• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

No reason given at will termination

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Jasoli12

Active Member
What is the name of your state? State of Oregon

If this is wrongful termination I sure could use some help in what I can do.
I recently (late April of '19) was let go from my job of e.5 years. I was not told why I was terminated only given last check and escorted to my car to leave the property in which the GM said I was trespassed.
I filed unemployment and get it uncontested by the employer. When they from the Employment office asked about why I gotta go I told her no reason given at will termination per Oregon state law. When she asked why I
What I thought i got terminated for i said I can only presume it was because i WOULD NOT enforce an illegal policy the GM asked me to enforce. The new policy was to kick off and not allow homeless people on the property EVEN if they had money to spend at the Dennys on premises.
I not only would have to profile then and deem them homeless but then would have to kick them off the property because they WERE simply homeless and last I checked, homeless are still humans the do need to eat and Dennys is open 23 hours and have inexpensive items that are very filling.
I was not going to get sued for enforcing this illegal policy so I did not enforce it. Is it too late to do anything about this? Is this c
Something I can call the ACLU about and lodge a complaint of aviation of a certain class of peoples civil right being infringed on? Is this a wrongful termination? If so, how do I go about using for the financial damages caused by this. Not only did I
I lose my lively hood, I also lost my marriage over this which has now escalated to my wife not letting me see my son and these damages are so great I dont even think there is a dollar amount that can even come close to compensating all that happened because of this. Please help.
 


Taxing Matters

Overtaxed Member
Most private employment in the U.S. is "at will" which means the employer may fire you for any reason except for a few reasons 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. Often being fired for refusing an employer's directions to do something illegal would violate public policy and would be a wrongful termination.

Here's your problem though: it is not illegal under federal or Oregon law for the restaurant to kick out people it thinks may be homeless. Under federal law, it is illegal for a business to discriminate against customers because of their race, color, national origin, religion, or disability. Under Oregon law it is illegal for a business to discriminate against customers because of their race, sex (including pregnancy), sexual orientation, national origin, religion, marital status, physical or mental disability, or age (18 years of age and older). So being homeless is not protected from discrimination under federal or Oregon law. So unless the locality where the restaurant is located has a law that prohibited discrimination against the homeless (and so far as I can tell no Oregon city or county has such a law) the restaurant was within its rights to kick out homeless people.

It is not unusual to see that in businesses like Denny's, where homeless people may try to stay all night in there where it is warm and out of the weather. But restaurants aren't there to be substitute housing. It may be cold hearted for the business to kick them out, but it was almost certainly legal for the business to do.

And that means your termination was not wrongful if the reason for it was refusing an order from your boss to kick out homeless people.
 

Jasoli12

Active Member
Most private employment in the U.S. is "at will" which means the employer may fire you for any reason except for a few reasons 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. Often being fired for refusing an employer's directions to do something illegal would violate public policy and would be a wrongful termination.

Here's your problem though: it is not illegal under federal or Oregon law for the restaurant to kick out people it thinks may be homeless. Under federal law, it is illegal for a business to discriminate against customers because of their race, color, national origin, religion, or disability. Under Oregon law it is illegal for a business to discriminate against customers because of their race, sex (including pregnancy), sexual orientation, national origin, religion, marital status, physical or mental disability, or age (18 years of age and older). So being homeless is not protected from discrimination under federal or Oregon law. So unless the locality where the restaurant is located has a law that prohibited discrimination against the homeless (and so far as I can tell no Oregon city or county has such a law) the restaurant was within its rights to kick out homeless people.

It is not unusual to see that in businesses like Denny's, where homeless people may try to stay all night in there where it is warm and out of the weather. But restaurants aren't there to be substitute housing. It may be cold hearted for the business to kick them out, but it was almost certainly legal for the business to do.

And that means your termination was not wrongful if the reason for it was refusing an order from your boss to kick out homeless people.
I didnt not work for the Dennys, I worked for the hotel property that the Dennys was within. There are only a few places that are 23 hours and that was one of them. The fact I A) had to profile the fact they may or may not be homeless then B) Tell the "homeless" they could not travers the property to go get said food I feel is taking away their right to pay for and obtain food so they can continue to survive. The right to eat HAS to be a civil liberty. The restaurant was not the policy maker, it was solely the GM of the hotel property because he simply did not like them as they were a "lower class citizen. The entire thing was discriminatory against class of people infringing on their rights to Life, LIBERTY and their pursuit to happiness which to them mean actually being able to have a hot meal. As far as the Dennys not wanting them there all night, which they only tried to do in the old winter nights, they had their policies for that. They had a time limit to eat, drink their coffee and go. If they did try to stay in there too long then they is when I would tell them it is time to go, you have had MORE than enough time to eat now they have to go. Profiling to deem homeless is not right but not allowing them to enter the property in order to pay for a hot meal is beyond a reasonable policy it is down fight denying a class of people their civil liberties. I suppose it is time to call and see what the ACLU has to say about this policy and see how they tell me to handle it.
Had it not been an illegal policy the unemployment department would have deemed that a viable termination thus not approving my unemployment. I suppose my next step is to call the ACLU and see what they say about discrimination on people JUST because they are a lower class person.
 

Taxing Matters

Overtaxed Member
The right to eat HAS to be a civil liberty. The restaurant was not the policy maker, it was solely the GM of the hotel property because he simply did not like them as they were a "lower class citizen.
Sorry, but while one has a right to eat, a person does not have the right to enter on to someone else's property to do it. A restaurant or hotel may keep anyone off the property for any reason except for those reasons I listed in my previous post. And since being homeless is not a protected class, the hotel may legally keep them out.

The fact that the unemployment office approved your claim doesn't mean that the termination was wrongful. You get unemployment comp unless you committed gross misconduct. The vast majority of people approved for unemployment comp were not wrongfully terminated.

Contact the ACLU if you like. They'll be sympathetic to homeless people, but they'll tell you that there is nothing they can do to help you on a wrongful termination claim here.
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
I will also point out that there is no requirement in your state that you be given a reason for your termination.
 

Jasoli12

Active Member
Sorry, but while one has a right to eat, a person does not have the right to enter on to someone else's property to do it. A restaurant or hotel may keep anyone off the property for any reason except for those reasons I listed in my previous post. And since being homeless is not a protected class, the hotel may legally keep them out.

The fact that the unemployment office approved your claim doesn't mean that the termination was wrongful. You get unemployment comp unless you committed gross misconduct. The vast majority of people approved for unemployment comp were not wrongfully terminated.

Contact the ACLU if you like. They'll be sympathetic to homeless people, but they'll tell you that there is nothing they can do to help you on a wrongful termination claim here.
And it makes no different the owner of the property didn't make the policy but the GM did because has a bias against them just because they are homeless. This is not a long standing policy and has only been around for a few months now. Also, if :bums" were not allowed on the property one would have to put signs at the entrances stating such a policy same as the no trespassing .
 

Jasoli12

Active Member
I will also point out that there is no requirement in your state that you be given a reason for your termination.
I know this hence why I stayed it was a no reason given at will termination but that cam still be found as an wrongful termination if it is covering the real reason that would have been a wrongful termination had they said what they were fired for.
 

PayrollHRGuy

Senior Member
I know this hence why I stayed it was a no reason given at will termination but that cam still be found as an wrongful termination if it is covering the real reason that would have been a wrongful termination had they said what they were fired for.
The GM did not break the law. The policy was not illegal. Your termination was not illegal. There is no requirement to give you a reason for the termination.
 

Jasoli12

Active Member
The GM did not break the law. The policy was not illegal. Your termination was not illegal. There is no requirement to give you a reason for the termination.
Okay well I didn't start the question. With I deserve this I put if this is. I got an answer and I'm moving on I have a better job now anyway and they sell to pay for unemployment
 

Jasoli12

Active Member
The state pays unemployment. This is funded by a tax the employer pays.

If you have a new job you will not be getting unemployment.
Yes, I know I dont keep getting unemployment after I get a new job. The employer still has to pay out a portion to the state, if they didnt then they wouldn't contest anything.
 

PayrollHRGuy

Senior Member
Yes, I know I dont keep getting unemployment after I get a new job. The employer still has to pay out a portion to the state, if they didnt then they wouldn't contest anything.
An employers tax rate is adjusted depending on the payments made to former employees of the company. Your short claim is unlikely to have little effect on their tax rate.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top