What is the name of your state?
What is the name of your state?
California.
Up until my termination, I was a server at a restaurant staffed by a disproportionate number of workers related to the head manager. Store policy holds that in order to get a day off, one must get the shift covered. I was set to be best man in a friend's wedding, and I had a note tacked up on the message board for months requesting the shift covered. I had asked nearly everyone, and the restaurant was aware of my upcoming schedule. Finally, a week before the wedding, a co-worker agreed to work for me. Several days before I left, he called me back, saying that he could no longer work for me. The manager's son -- also a server -- was now considering not coming into work on Saturday (the day of the wedding), and one of the managers was allowing him free reign to decide whether or not he wanted to work. The co-worker who had orginally agreed to work for me was being held in reserve in case the manager's son didn't come in. Now, I had gotten verbal agreement from the worker before the manager's son mentioned not working, and all I was waiting for was the manager's approval. Unless there are valid reasons to the contrary, managers must approve these shift change requests. I've never had one rejected. Is the manager's son's fickleness a valid reason to reject my request? I was completely, utterly sure that I wasn't coming in; he wasn't. Moreover, I processed my request first.
In the end, I went to the wedding, which was several hundred miles away, and I was fired. Apparently, the manager's son decided not to come in, and several workers' shifts were rearranged to accomodate him.
Basically, I tried to get my shift covered, but the manager's son got precedent over me. And when both of us failed to come in, I was fired, and he was not. That seems like an obvious case of nepotism, which is a form of discrimination, or at least preferential treatment, and therefore illegal, no? Perhaps it's only wrong morally, as I have no legal background or experience, but this just seems wrong. In this particular restaurant, a rampant undercurrent of such nepotism has been pretty constant. I can undoubtedly get other workers (fired and still employed) to corroborate my claims and provide similar incidents. So, do I have a case? At the very least, I just want to be able to use the restaurant as a reference for further employment and not be listed as "terminated."
What is the name of your state?
California.
Up until my termination, I was a server at a restaurant staffed by a disproportionate number of workers related to the head manager. Store policy holds that in order to get a day off, one must get the shift covered. I was set to be best man in a friend's wedding, and I had a note tacked up on the message board for months requesting the shift covered. I had asked nearly everyone, and the restaurant was aware of my upcoming schedule. Finally, a week before the wedding, a co-worker agreed to work for me. Several days before I left, he called me back, saying that he could no longer work for me. The manager's son -- also a server -- was now considering not coming into work on Saturday (the day of the wedding), and one of the managers was allowing him free reign to decide whether or not he wanted to work. The co-worker who had orginally agreed to work for me was being held in reserve in case the manager's son didn't come in. Now, I had gotten verbal agreement from the worker before the manager's son mentioned not working, and all I was waiting for was the manager's approval. Unless there are valid reasons to the contrary, managers must approve these shift change requests. I've never had one rejected. Is the manager's son's fickleness a valid reason to reject my request? I was completely, utterly sure that I wasn't coming in; he wasn't. Moreover, I processed my request first.
In the end, I went to the wedding, which was several hundred miles away, and I was fired. Apparently, the manager's son decided not to come in, and several workers' shifts were rearranged to accomodate him.
Basically, I tried to get my shift covered, but the manager's son got precedent over me. And when both of us failed to come in, I was fired, and he was not. That seems like an obvious case of nepotism, which is a form of discrimination, or at least preferential treatment, and therefore illegal, no? Perhaps it's only wrong morally, as I have no legal background or experience, but this just seems wrong. In this particular restaurant, a rampant undercurrent of such nepotism has been pretty constant. I can undoubtedly get other workers (fired and still employed) to corroborate my claims and provide similar incidents. So, do I have a case? At the very least, I just want to be able to use the restaurant as a reference for further employment and not be listed as "terminated."
