Age Discrimination/Wrongful Termination

[Isis1]

"be here as long as EE has...and you'll understand."

You don't beat someone up when they're down. I'm sorry, but I'll never understand mean people.

he apologized.

 

[eerelations]

"be here as long as EE has...and you'll understand."

You don't beat someone up when they're down. I'm sorry, but I'll never understand mean people.

I never beat you up.

I gave you good, clear, accurate and correct advice (and spent a good amount of my own personal time doing so, too), all very politely. How does this make me an a$$ who is mean and should be ashamed?

When I mistakenly thought you were responding with sarcasm, I advised you that I thought your sarcasm was inappropriate. When I realized my mistake, I apologized. Immediately, before you even knew what I'd mistakenly said!

Is this what makes me an a$$ who is mean and should be ashamed? Politely telling someone her sarcasm is unwarranted and then apologizing for saying that? How? Please explain.

 

[rppearso]

Im not sure what the point of these anti discrimination laws are when they are nearly impossible to prove, any manager with any sneakyness seem to be able to easily dodge any of these laws simply by not having to disclose anything (or being really vague with there disclosures), my friend has this same problem being apart of the national gaurd, when he is applying for a job they dont have to tell him why they did not hire him so its impossible to know if its because he is in the gaurd and subject to deployments or other things that could take him away from work without them being able to terminate him for it. Employment laws seem to be really weak in this country compared to europe. These laws really dont offer any protection and give almost all the control to the managers unless the manager really drops the ball and does something stupid to cause an EEOC action.

Im not even sure why this section exists in the legal forums as all the different things I have read no one really ever has legal standing unless your manager walked up to you can called you a ni**er and you have a voice recording of it and thats realy lame protection.

 

[pattytx]

rppearso, what is the point of you being here if all you're going to do is stir up political controversy? I think it's pretty obvious that since you've only made 157 posts in over 4 years, you aren't actually helping posters with their questions.

 

[rppearso]

rppearso, what is the point of you being here if all you're going to do is stir up political controversy? I think it's pretty obvious that since you've only made 157 posts in over 4 years, you aren't actually helping posters with their questions.

As I said most of any of the other posts go something like this: You have no legal ground and you are totally screwed, go down to the soup kitchen and hope to God someone hires you and stop complaining. How useful is that. From the posts I have read over time all of these EEOC laws have no teeth, employers can pretty much do what ever they want and get away with it unless they do something WAY over the top. So all im saying is whats the point, are you just waiting for someone to come on here and say I have video tape evidence of an employer making a racial slur because thats all that seems to get an EEOC action and even then as another poster said it can take up to 18 months, by that time the poster will have already gone into forclosure and/or be homeless. Its the same story with the military section and child support section. Anyone trying to get legal relief seems to get the same answer: your totally screwed go set up a tent in central park and hope they arrest you because at least you will have food to eat, this nation is going to be comming upon a rude awakening pretty soon.

 

[pattytx]

Anyone trying to get legal relief seems to get the same answer: your totally screwed go set up a tent in central park and hope they arrest you because at least you will have food to eat, this nation is going to be comming upon a rude awakening pretty soon.

That is just not true. There are plenty of questions in the Employment Law forums where we agree that the employer has violated the law and we give the poster the options for legal recourse.

Where did you come from, anyway?

 

[rppearso]

That is just not true. There are plenty of questions in the Employment Law forums where we agree that the employer has violated the law and we give the poster the options for legal recourse.

Where did you come from, anyway?

I was orignially on here for military advice which I got very nasty comments and finally some good advice but either way I have seen very few cases where the OP has meaningful legal recourse UNLESS the employer did something WAY over the top.

 

[pattytx]

So you are not an attorney, or an HR or Payroll professional with decades of practical experience. Got it.

 

[commentator]

What we do here is a lot of "reality orientation counseling." People post here, asking about things they would like to believe are true. We tell them, within our scope of reasonable experience and knowledge, what is really true. Hopes are dashed. Feelings are hurt. In my long experience, people tend to believe they have more rights than they do. "They can't do this to me!" is the cry. Sadly, they usually can. There are very few guarantees, very few "rights" for employees in the area of jobs, employment, and wages.

 

[cbg]

What's more, whether the same laws benefit the employer or the employee depends on the job market. The at-will doctrine has not noticably changed in the past decade, nor have most of the major Federal laws changed markedly (and what changes there have been, mostly benefit the employee) but ten years ago the at-will doctrine strongly benefited the employee, not the employer. Today it is the other way around. That is not the fault of the posters here; it is a result of the changed economy. The pendulum has swung, and it will swing back again.

Would you prefer that we told the posters that yes, the employer was acting illegally and they could sue, when it was NOT true? Would that be helping them?

 

[ecmst12]

But you know what we don't see and kind of doubt we will ever see much of? Employers coming on here and saying, "Can he just up and quit without any reason or notice? That's NOT FAIR!!!"

 

[rppearso]

What's more, whether the same laws benefit the employer or the employee depends on the job market. The at-will doctrine has not noticably changed in the past decade, nor have most of the major Federal laws changed markedly (and what changes there have been, mostly benefit the employee) but ten years ago the at-will doctrine strongly benefited the employee, not the employer. Today it is the other way around. That is not the fault of the posters here; it is a result of the changed economy. The pendulum has swung, and it will swing back again.

Would you prefer that we told the posters that yes, the employer was acting illegally and they could sue, when it was NOT true? Would that be helping them?

Your right, its just very unfortunate that the federal gov does not create more aggressive laws to deal with issues that people have with employers. I would be curious to see what would happen if unemployment hit around 50% if the gov would step in and put there foot down. It is kind of turning back into the days where there were company stores and when they were done with you they just threw you out on the street, that is definitly not first world quality of life. I guess my point is there is really not much "law" when it comes to employment, "at-will" is pretty much lawless except for a very narrow band of things.

 

[Zigner]

I guess my point is there is really not much "law" when it comes to employment, "at-will" is pretty much lawless except for a very narrow band of things.

Nope - at will is well defined. Furthermore, why would it be ok to infringe on the rights of one set of people in favor of another set?
(Don't answer, it was a rhetorical questions)

 

[rppearso]

Its not about infringing upon rights its about the fact that there are no safety nets in our society, if you are thrown out on the street and do not find another job quickly you can be totally screwed. This country does a very poor job of taking care of its down traudin thats why laws favoring the employee are so important. Its no about my rights vs your rights its about basic human rights and the right to life.

 

[Zigner]

So, you would rather infringe upon the rights of the employer instead of the employee, right?

See, it IS about infringing upon the rights of others.


But, this thread is not the place for this discussion...