>>><snip>
>>>>Since it's my scenario to play with, let's say that it's a fact that the tattler had personal motives to want to make the employee pay for their unethical behavior. Do I know the thoughts of the tattler? Well, my scenario, so I guess I could, but no, maybe we dont know exactly what they are thinking, only that it's obvious from their actions that it was personal. Like seeing someone slip on ice and fall. You can't say 100% for sure that it was the ice that caused the fall, but you know.
>>>
>>>Jay, if you are talking about what I think you are talking about then honestly that is not a firing offence. People spend time at the cooler, talking rubbish with friends, having a smoke, or other endless time wasting activities while on the job. Is there anyone in the world that works 8 solid non-stop hours (besides the poor bastards in slave labour) that can truthfully say they never wasted a minute of company time? And if you have wasted a minute you are as guilty as a if you wasted a day. You're just subjectively deciding how much time wasting is ok. BS.
>>
>>I don't think that the "time-wasting" was the issue.
>
>I think it was Mike. iirc it was about spending company time doing non-company related things. That's assuming we are all talking about the same thing ...

No, I would assume it was about using company time/property to improperly access an online account. If the issue was strictly about time-wasting then Person A needs to send Person B a big "MIND YOUR OWN FREAKIN BUSINESS".