In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Fire U 4 No Reason!
tr fox
Member Posts: 13,856
Another poster posted a topic (linked below) about a mechanic that got fired for buying a Harley. Seems he worked for a dealership that sold Japanese motorcycles and his boss felt it would look bad for business if his mechanic rode to work on a Harley. so the boss fired the mechanic solely for buying the Harley.
The important words, to me at least, was the comments "Michigan is a 'at will' employment state and any employee can be fired for any reason". Of course that statement should have included the words "can be fired for no reason" also since that is the case in Michigan.
AND the case in Missouri and a whole lot of other states. Probably the case in your state and you didn't even know it.
If you were to debate this unfair practice with your state or federal department of labor, they would probably justify this practice (as they did with me on the phone) that you the employee can just up and quit your job with no notice and no reason. So why is it unfair for the employer not to be able to do the same; fire you with no notice and for no reason?
Of course we all know the defect in such logic. Part of the defect is that there is no comparsion between the position of being the employer/company and just a lowly hourly employee who needs steady and predicateable employeement to support his family.
I hope the many of you here that always bash unions (the good unions which there are several) and feel that a good employee will always receive fair treatment from his employer will read this post. There was nothing said in the article about this fired mechanic not being a good employee.
And for those of you that will still think that an employee can fight such unfair treatment, notice that this treatment is provided for and protected by law in Michigan (and many other states). Besides, unless that mechanic was one of our protected minorities, if he wanted to take this unfair firing to court, he would first have to find an attorney willing to take the case, pay that attorney a $5,000.00 retainer up front and then pay about $150.00 per hour for that attorney. And would still probably lose his case.
And he would be unemployed with no income while trying to fight this legal battle.
No matter how good a person or employee you are, the working person needs at least some more job protection than they now have. Good Unions are the "non-government involvement" answer.
For topic see:
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=163731
The important words, to me at least, was the comments "Michigan is a 'at will' employment state and any employee can be fired for any reason". Of course that statement should have included the words "can be fired for no reason" also since that is the case in Michigan.
AND the case in Missouri and a whole lot of other states. Probably the case in your state and you didn't even know it.
If you were to debate this unfair practice with your state or federal department of labor, they would probably justify this practice (as they did with me on the phone) that you the employee can just up and quit your job with no notice and no reason. So why is it unfair for the employer not to be able to do the same; fire you with no notice and for no reason?
Of course we all know the defect in such logic. Part of the defect is that there is no comparsion between the position of being the employer/company and just a lowly hourly employee who needs steady and predicateable employeement to support his family.
I hope the many of you here that always bash unions (the good unions which there are several) and feel that a good employee will always receive fair treatment from his employer will read this post. There was nothing said in the article about this fired mechanic not being a good employee.
And for those of you that will still think that an employee can fight such unfair treatment, notice that this treatment is provided for and protected by law in Michigan (and many other states). Besides, unless that mechanic was one of our protected minorities, if he wanted to take this unfair firing to court, he would first have to find an attorney willing to take the case, pay that attorney a $5,000.00 retainer up front and then pay about $150.00 per hour for that attorney. And would still probably lose his case.
And he would be unemployed with no income while trying to fight this legal battle.
No matter how good a person or employee you are, the working person needs at least some more job protection than they now have. Good Unions are the "non-government involvement" answer.
For topic see:
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=163731
Comments
But the laws give no protection to employees based on whether or not they buy the wrong make of motorcycle.
And actually I think the boss was being smart by openly declaring the reason for the firing. Now the poor employee cannot claim any of the legally protected reasons for being fired (age, race, etc.)
But rather than be shooting my mouth off on something that I have only limited personal experience with (and no formal education on) maybe some knowledgeable attorney will jump in and tell us.
Buy a brand new Harley when rice burners make your living for you and that's somewhat of a problem as it means that you have little respect or faith in the product(s) that pay your wages. Drive that new bike into the dealership where you work and I can see where it might be considered a slap in the face by the owner.
I know that I'd have second thoughts about your continued employment when you so obviously would be happier wrenching another brand. I might consider it my duty to open that very opportunity to you.
There's a huge difference between doing what you did and having a long-standing love of Harley's. Had I been your employer and known that you collected and restored old hogs as a hobby, then there would have been no problem at all. Truth is... Had you purchased a new Harley and been discreet, I'd have been inclined to overlook your purchase (if I ever even knew about it).
But discreet you weren't. Neither were you very smart, nor very loyal. I have a feeling that you and your former employer will be happier now. Perhaps for good reasons on both sides.
Nord
Work at a dealership that sells rice burners and perhaps you might expect the owner to have a bias toward them. I can certainly understand.
Buy a brand new Harley when rice burners make your living for you and that's somewhat of a problem as it means that you have little respect or faith in the product(s) that pay your wages. Drive that new bike into the dealership where you work and I can see where it might be considered a slap in the face by the owner.
I know that I'd have second thoughts about your continued employment when you so obviously would be happier wrenching another brand. I might consider it my duty to open that very opportunity to you.
There's a huge difference between doing what you did and having a long-standing love of Harley's. Had I been your employer and known that you collected and restored old hogs as a hobby, then there would have been no problem at all. Truth is... Had you purchased a new Harley and been discreet, I'd have been inclined to overlook your purchase (if I ever even knew about it).
But discreet you weren't. Neither were you very smart, nor very loyal. I have a feeling that you and your former employer will be happier now. Perhaps for good reasons on both sides.
Nord
For some reason I'm thinking the one that still has a source of income to support their family with is going to be the "happier" one.
Dumb is dumb, and that's a fact! Let's face it, would you wish to employ someone who didn't have your interests in mind... And made it obvious... And rubbed it in your face?
Nord
It is WRONG THINK to feel that ANY employer owes you anything. It is a private contract; the government has stuck its nose into the workings of business for way too long. It is one reason why America is falling behind; we do not hold people to a standard of conduct. For an example of this just look at fast food workers. Poor manners, dirty uniforms, filth in the bathrooms and a "what do you want" attitude.
QUOTE FROM YOUR POST
Of course we all know the defect in such logic. Part of the defect is that there is no comparsion between the position of being the employer/company and just a lowly hourly employee who needs steady and predicateable employement to support his family.
THAT (above) is the defective logic. Why is there no compairson? As a small business man I have EVERYTHING I have, own, or will ever have on the line for my business. If the business fails I am in the street, I have all the risk. My family has the same needs as yours.
The needs of the employee are NOT; and I repeat NOT the concern of the employer, he is there to make money. It is the MAN that needs to be concerned for the welfare of him and his. If he chooses to break a rule in a flagarant manner he is putting his family at risk. Not the employer.
So some jerk walks off the job, the employer can't get the work done and he may lose thousands because some idiot has a bad day. You need to follow the rules of the employer, if not then get out, start your own business so you can be on easy street. Natural selection will rule. That is why Unions are a failure; they protect sub-standard conduct as the norm.
I fired a lady once after 2.5 hours of employment....she thought she could negeotiate the Corporate Policy Handbook point by point. She learned real fast that it was not open to negotation.
Work or get fired, follow the rules or get fired. Don't like the rules start your own business, put you * on the line (along with your wife and kids) and see how fast you "see the light" in employment issues.
I would have kicked his JUNK Harley over first.....then fired his STUPID butt for being such a complete moron.
RANT OVER
We had a case similar to this come into our firm. A 46 year-old woman, who worked at the same office for 20-some years was laid off. We sued on her behalf, but because the company she worked for had changed its name and corporate standing, they considered it a new company. They were doing the same job, same service, had the same clients, but just changed their name, so we thought we had a good case. The judge sided with the employer, new corporation, new company, new employees, case closed. All she got was unemployment, and since our firm took the case on a contingency basis---we lost out on our fees.
Just my .02
Eric
All American Arms Company
www.galleryofguns.com
VIP Code: AAAC
Veteran Owned and Operated
I'm an employer and I fully support the "at will" policies. You should be able to fire any employee that YOU BELIEVE is not working out for your business. This is not a communist country where the gov't owns all private industry. The gov't has NO PLACE in telling me that I cannot fire someone who I believe is a detriment to my businsses...it's not their money, or their image. You have NO "right" to work for private businesses. It is a real shame to see this "entitlement" mentality being so widespread. We are not a communist/socialisistic society yet...and I pray to God that we never will be. This is just one more example of how unions have ruined this country...they spread this type of mentality.[xx(]
Just my .02
Eric
All American Arms Company
www.galleryofguns.com
VIP Code: AAAC
Veteran Owned and Operated
Just for the record: I do disagree with how that motorcycle shop handled their situation...but you know what.?.? They are going to have to suffer the ramifications of their poor decision making. That's the beauty of private industry...it has a way of regulating itself.
Eric
All American Arms Company
www.galleryofguns.com
VIP Code: AAAC
Veteran Owned and Operated
My payroll, along with the rest of the funds in my business, is to be spent at my discretion. It's my money (or someone has placed it under my supervision), and I should be able to spend it on who or what I want. Firing someone for any reason isn't "unfair treatment"; it's just a business decision.
2-barrel
And once in existance ALL companies need customers. customers that come from the ranks of the public citizens.
And most companies need employees. Most of which come from the ranks of the public citizens.
Each depends on the other for survial. Each should receive predicateable and fair treatment from each other.
This opinion is not meant to stick up for bad employees or employees who just want to cause problems or try to run the business they are working for. It only applies to good and honest employees who are hopefully employed by good and honest employers.
I don't see a problem with at-will employment. Sure, an employer can fire an employee without reason (as long as he doesn't fire the employee for an impermissible reason). But it works both ways; an employee can quit without a reason too.
That is like saying a professional boxer can just walk up and punch another, smaller man who is not a professional. With the rational being that "well the smaller man had the right to punch back".
Most employers are in the "strong" position for many reasons which I will be happy to list for anyone not knowing. Most employees are in the "weak" position for reasons which I will also list for anyone not knowing.
An employer and an employee DO NOT interact on equal footing in most circumstances.
This dealership may well suffer from the bad publicity this causes.
I sure as heck would look for someplace else to buy a bike or have
work done on mine.
We now return you to your regulary scheduled "tinfoil hat wearer" topic.
Some guys like a mag full of lead, I still prefer one round to the head.
Or my wife, who is employed by a school, spends her hard earned money at another school on tuition?
What if it had been a Chevy Truck? Still just a set of wheels, reliable transportation to work?
Or me, a truck driver, helping my neighbor move a new lathe or milling machine, and him compensating me for my gas and vehicle wear?
What I think, has little to do with what might happen in this case, but I can guarantee you that if I decided to drive a motorcycle, it won't be purchased from that dealership.There is a right way, and a wrong way to handle a situation like this, and firing a good employee isn't one of them.
How about just moving the employee parking lot to the rear of the property, but allow anyone who bought one from the dealership, special parking, since they are, in fact a customer. Put any conditions of employment such as this, in all correspondence with possible applicants. Not firing them after it has been done.You might think you are "God", but that doesn't make you so. The employer is merely someone who is taking a chance on getting enough business to recoup his investment, and make a decent living. In reality, that is all the employee was doing, by purchasing reliable transportation, on a product that has a better resale value than his boss sells. He probably even "showed it off" to his fellow employees when he drove up on it, which is not abnormal for people spending that kind of hard cash. How many of you have popped the hood on the last new vehicle you bought, to show a friend?
Dispite what most people think, Good help is hard to get. Warm bodies are a different story.
As for me, if they don't like the way I work, the way I try to make or save them money, then they can have my notice. But if I just quit, they do have some recourse, by not paying me for acculated vacation time, poor recomendations, rehire policies. I refuse to work for someone who doesn't have my best interests at heart. I am there to make money, and the only way to do it, is for my employer to make money. That has to be a two way street, and what I drive, or do in my off hours has little to do with it.
Sandman2234
Have Gun, will travel<br>
Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun.
So TR, do you find Reynalds wrap better than the generic brand and does the heavy duty stuff protect better than the regular strength?
We now return you to your regulary scheduled "tinfoil hat wearer" topic.
Some guys like a mag full of lead, I still prefer one round to the head.
Kind of an odd post/comment.
Just glad it wasn't me!
Psalm 109:8
John
quote:Originally posted by mpolans
I don't see a problem with at-will employment. Sure, an employer can fire an employee without reason (as long as he doesn't fire the employee for an impermissible reason). But it works both ways; an employee can quit without a reason too.
That is like saying a professional boxer can just walk up and punch another, smaller man who is not a professional. With the rational being that "well the smaller man had the right to punch back".
The smaller man who is not a professional can choose to leave the ring at any time and fight another boxer more to his liking.
I do not support the socialist idea of taking away a person's right to hire and fire whomever he/she wants for whatever reason he/she wants.
Boomer
"Success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as it is by the obstacles which one has overcome while trying to succeed"
. and the antithesis to this philosophy was uttered by Bill Clinton "I smoked it, but I didn't inhale."[V]
NRA Life Member
Geez tr fox you can say my name, I have been a member here since 2000.[:p]
I was just thrilled that a post I made got such a response. Usually when I make a post the thread instantly dies
I am not a number I am a free man
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by mpolans
I don't see a problem with at-will employment. Sure, an employer can fire an employee without reason (as long as he doesn't fire the employee for an impermissible reason). But it works both ways; an employee can quit without a reason too.
That is like saying a professional boxer can just walk up and punch another, smaller man who is not a professional. With the rational being that "well the smaller man had the right to punch back".
The smaller man who is not a professional can choose to leave the ring at any time and fight another boxer more to his liking.
I do not support the socialist idea of taking away a person's right to hire and fire whomever he/she wants for whatever reason he/she wants.
The concept of voluntarily entering a boxing ring to fight has no comparsion to the situation most working people face. They have no choice but to enter the "arena" and get into the "ring" of the working person and the employer. And once in they usually have no way to get out; until they retire or die.
As I already mentioned, it is a fact that, unless you have some way to avoid work, you have to be a worker, manager or company owner. And EVERYONE has to depend on EVERYONE else. None can survive without the other.
The worker needs a job. The manager needs someone to manage. The company owner(s) needs customers/clients that mostly come from the class of the workers.
It is not Socialist to believe that everyone should do their best to treat each other with dignity and respect. For just one example, most good employees with offer two weeks notice before quitting so as not to put their employer in a bind. This is of some benefit to the employee but often is a big help to the employer.
Do many employers treat their employees with the same courtesy when firing, giving raises and promotions or assigning shifts, etc.?
If it is Socialist to want fairness and honesty in a human endeavor then I guess I am guilty of being a Socialist.
quote:Another poster posted a topic (linked below)
Geez tr fox you can say my name, I have been a member here since 2000.[:p]
I was just thrilled that a post I made got such a response. Usually when I make a post the thread instantly dies
I am not a number I am a free man
My actions were an attempted courtesy to you. I did not know if you would be offended if I brought your name into my topic post.
I am not a number I am a free man
I'm still a bit chagrined by the ability of my coworkers and immediate supervisors to just sit idly by and watch it happen, again after watching it happen to two employees prior to me. A bunch of mouth-breathers who talk about solidarity and loyalty. I'm sure they will feel differently when it's their * on the carpet.
Without the unions,the American workplace has become little more than a sick "office version" of "Survivor".
Someone is getting voted off the "island", and it ain't gonna be me...
I am the Egg-Man! I am the Egg-Man! I am the Walrus! Kooo-kooo-kee-chooo!
Discrimination in hiring practices is a whole other can of worms.
KC
Sorry, I must side with the employer on this issue. What reason was he given when he was hired? If you don't have to give a reason to give someone a job, why would you need a reason to terminate them? The company should be able to hire and employ anyone it sees fit. If someone gets released, they are entitled to unemployment, that is your protection. It is tough, but so is the world.
Discrimination in hiring practices is a whole other can of worms.
KC
When an employer hires someone, that hiring "helps" the new employee and presumably also the employer and that hiring is being done with the consent of both employer and employee.
To fire someone is harmful to the fired person and is usually done without the consent of the employee. I'm not saying that an employer has to have the consent of the employee, I am only trying to point out that there is no true comparsion in the words in red above.
BTW unemployment is usually only a fraction of what had been the fired employee's pay.
And yes, bad employees don't deserve to keep their job so don't anyone hammer me on that point.
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
The concept of voluntarily entering a boxing ring to fight has no comparsion to the situation most working people face. They have no choice but to enter the "arena" and get into the "ring" of the working person and the employer. And once in they usually have no way to get out; until they retire or die.
I disagree. Outside of a communist society where some central planning group decides how you should work, each person has a great deal of freedom to choose their profession. Here in the US, we have the right to decide to choose a new, different profession if we don't like the choice we made. What most of us don't get is a free lunch. Our decisions have consequences. You just have to live with the consequences of your decision. If your options are limited because you are afraid of the consequences, that's life.
As I already mentioned, it is a fact that, unless you have some way to avoid work, you have to be a worker, manager or company owner. And EVERYONE has to depend on EVERYONE else. None can survive without the other.
The worker needs a job. The manager needs someone to manage. The company owner(s) needs customers/clients that mostly come from the class of the workers.
This is true...and each should have the flexibility to decide what job, who they manage, and what customers/clients they choose to pursue.
It is not Socialist to believe that everyone should do their best to treat each other with dignity and respect. For just one example, most good employees with offer two weeks notice before quitting so as not to put their employer in a bind. This is of some benefit to the employee but often is a big help to the employer.
Do many employers treat their employees with the same courtesy when firing, giving raises and promotions or assigning shifts, etc.?
Often, employees offer two weeks of severance pay in lieu of two weeks notice. So yes, many do. However, neither employees, nor employers are required to give any notice or severance pay beyond wages owed for past work.
If it is Socialist to want fairness and honesty in a human endeavor then I guess I am guilty of being a Socialist.
Since the wounds are still fresh, I'm trying terribly hard not to sound too bitter, but in my situation, I was a three-year employee, senior in my position. 7 years experience. I trained the 5 FSW's on staff other than myself. Their reasons for terminating me could not have possibly been more vague, one of which was that I didn't have a "handle" on the job. I was also told that I didn't do enough "extra" stuff, whatever that means, I take it to mean *-kissing. Since when is that a prerequisite to maintaining employment in this country?
If at first you don't succeed, don't try sky-diving....