Workers forced to use bucket for toilet awarded $332,000 (Portland, Gaston: attorney, gated)

[SunnyKayak]

They testified that their employer, Menzies Aviation, refused to provide them with a toilet and that using the restrooms of nearby businesses wasn't a solution because they were not welcome. The men performed mechanical work at Portland International Airport.

Read more: Workers forced to use bucket for toilet awarded $332,000 | toilet, awarded, use - Gaston Gazette

[1208]

You felt the need to post this why? it is just unpleasant. why come over here from north carolina to bring this up?

[SunnyKayak]

Originally Posted by 1208

You felt the need to post this why? it is just unpleasant. why come over here from north carolina to bring this up?

It is in the news, and Portland related.

[ccjarider]

Ok, so instead of just throwing it out there - make some comment or state some
opinion.

Me - I'd use a bucket for 300k. Do not believe employers action is that big of a deal.

[Larry Caldwell]

Originally Posted by ccjarider

Ok, so instead of just throwing it out there - make some comment or state some
opinion.

Me - I'd use a bucket for 300k. Do not believe employers action is that big of a deal.

They were awarded the $332k for being fired when they complained to Oregon OSHA, not for using a bucket. It was just compensation for loss of wages.

[EnricoV]

Yeah, I sat on a jury once where an illegal immigrant was fired from a fast-food job because when she went to give a statement regarding another case (sexual harassment) she told them that her SSN was fake, and that she was illegal. The restaurant fired her when they found out she was illegal (because it's illegal to employ illegal immigrants). The stupid jury all wanted to give her like a year's salary. They thought it was the restaurant's fault that they didn't have an HR representative who went with her to give the statement, and could have advised her to not admit to being illegal. Even though they were required by law to accept the information that she had given them as it was, so had to assume she was legal.

What juries will do in this overtly liberal county is ridiculous. And it'll be even more ridiculous if they think they're getting one over on "the man."

[Nell Plotts]

In many cases an agreement is reached with Immigration to resolve the witness/complainant's status as a part of the litigation. Without a waiver an employer who hired an undocumented worker in good faith is obligated to terminate the employee. Failing to resolve this with Immigration exposes undocumented workers to criminal activity without recourse to the courts.

Menzies Aviation was sued for firing employees who filed a complaint with OSHA, not for the failure to provide adequate sanitary facilities. In today's economy how long do you think it would take for those employees to find another job? The law not only provides that the x-employees be made whole (lost wages and benefits) but also a penalty - a substantial portion of which goes to a State - to make the firing action memorable. Do I feel sorry for Menzies, a large international employer? Not at all, they knew better. They shot themselves in a very sore foot,.

[jjpop]

Originally Posted by EnricoV

Yeah, I sat on a jury once where an illegal immigrant was fired from a fast-food job because when she went to give a statement regarding another case (sexual harassment) she told them that her SSN was fake, and that she was illegal. The restaurant fired her when they found out she was illegal (because it's illegal to employ illegal immigrants). The stupid jury all wanted to give her like a year's salary. They thought it was the restaurant's fault that they didn't have an HR representative who went with her to give the statement, and could have advised her to not admit to being illegal. Even though they were required by law to accept the information that she had given them as it was, so had to assume she was legal.

What juries will do in this overtly liberal county is ridiculous. And it'll be even more ridiculous if they think they're getting one over on "the man."

Unfortunately, this seems to be the only way for regular folks to attain the American Dream, and most jurists relate to the plaintiffs in these kinds of cases.

If anyone thinks they can obtain it through hard work alone they are fooling themselves. The deck is stacked against us, and people in control want to keep it that way. It's a concerted effort to continue to erode the middle class and create a permanent under class with no financial upward mobility.

[EnricoV]

Originally Posted by jjpop

Unfortunately, this seems to be the only way for regular folks to attain the American Dream, and most jurists relate to the plaintiffs in these kinds of cases.

I quite disagree. And I think people who manipulate the system for a big payoff are not "attaining the American Dream". They'll be broke and on to the next manipulation in no time flat after they've squandered whatever settlement they got.

[Nell Plotts]

In this particular case the employer controlled the events, violated several labor laws. The complainants were entitled to be made whole and the court system something for their efforts. In almost all instances the employer had the opportunity to settle before going to court. I do not see this as workers "trying to take advantage of the system". What should the workers have done except going to court? Menzies Aviation rolled the dice and lost.

If an employer fails to pay as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act an employee is able to sue for their back wages, an equal amount as liquidated damages, their attorney fees and court costs. If they have filed a complaint with the USDL that agency will calculate what is due and give an employer the opportunity to pay without the additional monies assessed.