Reply With Quote
Sounds like a pretty idiotic boss.
Firing contest by boss leads employees to quit
State judge sides with ex-workers, citing 'intolerable' work environment
A Bettendorf businessman, branded as the “boss from ” by some of his employees, offered prizes to workers who could predict which of them would next be fired.
A state judge has called that a “deplorable” act and sided with the company’s ex-employees.
Read more
Sounds like a pretty idiotic boss.
lol....$10? Add cheap to the list behind arrongant asshole.
Oh wait, was she a great big fat person?
lolz
Only read the posts, not the link, but my immediate thoughts is he did such a thing to have other employees rat out the slackers he didn't know about.
1) He owned the business and, even if distasteful, it was not illegal to have such a contest.
2) The contest did not require anyone turn anyone else in for conduct that would cause them to be fired; the owner hired a secret shopper to evaluate employee performance. If anything, (and, IMO, I think this was the purpose of the contest) it gave them fair warning their adherence to rules was being observed and that a failure to abide by them would result in termination.
3) The employees voluntarily resigned which, regardless of the tastefulness of the contest, disqualifies them from unemployment benefit.
4) Nothing in the story indicates the "offended" employees attempted to address their grievances through any channels that may have been afforded them by their employer -- conveniently, there's no mention of whether or not such a process existed.
5) Quitting, and giving up a source of income in this economy, is seriously stupid. Don't play the game. Quit talking on your cell phone, wear the ing shirt, don't let your friends behind the counter, take off the hat, park where you're told, and be courteous to customers. Sounds like the owner was having a problem with widespread disregard of the rules and wanted to bring back some decorum.
I think the judge got it wrong.
In the future, I bet the employer just hires the secret shopper and fires employees without such an "offensive" warning.
If I were the employer, I'd be tempted to sue the former employees for slander or defamation.
Last edited by Yonivore; 10-03-2011 at 05:13 PM.
You wouldn't get anything. They are unemployed.
I'd settle for the judgement.
State records show that at least two QC Mart employees sent letters to company managers objecting to the contest. One worker wrote that the contest was “bizarre and unprofessional.” Another worker wrote that it had “created an atmosphere of distrust, intimidation and paranoia.”
Did you read the story?
where is the slander and defamation?
Yep; I read it.
Shelsky was the subject of the article and the unemployment dispute.Shelsky said she and her store manager, along with a few other employees, quit as soon as they saw the memo and realized it wasn’t a joke or a prank.
“It was very degrading,” she said. “We looked at that, then looked at each other, and said, ‘OK, we’re done.’ ”
Did anything in the story indicated that the "offended" employees attempted to address their grievances?
You can't sue for slander and defamation when you've done every single thing the employee claimed you did.
Exactly. Being (truthfully) outed as the modern day Ebeneezer Scrooge <> being defamed or slandered.
I would make them support the claim he was "from ."
I don't know many people that find "convenience store clerk" the most rewarding career choice. Yes, it's honorable employment but, I can see where a generation of people raised to believe they're en led to a job -- regardless of their own work ethic -- could see a disciplined employer as being "from " and creating a "hostile work environment" by demanding they adhere to company policies regarding store operations and employee conduct.
If the local convenience store chain where I live is any indication, I'd fire about half the staff and keep looking for employees with the work ethic of the half I didn't fire.
How does requiring employees to adhere to a code of conduct equate to being a modern day Ebeneezer Scrooge?
Uh, the firing contest? That was ing psychotic.
No one was required to participate.
Thankfully there are regulations penalizing those that create hostile work environments.
No one would be required to participate in a wet t-shirt contest, were he to have one of those, either. Do you think that would fly?
There are lines you don't cross as an employee or as an employer. He crossed them. If they're slackers, fire them and be done with it.
If he were a Beach Bar, yes.
Well, it's not the contest that was at issue in the court case, it was whether or not the employee who quit was en led to unemployment. It was in the employee's interest to make the case conditions were so oppressive, quitting was tantamount to being fired.
I don't think a non-compulsory contest over who will be fired for non-compliance with company policies rises to that level. The story states the employer was known as "The Boss from ," but, other than some vague allusions to a "hostile work environment," no offense -- other than the contest -- was offered as evidence of the hostility.
Sounds to me like a bunch of minimum wage grade employees saw an opportunity and found a lawyer to take their case before an idiotic judge that doesn't know a quitter from a fired person.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
