Just when I hould be celibrating the rug gets pulled out.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Not unless there's a written policy, or an express provision in his employment contract.

All he's due is unused vacation time and pay for the hours worked, but not yet paid.

The only trick is that he has to be paid through the day they hand him the final check, since they're the moving party in the termination.

Tody was pay day. They gave me an additional check which covered my wages for monday through thursday and they gave me money for my sick leave and vacation pay which hadn't been used. Still this sucks. Those bastards should be forced to pay severence pay like in France.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


you have to really think about your situation and prospects before I'd recommend the vacation.

This is the best advice. When you will settle in a new job, it will be time to think about revenge (if you are still motivated), but now it would make you waste a lot of energy for a low priority item.

The carreer of a qualified salary is very long, and the sooner you learn where the potential problems are, the better. You are learning the hard way a very important point : there is a saying that the boss has the subordinates he deserves; the reverse is true as well. Even if the economy sometimes oblige you to accept a job with a not perfect boss, never forget to continue your search until you find the boss you deserve. Fortunately they exist, and they make the life at work a stimulating consistent pleasure.

Do not feel guilty, you are not. This was a worthy experience : how not to manage people.

Good search.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by notyoueither
That storey sucks to hear, Michael, but it's not directly equivalent is it?

Here, Oerdin does everything he is told, gets the supervisor to agree to what he is doing, then gets blamed for the supervisor's incompetence by the supervisor as way of covering ass (that sounds like it to me).

He's been an employee for a few months, and the alleged issues are all about performance and client relations. There are no specific discriminatory issues, or legal protections.

She was a multi-year employee, with an uncontested history of exceptional reviews, and bona-fide questions of selective policy enforcement, illegal retaliatory discharge, and violation of statutory rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Yet there was no case at all, because she was an at will employee and couldn't prove retaliation or discrimination.

In other words, besides length of service and proven work history, there were some theoretically compelling theories of illegal actions, but still no case.

He is not dealing with the sharks that run a company and who want to abuse a diabled or ill employee, he is dealing with a middle management disaster and would be doing the firm a favour by getting that to the attention of the directors of the company. Not to mention that if there are grounds for wrongful dismisal, which to me it sounds like it, then he could come out of it with some compensation.

Wrongful discharge for all intents and purposes does not exist in most of the US, including California. The only "wrongful" discharge that is actionable is one that provably violates employment law, or an express term of an employment contract.

Normally, company directors never see, nor care about this sort of thing, except in small companies - since here you have one department getting work from another, it sounds like the scale of employer (my friend's ex-company had about 100 local area employees and 500 nationwide) where this sort of thing goes directly from HR to outside counsel, and my experience from both side is that companies will immediately close ranks around any internal *******, because it's the outside guy you already got rid of who's "causing trouble" by making a legal issue of it. The lawyers enforce that - it doesn't matter what the guy has done, unless the canned employee has it all on tape with a dozen witnesses, deny it all.

At the bottom line, the a-hole gave faulty instructions, in an inappropriate manner, and then deprived Oerdin of employment as a consequence of the failure of the project. I'd be looking for a lawyer to sue that sucker personally for whatever I could find to sue him for.

And in California, you'd never find a lawyer to do that, because it's established law that an individual acting in connection with his employment (the *******) can not be sued personally for his work related actions. The angle of contract interference between the employer and employee has also been tried and shut down. What happens if you do it is (a) demurrer and dismissal with prejudice; (b) sanctions by the court against the plaintiff's attorney; and (c) a suit (with a certainty of summary judgment due to the successful demurrer) by ******* for malicious prosecution, if he so chooses.

I've been down both sides of this road in both public agency and private employment. Employees have virtually no recourse. At will is just that - with only certain statutory and express contractual exceptions, an employer can terminate employment "at any time, for any reason or no reason" - and that's a quote from the state supreme court.

I also got sued personally on the employer side - I didn't supervise the guy, but I had authority to recommend his termination, and I got sued for slander, breach of contract and contract interference. The end result was that the plaintiff fled the state to avoid pending legal action, the lawyer was sanctioned twice and had most parts of the suit dismissed within sixty days of filing on two demurrers, and two years later, the lawyer had to ask the courts permission to dismiss his client's remaining case, because the client hadn't paid or communicated in over six months, and his lawyer didn't want to be responsible for case management.

At least, if I wanted either revenge or redress, and I would, that is what I would do.

If you can pro per it, you could try, but employee side litigation is a brutal and fruitless path in this state.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Oerdin


Tody was pay day. They gave me an additional check which covered my wages for monday through thursday and they gave me money for my sick leave and vacation pay which hadn't been used. Still this sucks. Those bastards should be forced to pay severence pay like in France.

Yeah - the bias has really swung the other way. The 70's to mid 80's were really out of hand on the employee side, but now it's the opposite.

It sucks, and no company I ran would terminate anyone without some form of real internal due process and investigation by senior management, but despite it's "liberal" reputation in so many areas, and a run amok worker's comp system, California is practically 19th century in many labor law areas. Minimum wage and family leave act are just about the only exceptions.

[notyoueither]

Well, as the owner of a company where I do not directly supervise all employees... I would be very interested to find that someone between me and the guys on the line was protecting himself by canning productive employees to protect his own ass.

The best way to get that to my attention, if I had managed to avoid all the other signs, would be the lawyer giving me a call to say we had a problem. At that point I would A: circle the wagons, B: find out the truth and deal with it so that it did not happen again. C would be doing the decent thing for a guy who got screwed by my mistake (hiring or promoting a-hole).

[HershOstropoler]

Sorry to hear that, Oerdin.

How long have you been at the company? I'm not sure whether you mentioned it, do you have a written work contract?

[FrustratedPoet]

Wow Oerdin I'm sorry to hear about this.

Hang in there buddy. It sounds like you could really use that vacation.

[DAVOUT]

It should be noted that, as often, the primary problem is not the law or the corporate policy, it is the weak middle management who hides incompetence behind shameless injustice towards a subordinate.

But the top management is also to blame 1/ for not controling the behaviour of the middle management and 2/ for the poor organization of the company which accepts orders without proper specifications opening avenues for clients with bad faith.

A significant portion of the bad reputation gained by the capitalism is not the result of the capitalists attitude concerning the employees but simply and regrettably of the lack of professionalism and incompetent management.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
He's been an employee for a few months, and the alleged issues are all about performance and client relations. There are no specific discriminatory issues, or legal protections.

She was a multi-year employee, with an uncontested history of exceptional reviews, and bona-fide questions of selective policy enforcement, illegal retaliatory discharge, and violation of statutory rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Yet there was no case at all, because she was an at will employee and couldn't prove retaliation or discrimination.

In other words, besides length of service and proven work history, there were some theoretically compelling theories of illegal actions, but still no case.

This is basically it. I worked there for a little over six months and if this chick can't get justic then I'm sure I will just be wasting my time by filing a law suite.

The one bit of good news I can think of is I asked, half sarcastically, if this meant I'd be getting a bad refrence and my boss said they don't give refrences. They just varify dates of employment. The funny thing is they called all of my refrences when I joined but they don't give refrences? I've heard of this before (I think there was a CG thread) but I didn't know that was my (ex)employers policy.

[Spiffor]

Indeed, what if Oerdin wrote a fine letter to the big bosses (or at least A-hole bosses), so that they can see who's incompetent and who should get fired ?
If the bosses have some brains, they'll see immediately who's hardworking and who's weaseling out...

[FrustratedPoet]

If they seek references they must realise the value of them. To not give any out themselves seems a bit anti-social towards the others in their business community - more evidence as to what a bunch of ****** they are. Oh well, at least you're spared the further shafting of an unjust negative reference.

[devilmunchkin]

oerdon..i'm sorry..that really sucks. maybe you should move back to S.D. where everything you know is and strike out from there? or did you already buy that home? I'm sure your family will understand because from what you tell us, these guys completely used you as a scapegoat. I wish you could sue the pants off them, but MTG has a good point...most everything wasn't in writing. if worse comes to worse, maybe you could go back into the army for a while?

[Solly]

Having increased severence pay, (say for example as in France) would certainly decrease turnover of staff. Companies knowledgeability of how difficult/expensive it is to remove staff in those conditions, however, would render them less likely to take staff on in the first place. As a result, less flexibility.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by devilmunchkin
oerdon..i'm sorry..that really sucks. maybe you should move back to S.D. where everything you know is and strike out from there? or did you already buy that home? I'm sure your family will understand because from what you tell us, these guys completely used you as a scapegoat. I wish you could sue the pants off them, but MTG has a good point...most everything wasn't in writing. if worse comes to worse, maybe you could go back into the army for a while?

I didn't buy the house (thank god) I just got pre-approved for the loan. I am hoping to move back to San Diego. I looked on Monster.com and I found a few geology job in San Diego and I noticed that the U.S. Costums office is hiring for San Diego Harbor (not something I'd normally apply for but the money is good). Right now I'm just going to rewrite my resume and start spamming every employer I can think of.

[Solly]

I hope you're a successful one.