Fired for being a threat to the boss' marriage? - Page 3
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 22 of 22
Like Tree6Likes

Thread: Fired for being a threat to the boss' marriage?

  1. #21
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,686

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Potter75 View Post
    Well, like it or not its pretty much like this already. Firing someone is incredibly risky. Though he lost the case, he paid tens of thousands in legal fees to defend his right to fire her. Most wise employers just settle out of court to make the person go away. My Dad is a CEO, and when they have to fire people they almost expect a lawsuit, even with a documented record of poor performance. He's encountered everything from its because I was black, or fat, or depressed, or an alcoholic, or whatever. They truly were sh*tty workers, with documented sh*tty records..........but its cheaper to offer them 10 grand or whatever to just go away than it is to pay the legal fees to take it to court.
    Quote Originally Posted by mom3girls View Post
    In my life before kids I did all the hiring and firing for the store I managed, Oregon is an at will employer, and it was nearly impossible to fire people. I had an employee that was never on time, would miss shifts without calling in and just didnt come in and open the store one time while we were on our honeymoon. I went through all the paperwork for the termination process and she still sued.
    Quote Originally Posted by freddieflounder101 View Post
    I agree, firing people who are TERRIBLE is really hard. I had an awful situation the year before last with someone who was lazy and slow, who came in late every day, didn't complete work on time, made a ton of mistakes that were published live, used incorrect terminology to the point that it confused everybody dealing wit us, and would even say things IN FRONT OF HR about how he didn't do certain assignments because they "took a lot out of" him, and STILL it took about 6 months to even give him the 90-day warning. (Yes, 90 days.)

    He didn't sue, but the company was so jittery about it that it took mountains of meetings, paperwork, and more just to get as far as we did. (He ended up resigning just as his 90 days was up.)
    Quoted for reference in another debate.

    ~Bonita~

  2. #22
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    I'm not sure why you are quoting this. None of this has anything to do with "the government". Juries of ones peers or as$holes who are sue happy or entitled or lazy or bitter have nothing to do with the government. Don't you understand the difference?

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions