Fired! (not a good fit) and paraded around the office by security

[Wordy]

Why does it say that the person who posted this originally is "not a member?" I notice that sometimes, usually when a weirdo has posted something outrageous and inflammatory. All of a sudden they get the "not a member" status. I had thought this was a serious post, but maybe not?

[Weekend Traveler]

I was searching for interesting posts about employment. This one came up and shows why an organization needs a good Human Resources Department.

[annerk]

Oh please. Why don't you go mow your lawn or something.

[maf763]

Ah, another former identity comes to light.

[sinsativ]

Originally Posted by maf763

Ah, another former identity comes to light.

You noticed that too. Yeah, little too much of the Weakened Traveler in that Spring Greenery. Sad when you can't keep your lies straight. Insecurity is a terrible thing, you lean on it for comfort, the less you have, the more you need, when someone finds you out, you go crazy for more, constantly shouting, I'm not insecure, I swear to you Im not. All you have to do is put the unfortunate puzzle of this pod together, too bad not all the pieces are there.

[leira]

To a previous poster here. . .At-Will-Employment is an old doctrine that looks good on paper--b/c either party is not held by contract; however in reality the overall benefits go to the employer. There are many, many reasons why this is true. In short, unless you are under contract or union contract, any employer can fire, dismiss--whatever you want to call it--an employee at ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON--"For cause or for NO cause at all." That is it. Simple as it gets. It's problematic for too many reasons to mention here, but it is the general rule of the land in most areas for employment throughout the USA--unless the parties are under some sort of contract or union representation.

The short answer is this. In general At Will Employment doctrines allow the employee to leave without cause but they absolutely protect employers in dismissing employees without any cause! When ever employers put together something to try to place in a file re: cause of termination, and they are governed by At-Will-Employment, they are just covering themselves in case there may be some employee response--such as filing for wrongful termination or something similar, etc. But less than 10% of all wrongful termination cases are won by the employee. And it is not b/c they shouldn't be. It is just that the burden of unquestionable proof is not set forth by objective measures--and this is protected by way of the AT-WILL-Employment doctrine.
Employers DO NOT want to be held to objective measures; b/c then they can't do as they please with folks and allow for capricous actions against those they single out that are essentially doing a good or even better than good job. Under AWE, employers want the option to keep their lives as easy as possible, and thus, if they want to terminate someone for capricious reasons, basically they can, they will and they do--every single day in this country!

BTW, FYI, I am a most conservative person in many probably most ways--and I have had mixed feelings about unions, contracts, etc. But I have lived long enough to see the capricious games that go on all the time in the AWE workplace, and these games are protected by this old, old doctrine of At-Will-Employment. Now some organizations are much more fair, ethical, etc. But in all honesty, these organizations or those that have direction and power within them are too few and far between.

You have to remember too that organizations have their own lawyers and can afford to battle if they do have to go to court (though they don't want to--hence when a ex-exployee's lawyer can make an excellent enough case against them, they will more than likely settle out of court.. .), as compared with most employees, which will find the legal battles financially prohibitive as well as emotionally, psychologically, and even physically exhausting.

Any honest HR person knows about the realities of At-Will-Employment. If they are fair-minded people, the way the games are played will affect their consciences. If they are simply out to protect their own positions and that of their company's (sadly that is the case many times, but thankfully not all the time), then they will not blink an eye at such games. Administrators look for HR people that will be more like the latter than the former. Today's work environments can tend to promote those that can sear their own consciences.

Just don't be misled. Any person can be fired w/o cause for any reason at any time, unless they are under sound contractual agreement. So, when an employee begins a job in most At-Will-Employment states, he or she will sign a form that states that the information of offer and acceptance, etc will not be considered a contract and that the offer AND THE POSITION is subject to At-Will employment doctrine. They may not use those exact words; however, you will see that the offer is contingent under the employee accepting the "At-Will" postion as the governing one.

Firing does get a little bit trickier for those that have been there past the probabtionary period. Legal and HR generally want them to compile documentation in a file and show some progress of "counseling" or the like. But I have also seen appointed people dig through documentation or make documentation in order to seemingly justify the dismissal for a person that in reality is competent, talented, productive, etc look like it may have some legitimacy. Again, it is not necessary in AWE states; however, in the off chance someone will stand up to the subjective, capricious activity, afterall it is their livelihood at stake, they have something somewhere to try to help cover their butts if it goes any further.

Understand that employers and people in the work place don't necessarily have to be fair. They only things that are truly protected are those things that fall under Equal Opportunity Protection EEOC. Even then, the employee has the burden of proof to demonstrate that there has been actual discrimination--or in some cases whistle-blowing, etc. Usually that requires the help of others in the organization; and since in general, it is an "every man for himself" kind of world, a person may often be quite hard-pressed to find such inside support.

There is some honor and chivalry left in the world, but it is like finding large amounts of pure gold in city potholes and mudpuddles.

[mickey65]

I was fired from my job in mid-June, and wasn't escorted out or anything. My chicken**** boss left the office after tossing me my last check so he wouldn't have to face me.

I had a whole 40 hours of vacation time snatched away from me when I was fired, since as per the company handbook - if you're fired, any accrued vacation time is pretty much null and void.

I was denied UI when I applied and filed for an appeal. My hearing date is on Monday the 27th.

I'm pretty sure I'm going to win it since my boss "embellished" a few facts on the termination paperwork, and I have some proof via an email from a customer, and also the fact as per the company handbook, I was supposed to get annual written performance reviews - and never got one the 2 years I was there - so how can they "prove" I was capable of doing adequate work - when they never reviewed me?

I was fired for making mistakes, but the mistakes were all different and corrected. I didn't have the greatest of training either - if you can call non-stop yelling and being berated as that.

Besides the fact that what they wrote me up for, there was NO written company policies on any of it. I was learning as I went and only knew "right from wrong" when they'd write me up for stuff!

I put up with a lot of **** at this last place, and just feel I need to fight it - the lies and other things.

So I'll see what happens, come Monday. It's all going to be over the phone.

That's the way they do it in Texas, ya'll...

[Family_Guy27]

I'm surprised you even did the exit interview after being treated that way.