Fired for complaining about working conditions in online forum

[quincy]

OSHA has recognized both of the issues MidwestTech complains of here as problems employers should be proactive in addressing, because of the number of employee injuries and illnesses reported. In other words, MidwestTech is not alone in his concerns.

These are just not problems OSHA policies cover. There is no requirement for employers to increase breaks or provide other relief.

 

[Taxing Matters]

These are just not problems OSHA policies cover. There is no requirement for employers to increase breaks or provide other relief.

And, at least for his/her legal question, that's the important thing. What he/she is complaining about is not an OSHA violation. Nor would OSH Act protect him against retaliation for the online posts the OP made regarding how the employer was treating him.

Sure, it'd be nice to have a better schedule with breaks. OSHA and other worker organizations certainly encourage that. But no federal law requires the employer do it.

 

[quincy]

And, at least for his/her legal question, that's the important thing. What he/she is complaining about is not an OSHA violation. Nor would OSH Act protect him against retaliation for the online posts the OP made regarding how the employer was treating him.

Sure, it'd be nice to have a better schedule with breaks. OSHA and other worker organizations certainly encourage that. But no federal law requires the employer do it.

Right. I hope MidwestTech has gotten that message by now from our posts.

 

[MidwestTech]

You went on a national forum that, as far as you knew when you posted had no other employees of the company, to get a feel for whether people thought your position was good.

I've been on that forum for a long time. At the time of my posting, I knew that the forum's membership included Chicago event workers. I did not know which other Chicago event workers were going to be working that event with me. But I did know that there was a strong possibility that other Chicago workers scheduled to work that event with me, would be on the forum reading my post.

 

[quincy]

I've been on that forum for a long time. At the time of my posting, I knew that the forum's membership included Chicago event workers. I did not know which other Chicago event workers were going to be working that event with me. But I did know that there was a strong possibility that other Chicago workers scheduled to work that event with me, would be on the forum reading my post.

Please read the NLRB decision I linked to earlier. What you did on the forum would not be considered protected concerted activity.

 

[Taxing Matters]

I've been on that forum for a long time. At the time of my posting, I knew that the forum's membership included Chicago event workers. I did not know which other Chicago event workers were going to be working that event with me. But I did know that there was a strong possibility that other Chicago workers scheduled to work that event with me, would be on the forum reading my post.

First of all, I assume that event had people working for employers other than the employer who hired you. Those people working for other employers at that event don't count because the protected activity is coordinating with other employees of the same firm to collectively improve their pay or working conditions. So the fact that some other event workers at other firms might have participated in that forum doesn't help you. Second, you likely knew or could have found out who the other workers for your firm (if there were any) were that were working the event and could have reached out directly to them to coordinate on working conditions. But you didn't do that. You instead reached out to a forum in which most, if not all, the people responding would not be employees of your firm. That pretty much shows your goal was not to coordinate with other employees of the employer you worked for. You were soliciting input from anyone, employee or not.

While you may not like it, I see nothing for you to pursue here under the NLRA with the facts given. Feel free to consult a local employment law attorney on that, but I think you'll find the lawyer will tell you the same thing.

 

[quincy]

In addition, MidwestTech did not identify his employer by name. It would be hard for him to successfully argue that he was bringing fellow employees together to induce action.

 

[MidwestTech]

In addition, MidwestTech did not identify his employer by name. It would be hard for him to successfully argue that he was bringing fellow employees together to induce action.

The other problem is that I did not explicitly call for any action. I did not ask that other employees quit or call the employer to complain or do anything. One person on the forum (not an employee) explicitly called for action when she said that the employees should confront the employer with a copy of Illinois labor laws, thereby pressuring the employer to create better conditions. Well, I guess that, in the future, I'll have to be more explicit with my "call to action".

 

[quincy]

The other problem is that I did not explicitly call for any action. I did not ask that other employees quit or call the employer to complain or do anything. One person on the forum (not an employee) explicitly called for action when she said that the employees should confront the employer with a copy of Illinois labor laws, thereby pressuring the employer to create better conditions. Well, I guess that, in the future, I'll have to be more explicit with my "call to action".

It does help to let people know what your intentions are.

With luck, however, the jobs you have in the future will not have any issues that require a call for action.

Good luck.