I’m thinking about quitting.

I work with a forklift moving stuff between several warehouses. My manager doesn’t want me to do extra hours. Fine, then I want to go home exactly when my shift ends.

My shift ends at 5 pm. Before going home I need to take the forklift to a garage 10 minutes away and to recharge it. Then 5 minutes to walk back to the office where I clock out.

On my last shift, I received 2 assignments at 16:30, starting at 16:45 because trucks weren’t already there. Obviously, even doing just one of them means extra hours will be made.

I informed my manager sending her a message with our notoriously unreliable smartphones (issue for another day I already complained about). First I asked her if she wants me to log extra hours today. No, she said, then I told her if I have to do even just one of those assignments, extra hours will be logged in. Then she called me, accusing me of bothering her for the last 10 minutes and demanding to know where I was. I was already waiting for the trucks at 16:35, when she called me, but trucks were not there.

She then sent and deleted several other, smaller assignments at a rapid pace. As soon as I was starting one she would delete them. This happened 3 or 4 times.

She settled for a small one and even with this one I logged in 10 extra minutes, leaving my workplace at 5:10 pm.

What I want to tell her:

Are you aware you give me contradictory orders? If my shift ends at 17:00 and I need 15 minutes to take the forklift to the garage, if you give me an order at 16:45 I’m obviously going to do extra hours. You have clearly stated you don’t want to pay me any extra hour, which is fine by me, but then why do you keep me sending orders at exactly that hour? If you don’t want to pay me any extra hours my last assignment has to be finished at 16:45. Otherwise I’m logging in extra hours.

I don’t see how this can end well, but something has to be done. It’s not the first time she’s reacted so emotionally and I’m tired.

Before I quit I’d like to try and see if a rational conversation with her is possible. Then at least I tried.

A coworker who was the reason why I was moved to another department (she is friends with the manager) changed departments herself and now I sometimes have to work with her.

First time she saw me at her new position she greeted me as nothing happened, as she wasn’t the reason why I was moved laterally. I replied with a non effusive hi.

I don’t engage in non job related conversations with her, if I have to work with her I just ask her in a neutral voice where is what I need and proceed to do my job. Otherwise I avoid her because I don’t trust her. I don’t have to work with her whole shifts or every day, which is good.

The incident I mentioned on my first paragraph happened 2 years ago and I still remember it enough not to like that person. I don’t know if more mature folks would have already forgotten about it but I cannot. Am I holding an unhealthy grudge? I mean I’m happy if I don’t have to see her.

every time I want to talk to my boss about something work related I ask for a private conversation, because this is the way it should be, at least I see it that way.

I work with several forklifts and mistakenly though 2 were broken because I couldn’t start them. Because we all need the forklifts and my boss was on holiday I started looking for a mechanic within the organization, always informing the substitute boss as well.

Regular boss comes back from his holiday, asks me to come to the office, asks me point blank in front of everyone else to hear what I was thinking to do that. 2 secretaries and 3 coworkers heard the whole story.

I presented my side of the story and after a short discussion my boss a mechanic and me went to check the forklifts were the mechanic started them, so I was wrong all along.

I apologized to them both and repeated I wanted to save time, because boss was on holidays and I wanted to have all forklifts in working condition, because we all use them extensively.

If I was the boss in this situation I’d have conducted the conversation behind closed doors, not in front of the whole office. It feels like mobbing and makes it difficult to trust this person.

Is this a red flag or am I overreacting?

Permanently Deleted

federal legislators includes representatives (HOR) and senators.

one could be tempted to think that on a fptp system the representative actually represents his district and not his party, something that should be clearer on a senatorial level.

However, there are no limits to political donations in the US afaik, which I guess means the rich and powerful ones can invest as much as they can to denigrate the other side, usually a democrat (correct me if wrong).

I don’t know if there are like party federal committees that raise money nationally for or against abortion, death penalty, tariffs… and then each party decides how to allocate that money. I don’t know if there are staffers in each party that decide which candidate is compliant enough to follow blindly what the federal committee decides and is not going to be a dangerous maverick because he actually has an independent moral compass.

Is it possible for local candidates to run against their own party and actually win? Like a republican that lost his party’s nomination for a district, then becomes an independent and actually wins against his former party?

Or are HOR races much more local than I imagine and each representative campaigns exclusively on local issues, raises money only in the constituency to be invested exclusively in the district’ election?

Do candidates have to give back the money that was given as a donation that wasn’t actually used to try to win an election?

Can a politician actually pretend to raise money for a campaign and then simply pocket it?

I have the feeling that most members in the HOR are careerists that usually go with the motions and repeat the official position of their party and only selected individuals are brave or reckless enough to say out loud and clearly what they believe in (extreme example, Marjorie Taylor Greene). Most representatives, when pressed upon a problematic issue will first give you an elusive answer, then contact their party for instructions about what the correct answer is. This applies to both democrats and republicans.

I have no idea if federal senators are also mostly followers and not leaders.