"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
...

On 8/7/2016 12:58 AM, Sky wrote:

>
> Bove has now mentioned at least thrice that where angela sporadically
> worked, its so-called "manager" is/was a 16-year old kid. Something is
> especially wrong with this 'scenerio', and it seems to be quite
> questionable? What company any where (in the USA) would allow a
> non-adult (under 18!) to be responsible for the entire place with no
> adult supervision!!?? Somehow, this seems to be to be a matter of gross
> liability should something awful happen (robbery, murder, theft, etc.)
> while this under-age "manager" was in charge. Yet another 'story' from
> bove.

Certainly sounds questionable, but I've seen similar situations in the
past. State law now prevent it in many places.


>
> If my child had ever been unable to contact me while at work because
> calls were not allowed to phone home, I'd have a huge hissy fit and
> politely confront the owner and/or adult management to let them know of
> my extreme dissatisfaction and concerns

Now that is funny. Most everyone is telling Julie to stop hovering, let
the kid fend for herself and the like. Isn't this doing exactly the
opposite? As stated already, the "child" is an adult.
-----------

lol

--
http;//www.helpforheroes.org.uk