New Laws

[DrFaroohk]

These should be made real laws (if they're not already)...I've seen almost all this stuff done at my jobs over the years and its crappy...

1) "Making" someone quit. I don't know exactly how the whole unemployment thing works but in my limited understanding the company itself has to cover some of the cost, like insurance or fees or something...well tough cookies. Giving someone crappy hours, or making them work back to back shifts (close at 11 p.m., open back up at 5 a.m., etc...) or just being really mean to them so they hate it there and quit on their own....that definitely needs to go . I've heard its already illegal but I've seen it done a million times,.

2) There needs to be some type of statute of limitations on firing people. I know at my old store we were always short handed, and it was kinda common to hold on to a crappy employee until you hired a better one, and then get rid of the crappy one . No no no no . if they're so terrible they need to go right away, not when its most convenient.

3) Employers should have no right to dictate how you live your personal life or to reprimand you for anything that happens off the clock. Exceptions: If it directly affects the work (like if you're a cab driver and lose your license for DUI) or if you're paid some type of a retainer fee (like an extra 200 a week to be sober at all times or something). Otherwise, just becuase you're screwing the bosses wife, while it may be a dumb thing to do, they shouldn't be allowed to fire you. Or one for me - if I'm shopping where I work on my day off, and the customer I denied beer to last night comes in to give me a hard time, well, I'm off the clock, out of uniform, and not subject to the whims of the company. I'm gonna tell that guy where he can go.

Obviously these would be subject to a lot of abuse, but seriously with some fine tuning I think they'd be great. Anyone want to add some more?

[Broomjockey]

1. Called constructive dismissal. Illegal many places. UK for sure (Heard Raps mention it).

2. Probationary periods, and get rid of "work-at-will."

3. The issue with this one is if you're recognizable as a member of that company. Most places hire you not just to perform a job, but convey an image, so in your situation, the person has recognized you as a member of that company. I totally agree, but it's part of the "please the customer" attitude so many places have. Get rid of that, get rid of the other.

Now for my crack at what should be law:
Employers cannot threaten someone's job/standing at their job for being unwilling to undertake a task that can have a negative safety impact, nor to suffer behaviour which is unlawful (abuse from customers, shoplifting, etc.).

What it means: No being fired for mouthing back to someone cursing up a storm, or stopping a shoplifter from *gasp* stealing! No being fired for refusing to clean up biologically hazardous waste, etc.

[wagegoth]

Number 1 is referred to as "constructive termination," and it is illegal, but you have to prove it, just like anything else. That means that if you believe it is happening to you, you have to document everything. Make copies of documents, including timecards, if you can, keep logs of conversations and disparate treatment of employees, etc. If it's discriminatory, it can be easier to prove, but if it's simply because someone doesn't like you, then you're going to have a harder time.

Number 2, sometimes a warm body is better than no body at all.

Number 3 depends on the privacy laws of your state, the behavior engaged in, and if you live in an "at will" state.

[blas]

I wholeheartedly agree with all of the above, but I doubt it could actually be put into action.

I definetly agree that incompetent and especially insubordinent people should be gotten rid of ASAP and not just allowed to keep working until a replacement is found.

[Andara Bledin]

#1: As mentioned, its already illegal. Also, with back to back shifts, I believe that most places must allow a minimum time between shifts for sleep. To determine your local regulations, talk to your labor board.

#2: Not feasible. Just because someone is craptacular at their job doesn't mean that they aren't at least marginally useful. It would be unacceptable to force a company to fire an incompetant employee prior to finding a replacement.

#3: That is a sticky subject. And it also varies depending upon where you live and what type of job you have.

I'm in California, and California has no laws protecting an employee's right to do anything they want off the clock. Case in point, my work is a "non-smoking" establishment. If you smoke, you don't get hired. If you are already hired and start smoking, you get fired. There is nothing illegal about this practice.

However, in another state (Minnesota, I think), there is specifically a law to prevent any form of discrimination based on anything legal that an employee does that does not have an adverse effect on their ability to do their job.

^-.-^

[Gerrinson]

In regards to #1, that is most definitely illegal. In my state they have to allow at least 8 hours from the time you leave to the time you return, well schedule wise anyway.

At the grocery store, once a week they would schedule me to close at 10:30 PM which usually meant that I was leaving about midnight due to last minute customers coming at 5 minutes to close and buying 30,000 items and the night shift manager who had to relieve me coming in an hour or so late on a regular basis (he's the Store Manager now, of course, because that's behavior worthy of promotion )

The next day, of course, I'd be scheduled in for 6:30 AM and usually that would be my long day of the week with a 10 1/2 hour shift.

With the leaving late and having to allow time for shower and getting to work in the morning, I'd usually only get 4 or 5 hours sleep in between, despite the 'scheduled' 8 hours off.

Sometimes I miss the grocery store. Then I slap myself upside the head and come back to reality.

[LifeCarnie]

Regardless of how you feel about it personally....

4.) People who have a prescription for Medical Marijuana should not be fired for failing a drug test for using medical marijuana.

This has happened in California a couple of times in recent years.

Why are they firing people for using prescription medication?

Try that with Zoloft and see what happens.

[AdminAssistant]

3) Employers should have no right to dictate how you live your personal life or to reprimand you for anything that happens off the clock.

That also depends a lot on the company and your immediate supervisor. When I got hired on at TJ Maxx, I had to sign this thing that said I didn't use drugs, drive drunk, and that I was an all around upstanding citizen of this United States of America.

Then, the AM who was taking me through this mountain of paperwork said, "Look, what you do on your time is your business. Just don't ever let if affect your work." i.e., Having a drunken party at your house during the weekend is fine. As long as you don't have to drag ass into work with a hangover the next morning.

[Rattslinger]

5) When people are sick and need off no more "hint, hint, wink, wink" you can have the time off, but we'd feel so bad that you'd miss out on the hours, etc.

[Andara Bledin]

4.) People who have a prescription for Medical Marijuana should not be fired for failing a drug test for using medical marijuana.

This falls under the same heading as I said earlier. In California, there are no laws in place to protect against discrimination for things outside of protected status.

If a company wants to not hire anyone who drinks Smirnoff Ice, they can legally do so as long as it is published that they do so.

I suspect it's just a matter of time before every state ends up with specific laws disallowing companies to discriminate for reasons that do not effect job performance or company image (no getting drunk in your uniform) and are not otherwise illegal.

^-.-^