No, I think the expression it plays off of is “nothing-burger” which is more common. Like, when everyone is expecting a very bad or very good thing to happen and nothing comes of it: “Well, that was a big nothing-burger” … that and leftist online discourse calling the US “burgerland” or the burger-reich
if you are really thinking about quitting, then you should be frank and professional and make sure as shit you are using email to create some evidence as the the conversation. You should try CC’ing her boss if you don’t mind making them potentially more angry. If you have HR you could CC them. As for your email, I would phrase it in a more innocent sounding way: Boss, I would really like some clarity on what you have been asking me to do. I understand what you told me a few days ago, that you do not want me to work any extra hours, and I am fine with that if that is what is being asked of me. However, when I am assigned a new job at 16:45, this becomes impossible to complete safely or legally, along with my other duties, before clocking out at 17:00. It takes at least 15 minutes to return the forklift and return to the clock. I would really like to respect what you are asking of me, but it seems like the two things you are asking are contradictory. Last evening, you sent several jobs to me and then canceled them, and you sounded upset with me over the phone. If you could provide me with some clarity on which ask to prioritize (clocking out at 5pm or finishing jobs I have been assigned at the end of my shift) I will be sure to do whichever is asked of me.
edit: forgot to add: the point is to create some level of evidence either for an unemployment claim or wrongful termination claim. If they are asking you to break labor laws in email its an open and shut case for your as long as you save the emails
This seems like it was written by someone who hasn’t studied logic enough… There is a distinction between whether an argument is Valid or Sound… Validity has to do with whether the argument is logically consistent, Soundness has to do with whether or not the suppositions are factual or not, I believe after validity is established. You can have a valid argument that is not sound, and you can have an invalid argument in which all of the statements are truthful.