Forced to take vacation

[marinevet]

What is the name of your state? Virginia

My employer is currently doing some temporary work shortages that have affected 11 employees. Out of those 11, 6 had all of their work come to a complete halt for, what has been projected to last for 2 weeks. 4 of us have been forced to take our 2 weeks of vacation, immediately. Of those 4, 3 of us did not have our work reduced, and the other one still had some work to do. We have been forced to take our vacation while the other's work in our place.
My theory is that they decided this alphabetically according to our last name, but us 4 have senority over 4 of the other guys that are still working. Is this legal?

 

[cbg]

Unless you are operating under a bona fide contract that says otherwise, yes, it is legal. Nothing in the law requires them to use seniority as the basis for deciding who works and who doesn't in a work shortage situation.

 

[marinevet]

Thanks for responding, cbg.
One of my buddies that also got placed on vacation called me earlier and said that one of the other guys was told to expect to look for a job because we weren't coming back. Can they lay us off, or fire us, or whatever they've got in mind and keep people who have less senority and then replace us with people who already work with the company in different positions, who also have less senority? I've been there 6+ yrs with no problems, 2 others 5+ yrs, and the other 6+yrs, all with no problems. The other guys they kept either haven't been there but 2-4 yrs, one is a boss's son (go figure), one is 10-25 minutes late for work EVERY day but he sucks up to the boss constantly, another used to work there but quit for 6 yrs and came back 1 yr ago, another has been there maybe 2 yrs. This whole thing just doesn't seem right. How can they get rid of people with no legitimate reason and keep the ones I described and replace us with others? I always thought that you couldn't be laid off unless your position was terminated. Is that not the case?

 

[cbg]

Can they lay us off, or fire us, or whatever they've got in mind and keep people who have less senority and then replace us with people who already work with the company in different positions, who also have less senority? Yes, they can. As I said, they have no legal obligation to use seniority as the basis for who goes and who stays unless you have bona fide contract (not a handbook, not an offer letter, not an e-mail from your supervisor, a CONTRACT) that says otherwise.

How can they get rid of people with no legitimate reason and keep the ones I described and replace us with others? Because the law permits it.

I always thought that you couldn't be laid off unless your position was terminated. Is that not the case? No, that is not the case. In an at-will state, which is every state except Montana and even includes Montana in some circumstances, an employee can have their employment terminated at any time and for any reason except one that specifically is prohibited by law.

I think part of the problem is semantics. Technically, "laid off" means you are still an employee of the company and subject to recall when working conditions improve. However, recently employers have been using it to mean any involuntary termination which is not the "fault" of the employee, including reductions in force and downsizing, but when they do not have any intention of calling back the employee whether for financial or other reasons. It's caused some confusion about employee rights and employer obligations.

 

[marinevet]

Well, it looks like, if the rumors are right, that we are royally screwed! You'd think that there would be laws to protect people in that situation, but like I've always said, the working people are the ones who always get screwed. Thanks again, cbg.