|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
11-17-2011, 01:36 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak
That's everywhere, Pete.
Just over the weekend we fired one for "texting" on the production floor, two for being drunk on the job, and one for doing serious damage to a vital piece of equipment with his forklift, just being a jackass.
Dave
|
Whereupon the terminated employees immediately left the building, went home, called in their unemployment claims (which they will likely receive), donned their protest gear (consisting of week old underwear, dirty shirt and jeans, and yesterday's socks) and went to join their brethren at the local Occupy rally.
|
11-17-2011, 01:50 PM
|
|
Loyal Opposition
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
Whereupon the terminated employees immediately left the building, went home, called in their unemployment claims (which they will likely receive), donned their protest gear (consisting of week old underwear, dirty shirt and jeans, and yesterday's socks) and went to join their brethren at the local Occupy rally.
|
Under most state laws, none of the mentioned employees would likely qualify for unemployment, as drunkenness and horseplay would likely be considered "serious misconduct." If there was a rule against use of personal telephones on the floor, I would expect that the one fired for texting would also be denied benefits.
I expect that most of the folks involved in the OWS movement have more serious concerns and are likely more responsible than someone who gets fired for showing up to work drunk. In fact, the statistics showed that the vast majority of the protesters were employed. They are just sick and tired of seeing the work they do devalued while the parasites on wall street get richer.
Regards,
D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
|
11-17-2011, 02:23 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
Under most state laws, none of the mentioned employees would likely qualify for unemployment, as drunkenness and horseplay would likely be considered "serious misconduct." If there was a rule against use of personal telephones on the floor, I would expect that the one fired for texting would also be denied benefits.
|
I suspect that they would receive unemployment.
The definition of serious misconduct varies from state to state, but is generally defined as conduct that is "harmful to the interests of the employer, and must be done intentionally or in disregard of the employer's interests." At various levels of the claims and appeal process, the benefits could be denied. However, if the claim gets to an ALJ, all bets are off. I'd suspect that most of the ALJ's that I've seen would not deem texting as misconduct, particularly if there were no prior warnings that such behavior could result in discharge. If there were no warning, and company policy specifically stated that an employee could be terminated for texting, an ALJ might decide that the employer might term an employee for violation of policy, but the violation of policy was not misconduct as defined by the state.
The individual doing damage to equipment would likely be eligible for unemployment, unless the employer could prove that the employee deliberately damaged the equipment. As you're likely aware, in unemployment hearings the employer has the burden of proof to demonstrate why a claim should be denied. The employer would have to have significant proof that the employee's actions were intentional. Not an easy thing to do. So, I strongly believe the claim would be allowed.
Drunkenness? 50/50. Did the employer actually see the employees drinking? Did the employer send the employees for a reasonable - suspicion breathalyzer or blood test? If there isn't proof that the employees were intoxicated, then it comes down to whether their horseplay met the definition of misconduct. Without more facts, and assuming that this employer is like many who terminate but fail to adequately document, the employees have a pretty good chance at a hearing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
I expect that most of the folks involved in the OWS movement have more serious concerns and are likely more responsible than someone who gets fired for showing up to work drunk.
|
Serious concerns like getting laid by their fellow protestors, blocking traffic, or trashing police cars?
Last edited by whell; 11-17-2011 at 03:06 PM.
|
11-19-2011, 06:06 AM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
Whereupon the terminated employees immediately left the building, went home, called in their unemployment claims (which they will likely receive), donned their protest gear (consisting of week old underwear, dirty shirt and jeans, and yesterday's socks) and went to join their brethren at the local Occupy rally.
|
Good for them. Maybe they'll be better at that, than they were at driving a forklift?
Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
11-16-2011, 11:22 AM
|
|
Resident octogenarian
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
|
|
Well I have news for y'all, Monday and Tuesday were errand days, bank, grocery store, opthalmologist, so with the latter the designated driver is the one not having the eye exam. They are building McMansions left, right and center. We saw two new sites starting the bulldozing and road making process. One site that started a year and a half back has a sign saying it was already 50% sold. Somebody is buying these McMansions. I really like to see it because the new process is to provide common septic and drainfield so they put the houses on one acre lots. This simply drives up the price of our 4-1/2 acres. After all there is really no value in having a 6000 sq ft house cheek by jowl with its neighbour. The county currently has us at $653,900 and when the 475 sq ft playroom is finished that will go over $700,000
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Last edited by merrylander; 11-16-2011 at 11:47 AM.
|
11-16-2011, 11:36 AM
|
|
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
|
|
Nice Rob!
There's a new development behind me with McMansions. Right before the crash they put in the last road, it's been empty. I figure that when they start building on it we've seen the worst of it here.
I agree, why would someone build a beautiful house on a tiny lot. I'd rather have a smaller house on a larger lot. Maybe a nice barn. Neighbors, I hate them
Blue, how do you legislate those things?
Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
|
11-17-2011, 10:14 AM
|
|
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
|
|
Another piece of encouraging news, I can't find the article online but the big railroads are booming. Hiring even.
Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
|
11-17-2011, 12:44 PM
|
|
Resident octogenarian
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
|
|
The other aspect of this communal septic tank.drainfield and one acre lots is care. The city folk buying these McMansions don't know from septic and dump every thing in them. The group up the road had the system back up - phew. One of the locals hit a skunk last night - right across the road from the end of our driveway - phew indeed.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
|
11-17-2011, 03:42 PM
|
|
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
|
|
Eeek!
Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
|
11-18-2011, 10:40 AM
|
|
Resident octogenarian
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
|
|
It also may prove that some people have tunnel vision, or as we used to say in La Belle Province - Tete de Pioche.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:40 AM.
|