Is Their a Viable Case Here?

[50Cal]

I have a manager who gave an employee a really poor performance review based on lies. Due to the poor numbers in the performance review it triggered a Performance Improvement Plan which would most likely lead to termination of the employee being reviewedd.

Can the employee sue the company that employed him if his termination was due to a bogus Performance Improvement Plan? The state is Texas.

 

[Just Blue]

I have a manager who gave an employee a really poor performance review based on lies. Due to the poor numbers in the performance review it triggered a Performance Improvement Plan which would most likely lead to termination of the employee being reviewed.

Can the employee sue the company that employed him if his termination was due to a bogus Performance Improvement Plan? The state is Texas.

Why don't you fire the lying manager and give the employee another, fair, review?

 

[quincy]

I have a manager who gave an employee a really poor performance review based on lies. Due to the poor numbers in the performance review it triggered a Performance Improvement Plan which would most likely lead to termination of the employee being reviewed.

Can the employee sue the company that employed him if his termination was due to a bogus Performance Improvement Plan? The state is Texas.

Who are you in this situation? A concerned coworker?

What lies were told, who told the lies, and why were these lies told?

If the employee improves his performance according to the performance improvement plan, it sounds as if he can keep his job. Is there something about this performance improvement plan that is unreasonable?

I don’t see any legal action for him to take if he is fired either way, though - based strictly on the information you have provided here. If he fears his job is in jeopardy, he might be smart to start looking for another one.

 

[quincy]

50Cal, I just reviewed your posting history and it seems this exact same thing happened to you in 2014. cbg provided you with an answer then that is a good one for you to reread now.

Here is a link to your 2014 thread:
https://forum.freeadvice.com/threads/placed-on-performance-improvement-plan-pip-with-false-testimony.604706/

 

[50Cal]

50Cal, I just reviewed your posting history and it seems this exact same thing happened to you in 2014. cbg provided you with an answer then that is a good one for you to reread now.

Here is a link to your 2014 thread:
https://forum.freeadvice.com/threads/placed-on-performance-improvement-plan-pip-with-false-testimony.604706/

Quincy it's not the same thing at all from 2014. The current Performance Review (which PIP was based on) was scored on lies and their is massive documentation for this. Please be objective and treat this as a separate occurrence with different circumstances.

 

[cbg]

The answer, however, is still the same. If fired, it will not be a wrongful termination as defined by law and will not provide the employee with any legal recourse. Not on the facts you've provided.

P.S. Read my signature for a definition of wrongful termination.

 

[Taxing Matters]

I have a manager who gave an employee a really poor performance review based on lies. Due to the poor numbers in the performance review it triggered a Performance Improvement Plan which would most likely lead to termination of the employee being reviewed.

Can the employee sue the company that employed him if his termination was due to a bogus Performance Improvement Plan? The state is Texas.

The employee could sue, but the employee would lose unless the real reason for the company firing the employee was a reason prohibited by law. Under the law of Texas and nearly every other state most private (i.e. non government employment) is at will. The term at will employment means that both the employer and employee are free to terminate the employment relationship at any time for any reason. Originally that meant that the employer could fire an employee for literally any reason at all. However, federal and state laws enacted in the last 60 or so years now provide some reasons for firing an employee that are illegal. If an employee is fired for a prohibited/illegal reason that is known as a wrongful termination. Note that wrongful termination does NOT mean, as many employees seem to think, the the employer was wrong about the reason for termination. In other words, if an employer fires an employee for allegedly stealing, for example, it doesn't matter whether the employee actually stole from the company. As long as the employer thinks the employee stole from the company the termination is not wrongful because firing an employee for theft is not prohibited by law. Whether the employee actually stole from the company is immaterial.

So the issue for wrongful termination is not whether the employer was right or wrong about the reason for termination. But rather, the issue is whether the real reason for termination (which might be different than the reason the employer actually gives the employee) is prohibited by law.
The prohibited reasons include firing you because:

• of your race, color, religion, sex, national origin, citizenship, age, disability, or genetic test information under federal law (some states/localities add a few more categories like sexual orientation);
• you make certain kinds of reports about the employer to the government or in limited circumstances to specified persons in the employing company itself (known as whistle-blower protection laws);
• you participate in union organizing activities;
• you use a right or benefit the law guarantees you (e.g. using leave under FMLA);
• you filed a bankruptcy petition;
• your pay was garnished by a single creditor; and
• you took time off work to attend jury duty (in most states).

The exact list of prohibited reasons will vary by state. Texas is not one of the more employee favorable states in this regard.

Thus, in order to know if there is a good wrongful termination case here, we'd need to know what the employer's reason for firing the employee was. If it was a reason like those listed above then the termination is likely wrongful. If the reason was performance problems, inappropriate conduct, or even just that the employer dislikes the employee (as long as the reason for dislike is not a protected characteristic like race, religion, sex, etc) the termination is not wrongful and there is no good case to sue the employer over it.

Note that employers do not have to offer employees a performance improvement plan (PIP) before firing, have to provide any warnings before firing, engage in any particular process for firing an employee, or even tell the employee why he or she is being fired. There may be good reasons for an employer to do those things, but the law does not require it. If the employer wants, it can simply tell the employer one day "you're fired, here's your final check, now get out."

There are three main exceptions to at will employment. The first is government employment. The second is where the employee is a member of a union that has a contract (known as a collective bargaining agreement or CBA) that limits the reasons union members can be fired. The third is where the employee and employer have entered into an employment contract for some specified period of time (e.g. one year, five years, or whatever) that limits the reasons the employee and employer may terminate the employment relationship during that period. If the employer fires an employee in violation of a CBA or employment contract that is a breach of contract action, not wrongful termination.

So if the employee in this instance cannot meet the PIP the employer may fire the employee for that and it would not be illegal unless the reason the employee was put on the PIP in the first place was something prohibited by law like race, etc.

 

[Taxing Matters]

P.S. Read my signature for a definition of wrongful termination.

I don't see your signature in your posts.

 

[Just Blue]

I don't see your signature in your posts.

You don't see this at the bottom of cbg's postings?:

Two things I am tired of typing: 1.) A wrongful termination does not mean that you were fired for something you didn't do; it means that you were fired for a reason prohibited by law. 2.) The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding contract or CBA expressly says otherwise. If it does, the terms of the contract apply.

 

[Taxing Matters]

You don't see this at the bottom of cbg's postings?:

No. And if I don't see it, it's likely some others don't see it either.

 

[cbg]

I don't see your signature in your posts.

Hmmm. That's odd. I was one of the few whose signature remained after the Great Board Update of a few years back when we all got avatars. I've had it for years and it both defines a wrongful term and also acknowledges that whatever answer I had just written, a legitimate contract or CBA can override it. Maybe it's only visible on some browsers or devices.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Maybe it's only visible on some browsers or devices.

I don't see it whether using computer, iPhone or iPad, or whether using Firefox, Safari, Chrome, or Vivaldi browsers (sorry, I don't do MS explorer/Edge ). Not sure why it doesn't show up since I don't see a setting for me to hide signatures of others.

 

[adjusterjack]

It's in your profile, under "signature," not in your posts. Click on "about."

https://forum.freeadvice.com/members/cbg.61677/#about

 

[Just Blue]

It's in your profile, under "signature," not in your posts. Click on "about."

https://forum.freeadvice.com/members/cbg.61677/#about

I see it on her posts.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Not sure why it doesn't show up since I don't see a setting for me to hide signatures of others.

I found the setting under preferences. There is a check box to see signatures of others. It must now be set not to show that by default as I don't recall ever deciding to turn off that preference.