rocknrobn26 Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Good luck w/ this sox, but frankly I don't think you'll need it. Being that it is Gubment, I have a hard believing a super has the power to fire on the spot and make it stick. I may be wrong, but when/if the HR dept looks into it, you may be getting a call w/ an offer for her to return. If not......kick them in the butt w/ the EEOC! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 One thing:we CAN get by despite this. It's just not in me to let them get away with it. That's good to hear! Pregnancy discrimination is just another form of sex discrimination. There seems to be this notion out there that when the decisionmaker is in the same protected class as the employee, there can't be discrimination (e.g., if it is a woman choosing to fire another woman, it can't be sex discrimination, or if it is an African-American refusing to hire an African-American, it can't be race discrimination). That is totally untrue, and it happens surprisingly often. No one should be allowed to get away with this bullchit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Good luck w/ this sox, but frankly I don't think you'll need it. Being that it is Gubment, I have a hard believing a super has the power to fire on the spot and make it stick. I may be wrong, but when/if the HR dept looks into it, you may be getting a call w/ an offer for her to return. If not......kick them in the butt w/ the EEOC! Even if she's does get called back, they should still kick them in the butt with the EEOC. This super should not get away with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Posted July 12, 2008 Author Share Posted July 12, 2008 Even if she's does get called back, they should still kick them in the butt with the EEOC. This super should not get away with this. If they do call,we were advised to refer them to the guy handling the case.He has informed us that when it's filed and legal reviews it,they'll inform management here that they have stepped in some deep doo doo,and get her back and hope we drop it. We won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 So, she gets her job back and you continue the suit? or, she gets another job somewhere else and you continue the suit? or, she (and you) hit the lottery and nobody's working again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Posted July 12, 2008 Author Share Posted July 12, 2008 So, she gets her job back and you continue the suit? or, she gets another job somewhere else and you continue the suit? or, she (and you) hit the lottery and nobody's working again? I have no real idea.She's filed for unemployment,and has already applied for two jobs. But I know this:I DO NOT want her back there as a casual.They might say our bad,bring her back,and create a reason not related to her pregnancy to then terminate her. I gave the manager two opportunities to reverse her decision;she essentially flipped me the bird. What happens now is all on her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 So, she gets her job back and you continue the suit? or, she gets another job somewhere else and you continue the suit? or, she (and you) hit the lottery and nobody's working again? $30,000,000.00 divided ~ 5,000 = $6,000.00 per complaint. $hitty lotto there . Good luck Sox. First thing I would do is write down the names of the casuals who were given re-assignments while they were pregnant. From reading squeegie's link that sounds very important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 So, she gets her job back and you continue the suit? or, she gets another job somewhere else and you continue the suit? or, she (and you) hit the lottery and nobody's working again? There is no suit yet, just and EEOC claim. After reviewing the claim, the EEOC can choose to pursue this in its own name for violation of the PDA and/or give a right to sue letter to Sox's fiance. I should hope that enough is done here to make sure this employer learns that terminating pregnant women because of the fact that they're pregnant is not cool, and that they have to be sure that they properly train their supervisors on this issue. There's not likely to be much money coming to Sox's woman if a case is pursued, assuming that she either gets her job back or finds another one at comparable pay. The damages in these lawsuits are the lost wages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Not that it matters much but I am with you 110% Sox. I am surprised that the manager, a female, was not more compassionate with your fiancee. Very interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Wife got paid 90 days leave. Perhaps she should quit and go to work for Wal-Mart? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalboyd Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 As a HR professional. Man you might just be able to retire after this settlement!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Roller Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 As a HR professional. Man you might just be able to retire after this settlement!!!! If I was one of these could I charge my wife for the sex? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolverines Fan Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 I am surprised that the manager, a female, was not more compassionate with your fiancee. Very interesting. This surprised me too. Hey Sox, has your finance clashed with this supervisor before? Not to imply anything negative about your finance of course. And like many have said, this supervisor is likely out of a job. Good luck with the suit, and I hope your finance finds a nice job somewhere else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDFFFreak Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 That absolutely blows. I can understand frustration on her employee's side, but the law protects working mothers and mother-to-be and there should be a better solution than terminating her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 That sucks, but good for you guys for doing something about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 I am surprised that the manager, a female, was not more compassionate with your fiancee. Very interesting. Yeah... women in the workplace are usually so kind and generous to one another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Good for you. That is some weak uncompromising BS. Do you think any of this will have indirect/direct backlash on you who still works there though ? I wouldnt take it lying down either way believe me but I was just curious as to your answer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 God luck, Sox. Pulling for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Even if she's does get called back, they should still kick them in the butt with the EEOC. This super should not get away with this. Agree, one tousand percent!. In no way did I intend for sox (soxette) to say :Eyeyorvoice: "Okay. Thank you for my job back." :Eyeyorvoice: But a call from the HR would show their vulnerability, and then they are in the catbird seat! In the words of G.S. Patton..."We're going to hold onto him by the nose and we're going to kick him in the ass." Sox, I hope/foresee a very nice Hawaiian honeymoon for the 2 of you, paid for by the gubment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxfactor Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 A couple questions first, Sox. Your fiance was hired as a casual. I have never heard of a casual employee staying on longer than a year. Did she get rehired, or did they just give her another tour so to speak. I thought a typical casual term of employment was just short of a year max. This is exactly why the Postal service hires casuals. They don't get full pay and no benefits are included. Plus the fact that they can push them around and terminate them when they are no longer needed. And the manager is playing the typical Postal bullsh*t game. And if she indeed is offered her job back, they WILL think of another reason to get rid of her. Count on it. This is an interesting case to me , although I'm sorry that it happened to you and your fiance. Here's to sticking it up their asses, from one postal worker to another. But just be careful, my friend. They will try and make your life miserable at work . But the union should have your back, even if you're not a member. By law they have to. Just watch your back and I hope everything goes well. I'm sure it will. One thing Postal Service management will never understand is that harrasssing employees does not make them work better. In fact, it usually has the opposite effect. And it was brought up in a previous post, but I want to make sure that you try and get the names of the previous casuals who got transferred to other jobs within. Very very important. Knowing the Postal Service as I do, they will probably expunge files of this happening, if they haven't already. I have had this happen to myself. I'm rootin' for y'all to kick some ass! Here's to the dirty bastages they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxfactor Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 That is some weak uncompromising BS. Now you know why people go "postal". They pull this sh*t all the time, not even thinking of the ramifications on someone's life. Welcome to the Postal Service. No vaseline required as we will f'k you so quickly that you won't have a chance to use it. Damn this pisses me off! Get em Sox! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skilly Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 You mess with a Huddler, you pay the price. Sometimes you just have to make them feel the pain before they will learn anything---especially the govt. We are all rooting for you and your gal! The thing that stands out to me the most? There is no way in hell that they couldn't have found a light duty assignment for her. There is ALWAYS something to do at any place of business that a pregnant or injured worker could accomplish and be a productive employee. I'm sure you've done a ton of homework on this, but check the Department of Labor sites, both state and federal, and also the OSHA site. Might find some ammunition in there. Good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Posted July 13, 2008 Author Share Posted July 13, 2008 A couple questions first, Sox. Your fiance was hired as a casual. I have never heard of a casual employee staying on longer than a year. Did she get rehired, or did they just give her another tour so to speak. I thought a typical casual term of employment was just short of a year max. This is exactly why the Postal service hires casuals. They don't get full pay and no benefits are included. Plus the fact that they can push them around and terminate them when they are no longer needed. And the manager is playing the typical Postal bullsh*t game. And if she indeed is offered her job back, they WILL think of another reason to get rid of her. Count on it. This is an interesting case to me , although I'm sorry that it happened to you and your fiance. Here's to sticking it up their asses, from one postal worker to another. But just be careful, my friend. They will try and make your life miserable at work . But the union should have your back, even if you're not a member. By law they have to. Just watch your back and I hope everything goes well. I'm sure it will. One thing Postal Service management will never understand is that harrasssing employees does not make them work better. In fact, it usually has the opposite effect. And it was brought up in a previous post, but I want to make sure that you try and get the names of the previous casuals who got transferred to other jobs within. Very very important. Knowing the Postal Service as I do, they will probably expunge files of this happening, if they haven't already. I have had this happen to myself. I'm rootin' for y'all to kick some ass! Here's to the dirty bastages they are. They hire them for a year,give them a week off,them bring them back for another year,if they like them. This woman is STUPID.All she had to do was send her to 030 under light duty,wait about 45 days until her year was up,and simply not bring her back.I Believe this was to send a message to all the casuals,"Don't even think about showing up with restrictions". As for me?Bring it on.EEOC protects you from retaliation.I've never been disciplined,and I rarely call in sick.Productivity?My scans will show how much I do.Plus I'm a naturally vindictive SOB.I'll document everything.I've been there 20 years and I've been around the block. I can always go after her with a civil suit as well if she pisses me off enough. I do know she is bucking for a head MDO position at another facility.I don't know if this would impact it or not;I sure hope it does. What I'd really like to happen:Bring my fiance on as a PTF Mailhandler,and waive the 90 probationary period so they can't create a reason to fire her then. I'm just so damn angry with her that I don't give a crap what they think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Posted July 13, 2008 Author Share Posted July 13, 2008 Hey Sox, has your finance clashed with this supervisor before? Not to imply anything negative about your finance of course. No.I'm not saying this just because I'm about to marry her either.She works her butt off.She's been there close to two years and has never missed a day.I really don't know why the MDO would do this unless it was to send a message to the other casuals.Her attitude when I informed her that she was in violation of the law was total arrogance."We aren't terminating her because she's pregnant.She's being terminated because she can't fulfill her job obligations." Whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxfactor Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 No.I'm not saying this just because I'm about to marry her either.She works her butt off.She's been there close to two years and has never missed a day.I really don't know why the MDO would do this unless it was to send a message to the other casuals.Her attitude when I informed her that she was in violation of the law was total arrogance."We aren't terminating her because she's pregnant.She's being terminated because she can't fulfill her job obligations." Whatever. Welcome to the Postal Bureaucracy, where our motto is ,"we don't give a sh*t for you". You've been there almost as long as I have Sox, so you know. Where the PO f'ked up IMO is, they should have just let her work out the rest of her tenure with restrictions and then let her go. They do not have to rehire casual employees. But it makes sense to hire one back that is fully trained and knows what they are doing, especailly agood worker like your fiancee. We have a saying at the Post Office: " If it makes sense, throw it out the window". Too many power hungry retards in upper management. I have seen first hand as a carrier how management simply does not give a sh*t about customer service anymore. It's all about speed and making their quotas. F'k the customer. I'm from the old school where I still give a sh*t about my customers and wouldn't have it any other way. What the hell happened? Case in point: Y'all remember those blue collection boxes on street corners and office complexes where you could dropyour letters into? Notice how they're disappearing? Now management's response to this is that they can no longer afford to pay the extra money for a collection run. Now just a few years ago, we carriers picked up the mail in the boxes on our routes. They put an end to that and instead made a a special collection run. We no longer pulled the mail from boxes on our routes. The collections runs did it. Now, instead of keeping the boxes there and having us go back to pulling them, they're just getting rid of them altogether. Does this make sense? Hell no, so let's make it so. Then they have the gall to put notes on the boxes with some bullsh*t like, "in order to better serve you.....". To me that just insults the customer. How the hell can that be "better serving you"? I sometimes feel like I'm working for the circus. These peoiple have no clue as to customer service and we have to hear the sh*t from our customers. Now, instead of the convenient blue collection box being in an office complex, for example. there is nothing. So Drs. and lawyers, etc have to send someone to the post office to deposit their outgoing mail. Hmmm "in order to better serve you" MY ASS!!! It's almost like someone has a hidden agenda to privatize the Post office. You think 42 cents is alot to mail a letternow? Just wait till it becomes a bunch of for-profit businesses delivering your mail. Rant over. Sorry to kind of steal your thread there Sox, but people have to know what kind of morans we work for. So does it surprise me what they're doing to your fiancee? Not in the slightest. Does it piss me off? Well, I think you already know the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.