biscuitninja_IHB
New member
Well the wife just got her walking papers. She was dismissed for among other reasons, "hearing impairment". Wow, i didn't know these people were this dumb.
-bix
-bix
awww crap....
- Thread starter biscuitninja_IHB
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
In both writing and verbal. Wow, as usual, these people are too stupid to be believed. As for how long... well they informed her without union representation, so the union has already filed grievence against a whole SLEW of people. As well we have retained representation. The HR, Company, Union et al. have been informed... that is how fast. I am quite suprised (one of the car guys (who is a labor lawyer - and an exceedingly good one) is laughing himself silly with just how stupid....).
-bix
Union protected and they put that in writing... That is stupid, especially so if they didn't document performance issues related to the "impairment" previously.
No, no documentation, which is especially disturbing. She was kinda fueding with one of the other ladies (who was a seinor member), so i'm sure this is why HR didn't document a whole lot of it. Anyways we shall see. She was 7 months away from vesting in a retirement. We are asking for a retirement essentially. We will see.
-bix
why a woman over 40?
Daedalus_IHB
New member
That's in writing? Sorry to hear, Bix. What does the missus do?
stepping_up_IHB
New member
Isn't that some kind of discrimination that isn't allowed?
centralcoastobserver_IHB
New member
So how soon is she going to file a complaint regarding discrimination based on a disability? She should, just for general principles.... her bosses are too stupid to be believed!
SoCal78_IHB
New member
Very sorry, bix.
no_vaseline_IHB
New member
Sorry to hear that B.
ipoplaya_IHB
New member
Sorry to hear the news bix.
ADA may provide employment protection to those with "hearing" impairments, but that can be a tough nut to prove. The most significant part of the definition of disability with regards to ADA is "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual". The big key there is "substantially limits" and whether a person qualifies under that definition.
If hearing was an essential part of the job as defined by the employer and the employer had no alternate position or responsibility the hearing impaired person could do instead, they could likely terminate without adverse consequence. Say for example I hired someone to answer the phones and figured out they just didn't hear well enough to do the job. If I had no other position for which they had the skills/experience for, they could be fired for such an impairment and not be in violation of ADA. ADA doesn't force employers to keep someone with a disability in a particular job or employed in general, it just compels employers to attempt to find accomodations for such individuals within the organization. That typically means switching of job responsibilities around but in many cases, especially in smaller companies and also a more virtual workplaces, that is impractical or impossible.
ADA may provide employment protection to those with "hearing" impairments, but that can be a tough nut to prove. The most significant part of the definition of disability with regards to ADA is "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual". The big key there is "substantially limits" and whether a person qualifies under that definition.
If hearing was an essential part of the job as defined by the employer and the employer had no alternate position or responsibility the hearing impaired person could do instead, they could likely terminate without adverse consequence. Say for example I hired someone to answer the phones and figured out they just didn't hear well enough to do the job. If I had no other position for which they had the skills/experience for, they could be fired for such an impairment and not be in violation of ADA. ADA doesn't force employers to keep someone with a disability in a particular job or employed in general, it just compels employers to attempt to find accomodations for such individuals within the organization. That typically means switching of job responsibilities around but in many cases, especially in smaller companies and also a more virtual workplaces, that is impractical or impossible.
biscuitninja_IHB
New member
Astute Observer said:
In both writing and verbal. Wow, as usual, these people are too stupid to be believed. As for how long... well they informed her without union representation, so the union has already filed grievence against a whole SLEW of people. As well we have retained representation. The HR, Company, Union et al. have been informed... that is how fast. I am quite suprised (one of the car guys (who is a labor lawyer - and an exceedingly good one) is laughing himself silly with just how stupid....).
-bix
ipoplaya_IHB
New member
biscuitninja said:
Union protected and they put that in writing... That is stupid, especially so if they didn't document performance issues related to the "impairment" previously.
IrvineRealtor_IHB
New member
Sorry to hear the news, but I hope you make it a very profitable parting of ways.
Removing stupid people from your everyday life is not a bad thing.
says the realtor.
Removing stupid people from your everyday life is not a bad thing.
says the realtor.
jbenko_IHB
New member
Sorry man, hope things work out for the better.
biscuitninja_IHB
New member
ipoplaya said:
No, no documentation, which is especially disturbing. She was kinda fueding with one of the other ladies (who was a seinor member), so i'm sure this is why HR didn't document a whole lot of it. Anyways we shall see. She was 7 months away from vesting in a retirement. We are asking for a retirement essentially. We will see.
-bix
freedomCM_IHB
New member
wow, how stupid could they be?
was this a public sector employer?
don't they have an HR department?
sheesh
(and sorry for your wife)
was this a public sector employer?
don't they have an HR department?
sheesh
(and sorry for your wife)
ipoplaya_IHB
New member
Anyone monkey in HR knows to never ever fire a woman over 40 without good solid documentation, written warnings, etc. unless it is for gross misconduct or as part of systematic workforce reduction plan.
irvine123_IHB
New member
Sorry to hear the news about Ms. Bix. From what you have briefly described here, you might have a claim here. Make sure you get the right help though.
biscuitninja_IHB
New member
1. Good Lawyer (but sleazy - in more ways that one! :vampire: )- check
2. Documentation of said idoicy - eheck
3. Will and desire beat them to a pulp (at least in court) - check, check!
good luck
-bix
2. Documentation of said idoicy - eheck
3. Will and desire beat them to a pulp (at least in court) - check, check!
good luck
-bix
stepping_up_IHB
New member
ipoplaya said:
why a woman over 40?
No_Such_Reality_IHB
New member
Wow, stunning display of stupidity.
sorry your wife was subjected to such gross incompetence. Given the alternatives, consider yourself lucky. The firm likely won't survive, or is it public sector?
sorry your wife was subjected to such gross incompetence. Given the alternatives, consider yourself lucky. The firm likely won't survive, or is it public sector?