What a day...

[PoorManQ45]

Not necessarily. Litigation results are unpredictable. There are so many variables, including the quality of your lawyer (as IB noted), how far the company and their lawyers are willing to defend themselves. (expect them to go the distance against you).

Ah, that makes sense. I was just confused by you saying get your job back. For the reasons you stated that wouldn't make sense.

Here is the bottom line. You've already admitted you made a big tactical error, and you paid a big price for it. Yes, it sucks. Now, you seem more preoccupied trying to punish them for their reaction to your big mistake rather than learning from your mistake and moving on. Your potential to win big in court based on your mistake and the state you live in is slim. Getting a new job is tough enough in this economy, even tougher when you can't use your previous companies as a reference. You need to stop arguing and concentrate on getting your career back on track

Sorry if I haven't made it clear. I have taken from this thread that if I have an issue that I should keep my mouth shut. If it is indeed a legal issue I will keep my mouth shut and simply report it to the necessary authorities.

[PyR0NiAk]

You're learning. I'm impressed.

[AZhitman]

A little side note: In a right-to-work state, the management need not (and is actually smart not to) give a reason for the termination. The employee "serves at the pleasure" of management.

It's called "uncovered" (vs covered) employment. Uncovered employees tend to occupy the upper 1/3 of the hierarchy, make more money, and have higher expectations. Covered workers have (and typically need) a little more protection.

When we terminate someone, it's typically, "Your services are no longer needed." Any further discussion serves only to provide fodder for a potential lawsuit. As such, HR simply states that the person is no longer needed.

Only in very egregious cases of wrongdoing will a person be officially terminated "for cause".

[Eikon]

A little side note: In a right-to-work state, the management need not (and is actually smart not to) give a reason for the termination. The employee "serves at the pleasure" of management.

It's called "uncovered" (vs covered) employment. Uncovered employees tend to occupy the upper 1/3 of the hierarchy, make more money, and have higher expectations. Covered workers have (and typically need) a little more protection.

When we terminate someone, it's typically, "Your services are no longer needed." Any further discussion serves only to provide fodder for a potential lawsuit. As such, HR simply states that the person is no longer needed.

Only in very egregious cases of wrongdoing will a person be officially terminated "for cause".

So you could bust someone for watching p0rn on their computer during work or embezzling money, but just tell them they are no longer needed, have a nice day.

Our legal system sure has made a mess of the common sense our world once had. I miss the idea that you could just catch an employee doing something wrong and fire them on the spot and tell them exactly why. They knew they were stupid, picked up their stuff and left and that was the end of it. Now you don't want to give reason for a firing, even if it's a really good reason, because it might invite a potential lawsuit. What a mess our world is!

[f1seb]

So nobody read my post? It's the same exact issue isn't it? But already with an outcome.....not speculation of what could happen....because IT ALREADY DID!!!

[Infinitiguy19]

I work for Cablevision's TSG (tech support group). Years ago there was an issue like this as well. Management wanted workers to be signed into their workstations with all their tools up hitting the ready button on the phones and start taking calls. To make a long story short. Cablevision got sued with a class action lawsuit, they lost, and now we have 7 minutes to sign into our tools starting on our shift time, everybody involved in the lawsuit got $1200. The End. But this is in New York, I don't know how it goes in those lawless 3rd world countries like Floridia.

Was anybody's IRA, 401K or any other benefits lost?

[Bubba1]

So nobody read my post? It's the same exact issue isn't it? But already with an outcome.....not speculation of what could happen....because IT ALREADY DID!!!

I did read your post, f1seb. It should have been acknowledged. Sorry. The underlying base issue is similar, but there are differences/ other issues including:
1. in Brien's case, he took it upon himself to tell management directly, who appears (not confirmed) to have interpreted it as a threat and got rid of him
2. You even noted that the class action lawsiuit was in NY. Brien's situation is in Florida. We don't know if the local laws are similar.
3. There are other aspects in NY not mentioned, such as how did the company address the cost increase after the decision? did they pass along the cost to the consumer?, did they lay anyone off?, did they trim other benefits? Is the situation better overall since they were forced to raise their expenses? It seems doubtful that they bent over like Kevin Bacon and accepted this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdFLPn30dvQ

Judging by the small "award" in the NY case. it would seem reasonable to expect that even if Brien could go back in time, undo his error, and then file suit. IF he were to win, the award would still be small. and it would still probably ruin his reputation at his company. The question remains, is it worth it?

[PoorManQ45]

Judging by the small "award" in the NY case. it would seem reasonable to expect that even if Brien could go back in time, undo his error, and then file suit. IF he were to win, the award would still be small. and it would still probably ruin his reputation at his company. The question remains, is it worth it?

Nope, not worth it at all. I agree with you guys.

Like I said, should have kept my mouth shut and filed the report

[AZhitman]

To play along, let me offer you something that has served me well in my career.

If everything at work is going along swimmingly, and all is well with your performance and your supervisors, there's not much need for this. But let's say you have an issue with a specific supervisor (or a specific situation). I've always maintained a "CYA File". In it, I'd document time / place of occurrences that MIGHT lead to problems down the line. Use shorthand, but be detailed. You never know when you may have to refer back to these. Print supporting emails and docments, and reference them in your notes (can be as simple as "see email A-1"). Maintain these in a locked drawer, or your briefcase, and don't work on this "on the clock". Before / after shift, or during lunch is best.

I've only had a couple instances where these came in handy, but BOTH times, they were a lifesaver (one went to actual legal proceedings and my notations served me well, especially since I then had a much clearer recollection than the person who made the allegation).

You'll run across instances where you're asked to go "above and beyond" in the performance of your duties. You can look for loopholes and choose to resist, or you can step up and make the bosses happy. Your choice needs to be on a case-by-case basis, weighing the pros and cons of each (often requiring a quick decision).

Also, remember - There's NOTHING wrong with saying, "I think I know the answer, but give me 15 minutes to confirm and I'll get back to you with a definite answer." People respect this, and it prevents you from looking like an impulsive know-it-all... and it REALLY helps when you're prone to being wrong on occasion.

[IBCoupe]

A little side note: In a right-to-work state, the management need not (and is actually smart not to) give a reason for the termination. The employee "serves at the pleasure" of management.

A note for the side note: Florida's legislature established a whistleblower exception to its right-to-work status.