Ron C. #5

[Whisperer]

Busy Lady....we are not discussing a lie here. I was told that RC's employment was not important to finding Haleigh. For some reason, things get distorted. I was implying IF he were lying, then he could be accused of lying at other times. LYING was not part of this discussion. A moderator stated his employment is not relevant. That was what I was discussing.

...I beleive that $10.00 was the amount given in 2005 for Superior Const. A poster (?)extended it to this recent job in making a point of how little he makes to support the family. I was attempting to make my point, rather ineptly, about a cert crane operator makes very good money. When I questioned certification, the house of cards fell.

It winds up he did operate a rolling crane. Subject supported by PDM....no salary mentioned.

I am not going to defend myself about this subject any longer. The PTB have made their statement that Ron's employment and salary is not relevant to the case.

 

[pirate]

but IIRC, he had only been working for PDM for a short time, right?

Barely 90 days.

 

[pirate]

Busy Lady....we are not discussing a lie here. I was told that RC's employment was not important to finding Haleigh. For some reason, things get distorted. I was implying IF he were lying, then he could be accused of lying at other times. LYING was not part of this discussion. A moderator stated his employment is not relevant. That was what I was discussing.

...I beleive that $10.00 was the amount given in 2005 for Superior Const. A poster (?)extended it to this recent job in making a point of how little he makes to support the family. I was attempting to make my point, rather ineptly, about a cert crane operator makes very good money. When I questioned certification, the house of cards fell.

It winds up he did operate a rolling crane. Subject supported by PDM....no salary mentioned.

I am not going to defend myself about this subject any longer. The PTB have made their statement that Ron's employment and salary is not relevant to the case.

Apparently neither are the criminal records of the paternal grandparents or their long term abusive relationships that are supported by public records.

 

[Pondering Mind]

Barely 90 days.

Thanks!... that what I was thinking. Do we know what his longest length of employment (at one place) has been in the last 6 yrs?

 

[Bobbisangel]

---------
How long do you think a company is suppose to have a job vacant when the job is needed to help run the company? Forever? If Haleigh was found in the first 24 hours deceased, the company at most would have a berevement period of three days to a week for immediate family. That is customary. How long is fair before the company has to have someone do that job?

Fair would have been for the company to uphold the agreement that they had made with Ron in the first place. It was agreed that he come back to work on a certain date and that is when he planned to return. It was fair until the company went back on their agreement and fired Ron. He didn't ask them to keep his job open forever....they agreed on a certain date.

 

[TxLady2]

Fair would have been for the company to uphold the agreement that they had made with Ron in the first place. It was agreed that he come back to work on a certain date and that is when he planned to return. It was fair until the company went back on their agreement and fired Ron. He didn't ask them to keep his job open forever....they agreed on a certain date.

That is not what the statement from the officials at PDM stated... there was no agreement between them, and he had not bothered to talk to them in all those weeks. He could have called them on Friday to tell them he was planning to come back on Monday, but it was too late. They had already filled his position. I see no reason to doubt what was in PDM's statement... but Ron could have told his attornies anything. Doesn't make it true.

 

[Emeralgem]

Fair would have been for the company to uphold the agreement that they had made with Ron in the first place. It was agreed that he come back to work on a certain date and that is when he planned to return. It was fair until the company went back on their agreement and fired Ron. He didn't ask them to keep his job open forever....they agreed on a certain date.

Could it be the company has a probation policy that we are not aware of? I know many companies do.
If he was there less than 90 days, and things didn't go as per agreement between Ron C and the company, perhaps that is WHY he was terminated...
IDK...Just saying..

And in reference to personal information. I would think IF your daughter is missing and you have not been cleared as a suspect, your life should be an open book... Nothing should be held back..

 

[DotsEyes]

IF he was lying about his job, he could be lying about other things. Lying in a criminal case can be discussed, no?

Maybe he was just lying to MC about his big crane operator job and he is really the answer service. But you know what? MAYBE he is a certified crane operator.

I can't agree with you on this one. MC said he was a crane operator. I haven't seen where he told LE a lie about his work or that he ever mentioned it at all. So what's the relevance?

 

[cajun]

http://www.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2009-04-15/story/haleighs_father_loses_his_job

I noticed on PDM's website a long metal building

​

PDM Bridge

and these are the type of cranes that are used in there. rolling overhead cranes.

 

[Dr. Know?]

I think the relevance would be if a person lies or not. Or just maybe, a timeline?

 

[Whisperer]

Thank you cajun for the PIC...that really helps.

 

[Whisperer]

DotsEyes...I do not have quote buttons so I can't post your writing.

I was NOT discussing RC lies. I was discussing the job. The quote of mine you posted in your last post was directed to the moderator who had responded to my post about my inquiry of RC employment. She wanted to inform me talking about his job was not relevant to finding Haleigh...I had responded with a justification which was to verify if RC was telling the truth, that's all.

 

[lonetraveler]

Fair would have been for the company to uphold the agreement that they had made with Ron in the first place. It was agreed that he come back to work on a certain date and that is when he planned to return. It was fair until the company went back on their agreement and fired Ron. He didn't ask them to keep his job open forever....they agreed on a certain date.

----------------
I have not seen a statement from Ron's ex-employer about having an agreement with a return date.

 

[raeann]

I am trying to catch up with this thread so I may need some clarification here about what we are allowed to discuss. In past cases, i.e. Ramsey, McCann, Caylee there has been endless discussion of the parents jobs, income levels, past and current places of employment, colleagues comments, etc. In the Caylee case, this has extended to her grandparents, uncle, great-grandparents, great uncles etc. In Haleigh's case, there has been intense scrutiny of her mother's past jobs, her private medical records, the background items in pictures taken of her, her lack of jobs, how much she was paid, even what she did and said at her former jobs. The Sheffield and Griffis family jobs have been discussed in depth, including the fact that someone from WS even called Marie's place of employment to report a RUMOR that was totally unfounded in an attempt to get her fired from her job.

I am more than willing to abide by whatever rules are deemed to apply in this case, but I don't have a clue right now what rules apply or which group of people that they are being applied to at this time. I am truly asking for clarification here so that I DON"T get in trouble, so please don't yell at me or give me a time out. :angel:

 

[stilettos]

Fair would have been for the company to uphold the agreement that they had made with Ron in the first place. It was agreed that he come back to work on a certain date and that is when he planned to return. It was fair until the company went back on their agreement and fired Ron. He didn't ask them to keep his job open forever....they agreed on a certain date.

If they had a signed documented agreement....then i am sure we will see a legal case for damages or reinstatement. IIRC there was a probationary clause in the original hire contract and that would have been in effect at the time. They do have corporate attorneys and I am sure they availed themselves of that advice before terminating employment.

 

[Whisperer]

Stilettos....There policy is public knowledge. I linked it once.

They can terminate w/o cause in the first six months.

 

[Whisperer]

Here is just one page...I have seen others that state the first six month probation is arbitrary and one can be dismissed w/o cause...not on this link though. It may have been changed. No probation is mentioned on this, however, it is interesting.

https://www.siteprosecure.com/com/pdmbridge/www/index.cfm?event=terms

 

[Pondering Mind]

Atherella, Since you stated in the Crystal thread that Ron had submitted to several drug tests while working at PDM, I was wondering if perhaps you had a link to that info? I have heard differing info (which is rumor, so not posted here) but I'm sure since you posted, you know this to be a fact? that Ron took and passed several drug tests, that is? TIA!

 

[stilettos]

Atherella, Since you stated in the Crystal thread that Ron had submitted to several drug tests while working at PDM, I was wondering if perhaps you had a link to that info? I have heard differing info (which is rumor, so not posted here) but I'm sure since you posted, you know this to be a fact? that Ron took and passed several drug tests, that is? TIA!

Wonder if someone actually has a copy from the lab of the certified test?

 

[Pondering Mind]

Wonder if someone actually has a copy from the lab of the certified test?

Me too...and as I stated I have heard differently in regards to PDM even giving drug test. Since these threads are fact only, I am anxiously awaiting the results. Don't know how I missed them stilettos.