User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/11/2016 12:29:43 AM EDT
[#1]
The final paragraph is what gets me:
"The Detroit Free Press reporting [sic] that the valet driver, identified as 32-year-old Didarul Sarder of Warren, has worked for the company for almost 10 years and was told to get off the premises after the incident and is believed to have been fired." Mr. Sarder should be celebrated as a hero, he likely saved the victim's life by stopping the perpetrator and holding them until the police arrived. Instead it appears he was summarily fired and promptly escorted off the premises, for violating the inevitable "No Weapons" company policy that lawyers insist upon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/11/2016 12:58:22 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The final paragraph is what gets me: "The Detroit Free Press reporting [sic] that the valet driver, identified as 32-year-old Didarul Sarder of Warren, has worked for the company for almost 10 years and was told to get off the premises after the incident and is believed to have been fired." Mr. Sarder should be celebrated as a hero, he likely saved the victim's life by stopping the perpetrator and holding them until the police arrived. Instead it appears he was summarily fired and promptly escorted off the premises, for violating the inevitable "No Weapons" company policy that lawyers insist upon. Yup. Complete bullshit. The guy saved her life, BECAUSE he was armed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/11/2016 5:59:27 AM EDT
[#3]
I suppose yet another reason not to apply for the big three.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/11/2016 9:35:24 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The final paragraph is what gets me: "The Detroit Free Press reporting [sic] that the valet driver, identified as 32-year-old Didarul Sarder of Warren, has worked for the company for almost 10 years and was told to get off the premises after the incident and is believed to have been fired." Mr. Sarder should be celebrated as a hero, he likely saved the victim's life by stopping the perpetrator and holding them until the police arrived. Instead it appears he was summarily fired and promptly escorted off the premises, for violating the inevitable "No Weapons" company policy that lawyers insist upon. I have some insider news regarding this told to me by a GM senior manager. Mr. Sarder works for a valet company which has a contract with GM. He has been banned from returning to GM property, but was not fired by GM since he was a contract employee. What the valet company does, fire or relocate him, is up to them and as yet unknown. GM is not budging on their zero tolerance policy regarding firearms on GM property. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/11/2016 12:47:29 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The final paragraph is what gets me: "The Detroit Free Press reporting [sic] that the valet driver, identified as 32-year-old Didarul Sarder of Warren, has worked for the company for almost 10 years and was told to get off the premises after the incident and is believed to have been fired." Mr. Sarder should be celebrated as a hero, he likely saved the victim's life by stopping the perpetrator and holding them until the police arrived. Instead it appears he was summarily fired and promptly escorted off the premises, for violating the inevitable "No Weapons" company policy that lawyers insist upon. That's weird - the article no longer contains that paragraph or anything about the valet driver being asked to leave. Was that in another, different article? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/11/2016 1:48:11 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have some insider news regarding this told to me by a GM senior manager. Mr. Sarder works for a valet company which has a contract with GM. He has been banned from returning to GM property, but was not fired by GM since he was a contract employee. What the valet company does, fire or relocate him, is up to them and as yet unknown. GM is not budging on their zero tolerance policy regarding firearms on GM property. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The final paragraph is what gets me: "The Detroit Free Press reporting [sic] that the valet driver, identified as 32-year-old Didarul Sarder of Warren, has worked for the company for almost 10 years and was told to get off the premises after the incident and is believed to have been fired." Mr. Sarder should be celebrated as a hero, he likely saved the victim's life by stopping the perpetrator and holding them until the police arrived. Instead it appears he was summarily fired and promptly escorted off the premises, for violating the inevitable "No Weapons" company policy that lawyers insist upon. I have some insider news regarding this told to me by a GM senior manager. Mr. Sarder works for a valet company which has a contract with GM. He has been banned from returning to GM property, but was not fired by GM since he was a contract employee. What the valet company does, fire or relocate him, is up to them and as yet unknown. GM is not budging on their zero tolerance policy regarding firearms on GM property. Stands to reason, they cannot fire him, as he does not work for him. They simply tell the company he works for, he is no longer welcome on their property. They simply state, "We did not fire him", which is true. They removed him from the position at their facility and his continued employment is dependent on his employer having a position for him elsewhere. So GM did not fire him, but they may have cost him his job (splitting hairs) As if I needed another reason to NOT BUY GM, just add this to the pile. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/11/2016 6:29:37 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quote HistoryQuoted: That's weird - the article no longer contains that paragraph or anything about the valet driver being asked to leave. Was that in another, different article? An earlier version of the article had that, the last paragraph has since been edited to "An investigation is ongoing." Which makes sense, since the author originally had too much conjecture and too few facts imo. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/11/2016 6:31:39 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have some insider news regarding this told to me by a GM senior manager. Mr. Sarder works for a valet company which has a contract with GM. He has been banned from returning to GM property, but was not fired by GM since he was a contract employee. What the valet company does, fire or relocate him, is up to them and as yet unknown. GM is not budging on their zero tolerance policy regarding firearms on GM property. Thanks for the info, you continue to be a HTF treasure  . |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2016 11:48:20 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Stands to reason, they cannot fire him, as he does not work for him. They simply tell the company he works for, he is no longer welcome on their property. They simply state, "We did not fire him", which is true. They removed him from the position at their facility and his continued employment is dependent on his employer having a position for him elsewhere. So GM did not fire him, but they may have cost him his job (splitting hairs) As if I needed another reason to NOT BUY GM, just add this to the pile. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The final paragraph is what gets me: "The Detroit Free Press reporting [sic] that the valet driver, identified as 32-year-old Didarul Sarder of Warren, has worked for the company for almost 10 years and was told to get off the premises after the incident and is believed to have been fired." Mr. Sarder should be celebrated as a hero, he likely saved the victim's life by stopping the perpetrator and holding them until the police arrived. Instead it appears he was summarily fired and promptly escorted off the premises, for violating the inevitable "No Weapons" company policy that lawyers insist upon. I have some insider news regarding this told to me by a GM senior manager. Mr. Sarder works for a valet company which has a contract with GM. He has been banned from returning to GM property, but was not fired by GM since he was a contract employee. What the valet company does, fire or relocate him, is up to them and as yet unknown. GM is not budging on their zero tolerance policy regarding firearms on GM property. Stands to reason, they cannot fire him, as he does not work for him. They simply tell the company he works for, he is no longer welcome on their property. They simply state, "We did not fire him", which is true. They removed him from the position at their facility and his continued employment is dependent on his employer having a position for him elsewhere. So GM did not fire him, but they may have cost him his job (splitting hairs) As if I needed another reason to NOT BUY GM, just add this to the pile. I do not regret leaving that shitty company. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
