Can you put link in comments how to go about determine value for EEOC mediation? Originally i did not know EEOC qas about money and was looking for only help. Now I'm concerned about termination and being left with nothing if workplace retaliates.
I've discovered that, in certain wrongful terminations, the claim is real, but it's not worth pursuing. Federal courts can get cranky about low value retaliation cases, my lawyer said.
Although some states have “good faith employment” laws to combat that At-Will employment, I understand an employer can fire you for really no reason at all in an At-will state, but what if instead of doing simply that they make up a false reason that is damaging to someone’s reputation or career, that would be wrongful termination. Not needing any reason but making up a false one is wrong.
This happened to my husband 4 months ago in Florida. The company accused him of saying things he didn’t (racial and sexist). A former employee quit a month after my husband became the boss of this particular site although my husband had nothing to do with it. This man was already quitting due to his complaint to HR regarding racism months before my husband ever got there. The timing was coincidence. This man went on to sue the company 1 1/2 years later. About 2 months after the lawsuit was filed HR came to my husbands site and fired him for using the “n” word (he’s never used that word) and being sexist towards women at the work sight. My husband demanded proof but they refused. They also refused to put this in writing and used the “fire at will” reason on paper. Besides that, my husband was hired to “clean up the sight” financially and walked into this racial mess on the side and did everything they told him regarding the racial training but kept having a lot of issues trying to get the $ needed from the company to fix the site. They wanted him to fix it without giving him what he needed to fix it. So there was tension there. We believe they are trying to appease the court and use my husband as a fall guy so they won’t have to pay as much money saying that they’ve “cleaned up the sight”. My husband has been in the industry for 25 years and everyone kind of knows everyone. He’s always had a good reputation and had headhunters coming after him all the time. He now can’t find a job. We wonder if word of mouth got out. As he’s been interviewing he’s had to do damage control a few times as people interviewing him know people from the company that fired him. We don’t know if it’s coincidence that my husbands not getting hired or his name has been ruined. It’s been heartbreaking as well as he’s a good man. At the same time we’ve been told we can’t sue because nothings in writing (how convenient for the company 🙄) and it’s a “right to work” state.
Well I Went Ahead & Hired An Attorney Because I Worked At Walmart Here In Pennsylvania & I Came Into Work One Day, Asked For A Work Accommodation Plus I Had A Complaint About A Supervisor & Was Pulled Into The Office Immediately. Then I Was Told My Performance Was Bad & Im Fired 🤣
Ed hones has a channel and he uses the term. I think he states case law? He uses retaliation and wrongful termination. Doesn't look like wa requires you to go to EEOC?
🤓I have an interesting topic to discuss, but be warned - it may be a bit of a brain twister. Imagine if an insurance company pressured your boss to fire you after you filed a complaint with HR about your previous boss. HR claimed agents were independent and wouldn't get involved. However, a week later, a different department demanded your termination, citing an ongoing investigation. You were never informed about the investigation or contacted. The EEOC filed a claim against the company, and after a position statement and rebuttal were completed, the EEOC dismissed the claim due to a lack of evidence of a relationship between the employer and employee. A "right to sue" letter was then issued 🧐
i wouldnt deny the person i would jist simply educate them. whoch is what a lawyer is suppost to do here is what i would do, say something like: yes its not a claim. its something that falls WITHIN another claim. for example: you can file a claim for violation of fair employment and house act violations. then from there list the proposed wrongful termination and as many elements as possible like unfair work conditions etc along with it all within that claim of violating fair employment as housing act. its an element of many elements within another claim. but u are correct no act lawsuit can be for wrongful termination you have to cite a real law and then use that within it as an element of 1 piece of evidence. generally rhe more evudence the better. usually a random termination not always be enough to be 51 percent preponderance
Wrongful termination in violation of public policy....is a claim. For example, the employee was terminated for complaining about the company's illegal acts unrelated to Title 7. Maybe the company defrauded a gov. agency customer and the employee confronted the company about it.
You are all good!!!
You’re 💯% correct, hence the reason they say “ if you were fired, AND faced discrimination; give us a call.” Notice they used and not or.
Hey Vince, I have one simple question. what’s the point of going to a jury trial if the judge still makes the final decision???
👀
Blue Yeti is a beast. Good for you for investing back into the channel.
Please talk about why attorneys don't want clients that ask "why".
So Retaliation being fired because of protected classes isn’t a claim?
Can you put link in comments how to go about determine value for EEOC mediation? Originally i did not know EEOC qas about money and was looking for only help. Now I'm concerned about termination and being left with nothing if workplace retaliates.
Check out our damages calculation and mediation preparation playlists.
I hear you clearly
Wow tks Im listening to you do you have video on top questions to ask defendant at a depo? Asking for a friend.
Another home run Vincent🙏🏼
I've discovered that, in certain wrongful terminations, the claim is real, but it's not worth pursuing. Federal courts can get cranky about low value retaliation cases, my lawyer said.
Although some states have “good faith employment” laws to combat that At-Will employment, I understand an employer can fire you for really no reason at all in an At-will state, but what if instead of doing simply that they make up a false reason that is damaging to someone’s reputation or career, that would be wrongful termination. Not needing any reason but making up a false one is wrong.
This happened to my husband 4 months ago in Florida. The company accused him of saying things he didn’t (racial and sexist).
A former employee quit a month after my husband became the boss of this particular site although my husband had nothing to do with it. This man was already quitting due to his complaint to HR regarding racism months before my husband ever got there. The timing was coincidence.
This man went on to sue the company 1 1/2 years later. About 2 months after the lawsuit was filed HR came to my husbands site and fired him for using the “n” word (he’s never used that word) and being sexist towards women at the work sight.
My husband demanded proof but they refused. They also refused to put this in writing and used the “fire at will” reason on paper.
Besides that, my husband was hired to “clean up the sight” financially and walked into this racial mess on the side and did everything they told him regarding the racial training but kept having a lot of issues trying to get the $ needed from the company to fix the site. They wanted him to fix it without giving him what he needed to fix it. So there was tension there.
We believe they are trying to appease the court and use my husband as a fall guy so they won’t have to pay as much money saying that they’ve “cleaned up the sight”.
My husband has been in the industry for 25 years and everyone kind of knows everyone. He’s always had a good reputation and had headhunters coming after him all the time. He now can’t find a job. We wonder if word of mouth got out.
As he’s been interviewing he’s had to do damage control a few times as people interviewing him know people from the company that fired him.
We don’t know if it’s coincidence that my husbands not getting hired or his name has been ruined.
It’s been heartbreaking as well as he’s a good man.
At the same time we’ve been told we can’t sue because nothings in writing (how convenient for the company 🙄) and it’s a “right to work” state.
Brannigan makes it very clear in all of his videos that he is only talking about California because California is the only place that he is licensed.
Well I Went Ahead & Hired An Attorney Because I Worked At Walmart Here In Pennsylvania & I Came Into Work One Day, Asked For A Work Accommodation Plus I Had A Complaint About A Supervisor & Was Pulled Into The Office Immediately. Then I Was Told My Performance Was Bad & Im Fired 🤣
Ed hones has a channel and he uses the term. I think he states case law? He uses retaliation and wrongful termination.
Doesn't look like wa requires you to go to EEOC?
🤓I have an interesting topic to discuss, but be warned - it may be a bit of a brain twister. Imagine if an insurance company pressured your boss to fire you after you filed a complaint with HR about your previous boss. HR claimed agents were independent and wouldn't get involved. However, a week later, a different department demanded your termination, citing an ongoing investigation. You were never informed about the investigation or contacted. The EEOC filed a claim against the company, and after a position statement and rebuttal were completed, the EEOC dismissed the claim due to a lack of evidence of a relationship between the employer and employee. A "right to sue" letter was then issued 🧐
O.K. maybe it was not wrongful termination, maybe I was terminated wrongfully? Might I have a claim?
Omg! People are so arrogant. I would not take him as a client, but then I’m not an attorney lol I just can’t stand the attitude of know it alls.
i wouldnt deny the person i would jist simply educate them. whoch is what a lawyer is suppost to do
here is what i would do, say something like:
yes its not a claim. its something that falls WITHIN another claim. for example: you can file a claim for violation of fair employment and house act violations. then from there list the proposed wrongful termination and as many elements as possible like unfair work conditions etc along with it all within that claim of violating fair employment as housing act.
its an element of many elements within another claim. but u are correct no act lawsuit can be for wrongful termination you have to cite a real law and then use that within it as an element of 1 piece of evidence. generally rhe more evudence the better. usually a random termination not always be enough to be 51 percent preponderance
I wasn't offended, they thought they were quoting an attorney.
Audio is fine, JC.
Sounds good to me 👍🏻
👋 😊
👍
Wrongful termination in violation of public policy....is a claim. For example, the employee was terminated for complaining about the company's illegal acts unrelated to Title 7. Maybe the company defrauded a gov. agency customer and the employee confronted the company about it.
Too bad you cannot go after toxic work environments. Corporate bullying is rapant and you would be in for big settlements Sir...OH WELL ?