Pelican Parts Forums - Grammar and punctuation errors (missing comma) cause and lose a lawsuit!

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)

- Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/)

- - Grammar and punctuation errors (missing comma) cause and lose a lawsuit! (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/1100336-grammar-punctuation-errors-missing-comma-cause-lose-lawsuit.html)

Grammar and punctuation errors (missing comma) cause and lose a lawsuit!

I think this is great.

A bunch of delivery guys in won a lawsuit to get OT pay. The reason they won was because of poorly written policy.

https://bangordailynews.com/2017/03/15/business/a-missing-comma-keeps-oakhurst-dairy-labor-lawsuit-alive/

Quote:

PORTLAND, Maine — A Maine labor dispute appeal decided on Monday hinged on perhaps the nerdiest, most contentious punctuation debate of all — the Oxford comma.

The U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of a group of Oakhurst Dairy truck drivers, who sued the company’s owners three years ago for unpaid overtime wages. The decision overturns an earlier U.S. District Court judgment in Oakhurst’s favor, keeping alive the dispute over $10 million in overtime wages for 75 Oakhurst drivers.

“For want of a comma, we have this case,” reads the opening line of First Circuit Judge David Barron’s 30-page decision.

The Oxford comma, also known as the serial comma, is used just before a conjunction, such as “and” or “or,” to separate the last item in a list of three or more things.

For example: “He bought milk, toast, and eggs.”

It has long served as fodder for heated debates on punctuation and grammar. Oxford comma advocates argue the punctuation mark provides clarity and avoids confusion. Detractors say the conjunction serves as enough of a delineation between items, and if the lack of a comma causes that much confusion, the sentence should just be written with more clarity.

Serial comma opponents would write the above sentence as “He bought milk, toast and eggs.” Proponents of the serial comma would argue that while that might not seem unclear, it would cause problems in a sentence like, “He brought his parents, Bill and Sue.”

Are his parents named Bill and Sue? Are Bill and Sue two entirely different people he brought along with his parents?

In the Oakhurst labor dispute, much of the focus is on a sentence in state law that describes how workers aren’t eligible for overtime pay if they’re involved in “the canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing, packing for shipment or distribution of: (1) Agricultural produce; (2) Meat and fish products; and (3) Perishable foods.”

Note, there’s no serial comma between “shipment” and “or.”

The question this ruling hinged on: Is “packing for shipment or distribution” a single overtime-exempt activity, or are “packing for shipment” and “distribution” two distinct activities that are both exempt?

The drivers read the passage to say that people who take part in packing for either shipment or distribution are exempt. Distribution wasn’t its own category as written, and because drivers don’t do any packing for either of those purposes, the law doesn’t apply to them, the drivers argued. Also, if “distribution” was meant to be its own exempt activity, why isn’t it written as a gerund (word ending in “-ing”) like all the other activities in the list?

When the district court originally ruled in favor of Oakhurst, it argued the law was clearly intended to count distribution as a distinct, exempt activity, meaning the drivers had no legal right to overtime wages.

The appeals court’s decision disagrees, arguing that the passage is too ambiguous, so the state’s wage laws must be “construed liberally” by the courts, giving more credence to the drivers’ interpretation of the passage.

In effect, a federal court ruling was overturned because of a poorly written sentence and a missing comma. Still, there’s good reason the state left out that comma. The Maine Legislative Drafting Manual states that, when drafting a law, “don’t use a comma between the penultimate and last item in a series.”

The sentence could have been made more clear if items were rearranged as “storing, distribution or packing for shipment of […],” if that was the law’s intention, in order to avoid the forbidden Oxford comma.

With the appeals court’s decision to overturn, the case likely will see future court proceedings before the lawsuit is ultimately decided.

The above article was included because it addressed both of the issues, the Oxford comma and the issue due to using the wrong form of the word distribute.

According to this article the issue was settled ~ a year later. The drivers won.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/08/584391391/maine-dairy-drivers-settle-overtime-case-that-hinged-on-an-absent-comma

I grew up learning the Oxford comma. I didn't realize until years later that any other way was acceptable to anyone.

I have a brother who is a master of this sort of thing.

You'll never convince the people whose cases have been won due to his mastery of the use of the English language that punctuation doesn't matter.

_

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norm K (Post 11430044)

I'm not always 100% correct on all written or spoken word because I'm sometimes lazy, but I'm thankful for the education that I received from the school that I was in for the 5th through the 8th grade so that I know the difference and know when I'm being lazy. They hammered this grammar and syntax into us. I can still diagram almost all of most sentences.

I have been deposed over my interpretation of a table in a medical textbook. It's a chapter on disability ratings for injuries, and the placement (or in this case, the lack thereof in this particular table) of commas is confusing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by masraum (Post 11430046)

I can still diagram almost all of most sentences.

Hated that, but it was far more effective than whatever methods they're employing these days.

_

I just thought the use of a comma before the conjunction was an age thing. My dad still uses it, but I'm pretty sure it was out of style when I started writing. Dad and I bought went to the same prep school, one that's pretty serious about English.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noah930 (Post 11430055)

i depose doctors every week in workers’ comp cases regarding such tables. i find these tables to be incredibly confusing and poorly written, particularly with regards to ratings involving range of motion deficits of extremities

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick Lee (Post 11430072)

Yes, I went to a private school for 3.5 years, and those were just the right years, because it was when they were teaching a lot of foundational stuff in math and English. If I had gone earlier or later, it probably wouldn't have served me as well.

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/what-is-the-oxford-comma-and-why-do-people-care-so-much-about-it/

Quote:

The Oxford (or serial) comma is the final comma in a list of things. For example:

Please bring me a pencil, eraser, and notebook.

The Oxford comma comes right after eraser.

Use of the Oxford comma is stylistic, meaning that some style guides demand its use while others don’t. AP Style—the style guide that newspaper reporters adhere to—does not require the use of the Oxford comma. The sentence above written in AP style would look like this:

Please bring me a pencil, eraser and notebook.

Unless you’re writing for a particular publication or drafting an essay for school, whether or not you use the Oxford comma is generally up to you. However, omitting it can sometimes cause some strange misunderstandings.

I love my parents, Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty.

Without the Oxford comma, the sentence above could be interpreted as stating that you love your parents, and your parents are Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty. Here’s the same sentence with the Oxford comma:

I love my parents, Lady Gaga, and Humpty Dumpty.

Those who oppose the Oxford comma argue that rephrasing an already unclear sentence can solve the same problems that using the Oxford comma does. For example:

I love my parents, Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty.
could be rewritten as:
I love Lady Gaga, Humpty Dumpty and my parents.

In college I worked for the California air resources board. (Ironically, I had a modified car). We wrote all our reports per California legalese punctuation. That rule was to never use a comma before “and” at the end of a written series. I think this was how I was taught in engineering school as well.

When I worked in engineering (Lockheed and Boeing) I often got push-back on this. But generally, I didn’t see consistency in this rule with documents we put out. Including to the FAA.

So, for argument, I just checked another government agency, the FAA. Looking at their documents it appears they do follow the comma before “and” in a written series rule.

It’s incredible how law found another way to be consistently inconsistent. I’m glad I retired last year.

Interesting. I was taught as an English major that the comma was not necessary before a conjunction when used to connect 2 words like 'Bill and Sue', or a string of nouns.

If it's good enough for a newspaper editor, it's good enough for me.

I think that case should be appealed to a higher court that can overlook minutiae and see the picture for what it is. IOW, I agree with the last paragraph in Steve's post.

If I'm remembering correctly, it was one of my grade school teachers who hammered the Oxford comma into my brain. It has served me well. Now get off my lawn...

I survived Catholic school and Sister Benedict's English class......I'd kiss her ass if'n it weren't moldy and and wormy.

"Let's eat grandma!!"

"Let's eat, grandma!!"

Punctuation and grammar are important.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins (Post 11430692)

"Let's eat grandma!!"

"Let's eat, grandma!!"

Punctuation and grammar are important.

Not the same, but great examples. We are talking about the confusion, or lack thereof, regarding conjunction.

BTW, would anyone be confused if I said, "Grandma let's eat!" Of course that does call for a comma, but I think the point is made, especially WRT to the court case. Deciding on the basis of a written brief and a comma is beyond ridiculous.

Someone got paid off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ramonesfreak (Post 11430185)

This is among the myriad reasons I do not see work comp.

While the language may be confusing, there is one thing that the courts didn't take into consideration, or if they did, I missed it in the article.

Legislative intent. I think Texas courts use this approach to resolve unclear or confusing language.

I always followed the Chicago Manual of Style which calls for the Oxford serial comma. If I was editing anything that came in without it, it got added. There can be too much confusion.

“The giant panda eats roots, shoots, and leaves.”Vs the drive by panda that “ eats roots, shoots and leaves.”

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 11430597)

Interesting. I was taught as an English major that the comma was not necessary before a conjunction when used to connect 2 words like 'Bill and Sue', or a string of nouns..

What style manual did you use? Most schools use Chicago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 11430597)

"Bill and Ted's excellent adventure!" No comma before the conjunction if it's not a list of more than three items.
"Me, myself, and Irene." If following the oxford comma rule, then there should be a coma before the conjunction, because it is a list of three (or more) items.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 11430723)

Deciding on the basis of a written brief and a comma is beyond ridiculous.

Someone got paid off.

Unless the author(s) of the policy testified as to what they intended it to mean, then it means what the punctuation says it means. Heck, even if they had testified, the policy means what the punctuation says it means.

_

What's interesting: While us old Farts are talking about Grammar the kids have dispensed with it.

Recently I had a discussion with a younger person over the use of the question mark.
- She was convinced it was redundant and served no purpose. :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norm K (Post 11430840)

That's what I fairly debate. I sat as a juror on a murder trial. You should have heard the interpretations in that courtroom. Due to my behavior, I was dismissed, so fortunately it was not on me to decide on guilt. BTW, he was found guilty and I'm happy that wasn't on my doing, right or wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norm K (Post 11430840)

Absolutely.

Language is an agreed upon form of communication. It has rules, upon which we have agreed. Those unable to follow those rules will eventually, and must eventually, suffer the consequences. Neither ignorance of those rules, nor laziness in following those rules, should be rewarded. Allowing such would only serve to ensure the slow degradation of our ability to communicate.

I hate to digress, but we are "blessed" with a few of our very own examples of this right here on PPOT and, more egregiously, over on PARF. One particular young man stands out as our shining example of the breed - he is notorious for his lack of punctuation and bad grammar. He blows off any criticism he receives for this laziness and ineptitude regarding his grammar and punctuation as no more than distracting attacks on the "points" he attempts to make, assuming, in his ignorance, that he has left his critic in the dust with nothing better over which to criticize him. His rapier wit has won the day, and the stodgy old farts here, unable to keep up, resort to low-brow criticisms of his grammar and punctuation...

Those criticisms (emanating from those stodgy old farts), are, of course, not unfounded - he reads and writes at less than an acceptable fifth or sixth grade level within the public school system in which I was taught. And yet, somehow, he attained to a college degree of some kind. That absolutely baffles me - how on Earth??!! Clearly, he was pushed through by an endless succession of public school "teachers" who were terrified of his failings - because, in our modern public "education" system, those are seen as their failings. So they passed him along, with him unable to competently do the work at any stage of the game, at any grade level. All the while putting smiley faces and gold stars on his below passing work, telling his parents how "bright" and "creative" he was for pursuing his "alternate" path...

So, yeah, people like him are writing important documents to which others will be held accountable. Legally accountable, by people who know the "rules". The low intellect laziness of these authors, which has been brushed off as "unimportant" criticism leveled by "stodgy" old critics, is going to come back to bite these organizations, these companies, in the pocketbook. As well it should.

I minored in English. Granted, often hard to tell here, where I do get kind of lazy at times. One of the most important influences in my life was a prof in junior college, a trained engineer, who told me "the brightest engineer in the world is useless if he cannot communicate his ideas. Learn to communicate..." So I did. And I wrote for two college papers, and have a fair number of internally published papers at my old employer - all of which are imperative that they be clearly understood and thereby executed by the end users of the processes they describe. Many of those papers have a bit more riding on them than someone's overtime pay, by the way... So yes, grammar and punctuation have demonstrated themselves to be rather important, at least to me. "Your mileage may vary"...

How many of you have drafted an amendment, or a bill to be enacted into law?

Cleverly worded language, even punctuation, some of which might be deceitful, is all over the place in legislation. Sometimes it has to be explained one way to one member, yet another way to a different one.

I've done it. I'm not proud of it, and is one reason why I got out of it. That's why legislative intent is key.

Sorry I moved away from the grammar aspect, which I'm sure Steve did not want. I apologize.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sc_rufctr (Post 11430941)