You didn't prove it wasn't malicious, and I don't know if it is malicious. Whether it was malicious or not was besides the point I was making.
The cement workers could of:
1. Stopped the cement trucks, made the cement harden and destroy the vehicle
2. Dump all the cement or use it as a sculpture
All of these would be malicious. You know what isn't? Taking option number 3
Take the cement truck back the facility, keep it running, inform that you left it. And leave to strike.
I'm so sick of your "you can't know and I don't know so let's assume xyz" when we 100% know the cement workers actively avoided destroying the cement. Had you know, read the article.
It supports my argument. You are a liability if you think it is okay to abandon a task in the middle of it.
In a perfect world tabzer sure. No one would leave a job in the middle of it. But the world ain't that simple chief.
So it then becomes a question of "did they midigate or reduce all possible damage that is within their control within a reasonable degree when they left"
And the answer is yes. Unless you want to tell me tabzer. That the cement workers, taking back the trucks, and keeping them running. Simitanously putting in the hands of the company, and keeping the product in a undamaged state, that doing so is malicious.
Which to me, if I had to use your example. Is keeping the food safe, for someone else to do the job. It's not irreparably damaging or destroying it. It's not dumping it on the ground. It's not eating it. it's not poisoning it.
It is simply keeping it in a spot, at the facility, in a preserving location, for someone else, who's job it is to handle it.
And if they company can't find someone else to do the job. It's the companies problem.
No it doesn't. This is literacy issue on your part, not mine.
If you think "keeping food safe" is the sole responsibility of a delivery driver,
Here's tabzer trying to do another strawman because he can't make an argument against what I said.
If the delivery driver midway through decides to go on strike. His responsibility in that position, becomes preserving the product (the food) which would alivate him of the responsibility of it, and fall back to the company.
Now if you excuse me but I've already wasted plenty of time arguing with your disgenious ass, and I've grown old of it, so don't bother replying. I won't read it.