On 8/4/2016 11:26 PM, Cheryl wrote:
> On 7/26/2016 3:48 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> She'd get dressed, drive to work, only to have them tell her that she
>> wasn't needed that day. When she tried to call ahead of time to see if
>> she was needed, they told her that she wasn't allowed to call them. Or
>> on the few occasions that she did work, they'd tell her that she had to
>> stay late but wouldn't allow her to call and tell us this. This of
>> course left her dad and I wondering where she was. The only thing we
>> could do was drive there and see if her car was outside. He did call
>> once to see if she was still there and she got in trouble for him
>> calling.
>
> I'm sorry Julie but I find this very hard to believe. You might have
> answered it later because as you can tell I'm not replying to a current
> post because I've just been too busy. They wouldn't allow an 18 year
> old to call home to say she has to work late? No fk'n way is that
> happening anywhere.

Indeed, bove shares pure BS fiction again! Does bove ever "write" (er,
post) anything that is believable?? Rarely!! All too often, bove has
demonstrated she has no credibility, whatsoever. Bove's cockamamie
'scenario' as described this time is only another example, among many
hundreds (thousands?). It is astounding any employer would not allow a
(minor?) employee to make a brief, one- or two-minute telephone call to
inform parents/family they had to work longer than anticipated and would
be home at a later time than expected.

Besides, bove's whole "story" above is debunked because without doubt
Angela has her own cellphone (smartphone, whatever) and could've used
that device to phone home, or texted, emailed, IM'd, whatever! No older
teen these days is without a cellphone - certainly not bove's spoiled
issue, poor thing (sigh).

Sky

================================
Kitchen Rule #1 - Use the timer!
Kitchen Rule #2 - Cook's choice!
================================