Update:

Post #1,275 by jlalexander 7/10/01 9:22:26 AM Reply	Update: Well, there's really no update. HR was supposed to have made a decision yesterday. But, apparently my boss called HR on Friday (on his leave) and said, "I know you guys are trying to fire me. I'll make you a deal: give me a severance package and I'll leave and won't sue you.". So, this gives you a little more insight into what a whack-o this guy is. For some reason he thinks he has a case? Texas is an at-will state; does that not mean that my employer could let him go for no reason whatsoever, without any liability? Does anyone know the details of at-will? So, needless to say, no decision was made yesterday. The Director of HR has now taken it to the Senior VP of HR for a decision. Obviously, they don't know what to do, either. Fun, fun. -Jason ---- My pid is Inigo Montoya. You "killed -9" my parent process. Prepare to vi.
Post #1,287 by addison 7/10/01 10:24:52 AM Reply	Re: Update: For some reason he thinks he has a case? Texas is an at-will state; does that not mean that my employer could let him go for no reason whatsoever, without any liability? Does anyone know the details of at-will? No. (that's not what that means). Even though you're at-will, there are legal obligations and restrictions. For example, do you think that all the women could be summarially fired one day? I don't know what case he thinks he has. I'd say he doesn't have one (from what I know now) - but paying him off might be cheaper (and safer) than fighting with him. He obviously feels slighted. If he was fired for "slanderous" accusations, that infringed on his ability to get another job, he would have a case. Proving it in court would be another issue, but he'd certainly not get laughed out of court with the case. Sure, its blackmail of a sort, but that's not that unusual.... I'd say pay the guy and not give him any reason to be upset, and be glad to be rid of him. (But I bet somebody will rather spend $500k of the companies money, (or more), with decreased productivity (you're certainly not working your best, are you?), legal fees, and whatnot, to save $50k). The Director of HR has now taken it to the Senior VP of HR for a decision. Obviously, they don't know what to do, either. That would worry me. Addison
Post #1,306 by jlalexander 7/10/01 12:09:40 PM Reply	Re: Update: Well, actually, I believe I was right on the at-will thing: [link\|http://www.prairielaw.com/articles/article.asp?articleid=1408\|http://www.prairiel...ticleid=1408] "At will" employees occupy the lowest rung of the management-labor relations ladder. In nearly all states, they have few rights in the workplace. Management can reassign, demote, discipline and even discharge at will employees on a whim with little legal recourse. These prerogatives can be exercised "for any reason or no reason at all," as the saying goes. So decisions involving at will employees can be unreasonable, and even arbitrary, without violating the law. That particular lawyer goes on to say that it's not right, and that it shouldn't be this way, blah blah blah, mentions that there's legislation passed that no one adopted, and then basically says, "Too bad.". -Jason ---- My pid is Inigo Montoya. You "killed -9" my parent process. Prepare to vi.
Post #1,318 by bepatient 7/10/01 12:58:55 PM Reply	However.... ...it is cheaper to grant this guy a standard package than to defend even a frivolous lawsuit. So the moron will probably get one just for the threat...which is probably what at least one person had told this guy to do. In the end..he ends up gone...which should be your primary concern. Um...er...well... I have no choice! [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]

Welcome to IWETHEY!