Wrongful Termination - Can you Sue?

[choinga]

TX

Here's a little backstory:

https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=389550

Long story short...

My sister was fired today from a childcare center because of something that my wife wrote on a Yahoo message group in response to something FACTUAL that she told my wife.

The senior management at the childcare recommended to my sister that she spank her child with a wooden spoon as a punishment for her two year old scratching other kids.

Appaled, my sister mentioned something to my wife last week who was incensed and posted on a Yahoo message board titled "My Subdivision - Mother's Group" (my subdivision left on purposely).

She stated the facts - that mgmt suggested that my sister spank her kid with a spoon and an opinion - that she was disgusted by these suggestions.

The owner of the childcare responded directly to my wife saying she was going to sue her for slander. Well, that's not going to happen - truth is the defense here - she can't sue for slander if what was said is true and there are several people who could corroborate my sister's story.

At any rate, my sister was terminated today because of the events that transpired - ie; her telling my wife who posted to the Yahoo message groups.

I know TX is an at-will state - but this can't be right? To me, this has wrongful terminitation written all over it, but I can't find a similar case to compare it to to tell for sure.

My sister doesn't have much money but is willing to sue this woman/company on principle alone. Are there lawyers who take contingent fee cases like that specialize in employment/labor law. Even where I live in Austin, TX - they seem difficult to find (and most that I've found look very pricey).

Finally - my wife wants to contact our local media and give them the facts and let them decide if they want to run with it - is this something that could come back and bite her? I'm all for it - the lady is a nutcase with people posting all over the internet, including former employees, on what a disaster this place is.

Any ideas?

 

[cbg]

What law are you claiming was violated?

A wrongful termination does not mean one that is unfair, unexpected, a violation of company policy, or for something the employee didn't do. Unless there is a specific law that prohibits the employer from firing the employee for the reason they did, it is not a wrongful termination.

 

[choinga]

Good point.

That's what I was grasping for I guess. It just doesn't seem right, and I know that certainly doesn't imply it's illegal, for a company to tell you that they are terminating you because of something that your sister-in-law wrote on a Yahoo message board - whether it's true or not.

Does that make sense? I guess my question was - IS there a law that applies here - or is it that if you live in an at-will state that unless its discriminatory that they can fire you for anything - even something as asinine as the aforementioned?

 

[Beth3]

IS there a law that applies here No.

Your sister griped to your wife about work and your wife made the unfortunate decision to post it all on a public website. I'm afraid that was a bad call on your wife's part.

Your sister may want to contact your State's regulatory agency that license's day care centers to inform them about the suggestion she spank a child with a spoon however.

 

[choinga]

That's what I thought. It's unfortunate that my sister didn't file a report to CPS or any other such agency because if she would have and they fired her for this then she likely could legitimately file for wrongful termination based on the fact that they were firing for reporting an incident.

One thing I read that was very interesting though:

Texas courts generally do not favor wrongful termination suits, and many of these lawsuits are unsuccessful. In many cases, courts will defer to the employer's reasons for termination (because no cause is needed under the employment-at-will doctrine) unless the employee can bring strong evidence of ulterior motives that demonstrate wrongful termination.

So, if an employee CAN bring evidence of an ulterior motive (in this case, they just didn't like my sister or were angry that she told my sister-in-law, etc...) that there is legal precendence for a case. Understandably, it would be a challenge...

 

[cbg]

It's a little bit broader than just discrimination, but no, I can't think of any law that applies here. Your wife made a bad judgement call here but, while it might be unfair that your sister was fired because of it, there's no law being violated.

Firing your sister because they didn't like her wouldn't be illegal either. The "ulterior motives" being described in this case relate to illegal reasons.

 

[VeronicaLodge]

Good point.

That's what I was grasping for I guess. It just doesn't seem right, and I know that certainly doesn't imply it's illegal, for a company to tell you that they are terminating you because of something that your sister-in-law wrote on a Yahoo message board - whether it's true or not.

Does that make sense? I guess my question was - IS there a law that applies here - or is it that if you live in an at-will state that unless its discriminatory that they can fire you for anything - even something as asinine as the aforementioned?

in an at will state you can be fired for any reason or no reason just not an illegal reason. you can be fired for wearing the wrong colored shoes or because you smell or just simply "because"

 

[choinga]

Thanks folks...damn laws!!!

Couple final things...

What about this?

...my wife wants to contact our local media and give them the facts and let them decide if they want to run with it - is this something that could come back and bite her? I'm all for it - the lady is a nutcase with people posting all over the internet, including former employees, on what a disaster this place is.

I can't see how there is any legal issue here - state the facts and if someone wants to investigate, they do. Anyone?

Finally, what about collecting unemployment? My sister is going to apply for it and it wouldn't suprise me a bit if this lady were to challenge - or whatever you do - for her not to get it. Is this a possibility? Can an employer simply say that they don't want to pay it and then the onus is on the the person who was terminiated to file a lawsuit or such to collect?

 

[mlane58]

Thanks folks...damn laws!!!

Couple final things...

What about this?

...my wife wants to contact our local media and give them the facts and let them decide if they want to run with it - is this something that could come back and bite her? I'm all for it - the lady is a nutcase with people posting all over the internet, including former employees, on what a disaster this place is.

I can't see how there is any legal issue here - state the facts and if someone wants to investigate, they do. Anyone?

Finally, what about collecting unemployment? My sister is going to apply for it and it wouldn't suprise me a bit if this lady were to challenge - or whatever you do - for her not to get it. Is this a possibility? Can an employer simply say that they don't want to pay it and then the onus is on the the person who was terminiated to file a lawsuit or such to collect?

Have her apply and if the employer contests and she loses, have her appeal, the burden is always on the employer to show that an employee was terminated for misconduct. BTW, an employer doesn't get to decide if an ex-employee recieves benefits, that is up to the state.

 

[choinga]

"the burden is always on the employer to show that an employee was terminated for misconduct"

Yeah, my sister called me earlier and said she pulled out some obscure parapgraph in the employee handbook where it said that employees aren't supposed to discuss cirriculum, etc... with anyone outside the company and is attempting to use that as 'misconduct', I guess. I don't see how that is going to fly as my sister was sharing what the director and her other senior member suggested to her on how to treat her child outside of the childcare. Apparently this lady has had many ex-employee's take it all the way to court on her because she doesn't want to pay for it after letting people go for unjust reasons.

Should be interesting...

 

[seniorjudge]

...
Yeah, my sister called me earlier and said she pulled out some obscure parapgraph in the employee handbook where it said that employees aren't supposed to discuss cirriculum, etc... with anyone outside the company and is attempting to use that as 'misconduct'
...

If it is in the employee handbook, how is it "obscure"?

 

[quincy]

Unless this childcare center has a history of abusing children, or has questionable child discipline practices, I doubt the media would be interested in investigating the center or doing a story on it. Unless a wooden spoon was actually used as discipline in the center, or unless using wooden spoons is standard disciplinary practice at the center, the mere suggestion made by senior management to your sister, to use a wooden spoon to control her child at home, would generally not be newsworthy.

 

[choinga]

If it is in the employee handbook, how is it "obscure"?

From the dictionary: not clearly seen or easily distinguished

I'm referring to the 'easily distinguished' part. My sister read the paragraph to me and in no way does it seem to be written for this type of (mis)use. It's more relevant to the sharing of teacher cirriculum, etc... and not - hey, if we tell you as a parent NOT as a teacher to spank your kids - if you tell someone then we'll fire you for that.

Everything is open to interpretation of course, but I doubt very seriously that this implementation of this rule as grounds to fire someone was not intended for this purpose.

EDIT: just got a little more detail for my sister as I'm helping her with her unemployment application...

So, basically her employer wouldn't even tell her why she was letting her go. She simply terminated her and then referred her to "pages 24 and 25" of the employee handbook for explanation. WTF???

On pages 24 and 25 there's a number violations listed and after the violations it says that its recommended corrective action for violation of group 2 standards is termination. examples are; dishonesty of any kind, violating conflict of interest or failing to participate in required orientation or other training programs, etc... none of those are applicable here and the ones I didn't list are even less applicable.

 

[Beth3]

...my wife wants to contact our local media and give them the facts and let them decide if they want to run with it - is this something that could come back and bite her? I'm all for it - the lady is a nutcase with people posting all over the internet, including former employees, on what a disaster this place is.

I can't see how there is any legal issue here - state the facts and if someone wants to investigate, they do. Anyone?

There's always the possiblity the day care owner will sue for slander - which will cost you a lot of money in legal defense fees, even if the suit is unsuccessful. Besides, the last time your wife "went public," it sure didn't do your sister any good. If there are issues with child care, then it's best to report them to the State regulatory agency and let them investigate. If it's as bad as everyone says, then the State can pull their license.