entry just to manufacture a technicality for a hit. The fact that they got her shift and supervisor wrong on the final papers makes it seem like they were not investigating, they were just rushing to execute a vendetta.
**Edit:** She got her 401k paperwork in the mail today, and they couldn't even be bothered to get the date right at the top of the page. Last I checked, it wasn't 2027 yet.
**Additional Comments from OOP:**
> **OOP:** I really need to know what her chances are I think the union will steam roll this asshole it’s a pretty strong union ...but I don’t want to rely just on my own understanding of labor law
**Editor's note: OOP made similar original posts across several subreddits, I am adding some comments for more context that were not stated in this original subreddit**
**Relevant Comments**
**OOP needs to have his wife call the union representative regarding this situation and file a grievance**
> **OOP:** I was having her call the union hall tomorrow the last grievance filed went unsettled, so I think management is dicking this rep around, I just wanted to be able to give her a little hope, so I figured ask the internet I think her chances are good... all the main ai models think her chances are good, but we're terrified
+
> according to what she was told the grievance is already being filed but I’m telling her to call the union hall tomorrow and verify cause the last grievance was still being debated during the hearing like they couldn’t give her an answer if it was settled or not, so I think this rep is compromised
**Commenter 1:**
1) The union is your friend, you should contact them immediately.
2) Deep breaths, you can’t think straight if you’re panicking and you can’t help if you can’t think straight.
3) Your wife might not need you to go into fix it mode right now, she might just want your commiseration and emotional support. Don’t piss her off by doing things she doesn’t want.
> **OOP:** too late for that but thank you she just gave my adhd having ass a mission I’m letting her rest for a little bit I just wanted to be able to tell her kind internet strangers said she has a solid case
**OOP's wife's work location and if a union representative was present when the termination took place?**
> **OOP:** NY USA and she’s a member of a pretty strong corning union I have to figure out what her chances are she’s a wreck
+
> yes the union rep was there she’s filed a grievance over it but during the meeting the rep and management were arguing over a grievance from January
**Commenter 2:** Why tf is the security guard in charge of attendance?
> **OOP:** you call the guard give the name reason and return day and the guard marks it down they marked tardy for the reason but next scheduled day for return
**Commenter 3:** Do you know why HR/Company wants to fire your wife?
Are they trying to downsize, so they grasping at straws?
This sounds like something the union should be able to fix. I wouldn't bother focusing on the legal language or random specifics, that will just drive you crazy. Just try to figure out why they're trying to launder this situation into a legitimate firing.
>
> **OOP:** new owners my wife is the quietest of a whole family that works their the hr guy is testing the unions strength
>>
>> **Commenter 3:** Oh, expect the Union to go to bat for her. If they don't, they're shooting themselves in the foot. She just needs to remind them this is a test case, and their jobs are on the line right now too.
>>>
>>> **OOP:** yeah her mom brother and sister all work at the same plant she’s just the least angry of the group, not even worst attendance
**Commenter 4:** Definitely look for procedural errors made against what is in the CBA *(editor’s note: collective bargaining agreement)*. I'm a rep for my union, but in a completely different industry. Whenever the company fires someone just because they want to, and not for a valid reason; they almost always screw up the process. Make sure she is talking to her union, you can help with research, but this is more their responsibility.
>
> **OOP:** wrong shift on the sheet, wrong super, she didn’t sign no final warning indicated, and her call off log that they themselves included (image above) lists return as nsd or next scheduled day
>>
>> **Commenter 4:** Is there a hearing or "investigation" with a hearing officer to determine whether this will be a dismissal or not? We have that as part of our contract, you can't be fired on the spot, there is a hearing process first.
>>>
>>> **OOP:** the hearing sheet has the final notice section blanks she had a hearing today and was walked out with 4 pages that’s it
**Commenter 5:** Did the company do any kind of investigation that would have allowed her to explain the confusion? Or did they just move to terminate based on the paper you shared above?
> **OOP:** So far, the sum total of the investigation was two emails printed in this paperwork, at least that is the entire termination paperwork they sent home.
>
> It had the incorrect shift listed and the wrong shift supervisor, it was missing the required plant manager signature, had no final notice section, and the reasons for strike one and two were blacked out.
>
> As far as the reason for termination on the paperwork, it was a blank X indicating an "improper call off," but even that I only know from hearing it. The document itself is vague, and between the five pages, it contains about 15 words of functional English.
>
> There was a previous grievance from January over a write up stemming from her using the word PTO when she called off when the correct term was personal, but that was still being debated by people at the termination hearing from what I was told, so I couldn't give any more info than that, and it wasn't even included or mentioned in the paperwork.
>
> This comment is about 60x the sum total of functional English in the entire investigation.
>
> edit; Plus they had her mother take the rest of the day to perp walk her out. She grew up here, that is heinously and publicly embarrassing since her family works there.
[Update #1](https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/s/7FMEqq640G): **May 29, 2026 (over three weeks later)**
**Update: Anchor Hocking fired my wife**
**TL;DR of Previous Post:** My wife, a union worker at the Corning plant, was walked out over a "conduct violation" for an improper call-off. She called in 33 minutes before her shift, and the guard manually logged her return as NSD (Next Scheduled Day), proving the company had actual notice. Local management tried to bypass her active attendance point bank, where she still had safe days left, by inventing a "conduct" charge on the floor rather than following standard policy.
**The Massive Update:**
It has been a few weeks, and things have completely turned around. The physical paper trail local management left behind was so incredibly sloppy that the higher-ups completely panicked.
Our Local Union President completely bypassed the standard timeline and jumped straight into the arena before a formal Step One meeting even kicked off. He actually tracked down my wife's cell number by messaging her mom on Facebook to get ahold of her directly. After her call with him, she told me that he said she was fundamentally wronged, that the union is going for full reinstatement and back pay, and that they will help call the unemployment office if she gets a denial. He told her to just sit tight while they close this loophole.
When you lay the paperwork they generated side-by-side, it is incredibly obvious why corporate is currently scrambling to completely redo and rewrite their entire attendance call-off policy.
The five-page packet they handed her at the plant, which she firmly refused to sign, explicitly checked the box for a conduct violation due to an "Improper Call-Off". They engineered this conduct charge on the floor because they knew her actual rolling attendance card was clean and they couldn't legally fire her under standard attendance rules. To make it worse, they rushed the write-up so fast they managed to list the wrong shift and the wrong supervisor on her final floor papers.
But then the corporate switch happened. A few days later, her formal benefits and 401k off-boarding letter arrived in the mail, which was officially carbon-copied straight to the local Union President. On this official corporate letterhead, they completely flipped the script and claimed she was terminated for a "violation of the Hourly Attendance policy for Absenteeism".
By officially documenting the internal reason as absenteeism to upper corporate and the union hall, They inadvertently admitted on paper that they executed a termination under an attendance framework where they completely ignored the mandatory progressive discipline steps required by our collective bargaining agreement. And just to cap off the absolute administrative circus of this new management team, the formal corporate letterhead they mailed out was officially dated at the top for May 6, 2027, literally post-dating her termination a full year into the future.
She is still currently listed as an active employee on ADP when she checks her 401k stuff. The facts spoke for themselves, the loophole is being closed permanently, and collective strength works.
Apes together strong ✊.
**Relevant Comments**
**OOP explains what the loophole is**
> **OOP:** Well basically, the five pages she was sent home with when they fired her at the plant checked the box for an Improper Call-Off (ICO). They tried to frame it as a conduct violation because conduct charges don't require the company to follow a progressive discipline policy, which means they thought they could bypass her safe attendance bank and fire her on the spot.
>
> But the loophole completely falls apart on two major fronts when you look at the facts. First, to legally fire someone for a real on-site conduct violation, you walk them out the exact day the supposed violation happens, not days later after hunting for time punches. Second, the formal corporate paperwork she later received in the mail completely flipped the script and explicitly listed the reason for her termination as absenteeism under the Hourly Attendance policy.
>
> Absenteeism is strictly governed by a mandatory progressive discipline policy in her collective bargaining agreement. By officially documenting the internal reason as absenteeism to upper corporate, they inadvertently admitted on paper that they executed an attendance termination while entirely skipping the mandatory warnings and steps required to legally fire her under the contract.
**Commenter 1:** So basically, they wanted a reason to fire her immediately, and they chose a conduct reason, because that doesn't require progressive meetings and follow ups. It's supposed to be like "You threatened to knock someone's teeth in, and they fired you on the spot for your conduct"
But then they realized that wouldn't work. Because they didn't fire her on the spot... they fired her after the fact. So they changed their story to their own higher management. It wasn't conduct, it was because of absenteeism.
But this just means they are back to problem 1, you can't fire someone for one incident, you have to go through the process. Which they didn't do. And now there is official paperwork for two different reasons, neither of which actually make sense, so it looks pretty strongly that the real reason isn't stated, and is likely an illegal reason.
> **OOP:** now you see the utter incompetence this company displays... after spending I think it was 70 million to acquire the brand
**Commenter 2:** Why did they want to fire your wife so bad?
> **OOP:** That was actually the main question the union president had. All of her attendance issues were spread out over a period of three years, and by any reasonable metric, she’s a good employee. That’s probably why he started the conversation by telling her straight up that she had been wronged.
**Commenter 3:** reinstated with back pay from May 2026 to May 2027 when she was fired?
> **OOP:** from May 2026 till whenever she’s reinstated, the 2027 date is managements typo not an actual date
**Commenter 4:** for full reinstatement and back pay, what's your wife grievance case step? did she go through the hearing yet? any mediation?
> **OOP:** She hasn't even had a solid Step One yet. The Local Union President actually spent two days trying to track down her number through her mom before she finally texted him to call at his convenience. He called that afternoon and told her straight up that she'd been wronged, and he mentioned reinstatement and back pay. Other than that, there hasn't really been time for any real mediation or anything like that. It had been about two weeks since she was walked out when he finally got ahold of her, and it’s been about three weeks total as of two days ago. There hasn't really been time for the full wheels of bureaucracy to turn, which is why I’m just hesitantly excited and wanted to share the good news I do have.
[Update #2](https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/s/Hklko6A7dD): **June 6, 2026 (eight days later)**
**Update #2: Fired Over a Clerical Error**
**TL;DR / The Situation So Far**
My wife, a union worker, at the Corning Correlle plant, was wrongfully terminated when local management tried to bypass the standard collective bargaining point system, inventing a conduct charge on the floor over a protocol-compliant call-off. Security logs explicitly show she called in before her shift, stating "Tardy" because she was out of PTO while providing a definitive return date of "NSD" (Next Scheduled Day).
The strategic landscape completely shifted this morning. Both the Plant Manager and the Union President have now explicitly admitted that she was fundamentally wronged and that the initial attendance policy interpretation was completely botched. Despite openly confessing to the error, the company is still floating a standard, lowball "compromise" offering her preferred shift layout back but completely refusing to pay a single cent of back pay for the time missed due to their own administrative negligence. While she is choosing to accept this offer simply to secure immediate household income and shift stability, make no mistake: this is a tactical decision for our household, not an absolution for their corporate negligence.
This penny-pinching tactic makes perfect sense when you look at the severe financial strain trailing the parent organization. Right now, global law firm Jones Day is aggressively suing the private equity parent firm and its glass portfolio brands in New York Supreme Court for $9.6 million in unpaid legal bills.
The court filings explicitly detail a corporate culture of "serial false promises" and financial manipulation, including an executive directive to draft a "fictitious funds flow" document to mask their delinquency. If a multi-million dollar corporation is literally dodging a $9.6 million bill to the high-powered lawyers who defend their plant operations, it is entirely obvious why local management is executing desperate, backdoor maneuvers to cheat a frontline worker out of a few weeks of earned wages.
To add absolute insult to injury, the company has actively kept her state unemployment benefits in total administrative limbo because they literally cannot tell a consistent story to the Department of Labor. When you track the literal paperwork they generated from the morning of the absence to the final termination notice, they have produced two entirely different, conflicting reasons for discharge on official letterhead:
The Progressive Discipline Form\*\*,\*\* Rewrote history three days later to process the infraction as an "Improper Call-Off (ICO)" conduct violation to bypass the point bank.
The Formal Corporate Notice, Flipped the script a third time, officially documenting the separation as general "Absenteeism" under the Hourly Attendance policy, completely ignoring the mandatory progressive steps required by the contract.
They logged it as a tardy, processed it as an improper call-off, and finalized it as absenteeism. They are stalling their responses to the state because entering these contradictory, fraudulent internal documents into a state regulatory system crosses directly into misrepresentation territory.
anyhow that's the latest thanks for the support y'all.
**Relevant Comments**
**Commenter 1:** Glad you guys are getting a resolution that works for you, it's shitty not to get the back pay though. Nice to have a heads up too that they are looking to get rid of her too. Maybe the whole family is forewarned. Wishing better times ahead for you both.
> **OOP:** ❤️ could be better but getting her job back is her main concern
**Commenter 2:** Sliding into a recession/depression is certainly the time to be practical. It would be great if the economy were looking better, but keeping a job is the most important thing you can do to weather the coming storm.
> **OOP:** I chose to believe her union pres is smarter than that though if they are making offers of reinstatement with no back pay in closed door shady meetings , they are waving the flag of please don't take this to arbitration
**Commenter 3:** Is reinstatement an option while the local pursues the grievance for backpay? It seems like the dispute lies in making her whole financially rather than returning her to work, since they’ve acknowledged their error.
> **OOP:** I doubt it this company doesn't like to pay their obligations ergo the reason for them being sued for 9.6 mil in NY supreme court for unpaid bills
**Commenter 4:** Ask the Union to approach the company with dropping the fight against unemployment in return for reinstatement without back pay. It would have to clearly indicate that the company must drop their opposition AND correct the record with UE so she can get UE for the day she was let go until her first day back to work. It's not the best option, but it would allow some financial relief for you without having to wait months for the grievance process to playout. I would guess the company probably won't let her back until she agrees to no back pay or they are forced in arbitration.
> **OOP:** The company actually can't afford to let state regulators look too closely at their paperwork right now because they can't establish a consistent reason for the firing. The termination packet they handed her on the floor logs the reason as an 'Improper Call-Off' (ICO) conduct violation, which they used to try to bypass her attendance point bank completely. But the official off-boarding letter mailed home flips the script and claims she was let go under the 'Hourly Attendance policy for Absenteeism.'
>
> Here is why that distinction matters under a union contract: an ICO conduct charge doesn't require progressive discipline steps, but an absenteeism charge absolutely does. By documented corporate admission, they processed it under an attendance framework where they completely skipped the mandatory warnings and progressive steps required by her CBA. They are keeping her state unemployment in limbo because entering these wildly contradictory documents into a state system crosses directly into fraudulent misrepresentation territory. They can't get their story straight on paper, and the union process is forcing them to look at that log error.
----
#----NEW UPDATE----
[Update #3](https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/s/KpemgCqhSl): **June 15, 2026 (nine days later)**
TL;DR of Previous Posts, My wife, a union worker at the Corning Corelle plant, was wrongfully walked out over a manufactured "conduct charge" on a protocol-compliant call-off, completely bypassing the CBA attendance point system.
The only real new update as of tonight is that her state unemployment was officially approved with absolutely zero denial or pushback from the company. For a place that supposedly fired a worker for a "conduct violation," staying completely silent when the state asks for verification is incredibly loud. They clearly realized they could not enter their messy, contradictory internal paperwork into a state system without crossing serious lines.
But as for her actual job, we are in a total standoff. Management is trying to float a compromise to get her back through the door, but their terms are completely ridiculous,
They are refusing to pay a single cent of back pay for the time she has missed due to their error. They are demanding she accept all her previous attendance checks against her. They want to keep the fraudulent disciplinary marks and write-ups active on her permanent record. Essentially, they want her back on the line, but only if she takes the financial hit and agrees to stay on an advanced disciplinary track based on paperwork they already know is wrong.
From what I gather, the Union President is completely rejecting this. He is still fighting tooth and nail for full back pay along with having her progressive record completely fixed and wiped clean of this mess.
Why they didn't deny her unemployment if they truly believed they had cause to fire her? They are trying to hold her livelihood hostage to protect local management from looking incompetent, but the union is keeping the grievances moving. Thanks again for the solidarity and support, it is keeping us going.
**Relevant / Top Comments**
**Commenter 1:**
> Why they didn't deny her unemployment if they truly believed they had cause to fire her?
Juice isn't worth the squeeze.
Paying lawyers to WIN against your wife is more expense than accepting the slightly higher Workers Comp payment amounts.
Sorry your wife was fired.
> **OOP's only comment in this update:** But to already have the union pres and the plant manager come out and say she was wronged, and the HR guy that did say he was in the wrong, I'm not seeing the brilliant play here. The union isn't going to let it go, and drawing it out is gonna get compoundingly more expensive for the company.
**Commenter 2:** Sounds like this might be headed to arbitration
**Commenter 3:** Good luck! Keep up the pressure on them and don't accept BS terms. Our company is the same way, and often once we point out how obscenely bad their documentation is they'll fight us just to waste everyone's time only to finally back down once the arbitration process begins.
**DO NOT COMMENT IN LINKED POSTS OR MESSAGE OOPs – BoRU Rule #7**
**THIS IS A REPOST SUB - I AM NOT OOP**
Show full