Walgreens Pharmacist Fired

[bersaguy]

Maybe they fired him because when he discharged his weapon he missed hitting the bad guy. Maybe if he were a better shot they would have kept him employed................jmho

[E4 No More]

Violate the rules then you should be fired.

 

"At Will" employment is complete BS and should be abolished. I know for a fact that some co-workers of mine at a couple of companies were discriminated against, fired for no cause, (other than the color of their skin or their disability), and then the employer hid behind "At Will" laws so that the company was safe from the EEOC. My own wife was discriminated against by her District Manager who hailed from Saudi-Arabia who didn't think women should be Pizza Hut managers, and who fired her citing "At Will" employment laws in Missouri. I found out later that he had once assaulted her by slapping her in the face with a bundle of dollar bills. And no, she didn't tell me even though I was a LEO where it happened because she was afraid I'd lose my job over his inevitable resisting of arrest had I known at the time.

[macville]

Violate the rules then you should be fired.

 

"At Will" employment is complete BS and should be abolished. I know for a fact that some co-workers of mine at a couple of companies were discriminated against, fired for no cause, (other than the color of their skin or their disability), and then the employer hid behind "At Will" laws so that the company was safe from the EEOC. My own wife was discriminated against by her District Manager who hailed from Saudi-Arabia who didn't think women should be Pizza Hut managers, and who fired her citing "At Will" employment laws in Missouri. I found out later that he had once assaulted her by slapping her in the face with a bundle of dollar bills. And no, she didn't tell me even though I was a LEO where it happened because she was afraid I'd lose my job over his inevitable resisting of arrest had I known at the time.

 

So I guess you really don't like freedom do you? Why do people think jobs are their's? Any jobs is owned by the company. Yes, at-will will be abused by some, but you know what, freedom is always going to be that way. Stop feeling like anyone owes you anything.

[E4 No More]

So I guess you really don't like freedom do you? Why do people think jobs are their's? Any jobs is owned by the company. Yes, at-will will be abused by some, but you know what, freedom is always going to be that way. Stop feeling like anyone owes you anything.

Sorry, but this response is a complete load of crap! Keep in mind that I once WAS an employer and my opinion hasn't changed since then, so this is not hypocrisy. I treated my employees with the respect and dignity that they deserved, and some of that included termination for cause.

 

When you are offered a job you are agreeing to an understanding between you and the employer, are you not? The employer tells you the job responsibilities and the compensation for meeting those responsibilities, correct? That agreement is called a "contract" by the legal definition, if I am correct. Said contracts can be verbal or written, but today's employers protect their selves by sticking with verbal contracts so that there's no record of said contract unless there happens to be a witness to it, or a recording of it. Anyway, what happens when you break a contract? Are there NOT consequences for doing so, or are you free to break a contract with, say, your mortgage holder under the guise of "freedom"? I'm not talking about changes in the needs of the business that warrants a lay-off. That is a cause that is commonly understood by both parties just like if you do not do your job or break a rule of the employer is also understood as cause.

 

Freedom? The preamble to The Constitution does NOT read, "We the business entities of The United States...." I believe it specifically says "people" instead: therefore, business entities are neither a protected group nor are they indicated to be applicable to what follows, meaning that the freedoms which are spelled-out in The Constitution. 

 

 

"Abused by some"??? Why is it that I can recall several case then? If only a few are abusing it then statistically I should only have personal knowledge of one.  Also, as an employer you are responsible for the managers underneath you.

 

Yeah, I must be a freedom-hating communist because I believe that a business entity's "freedoms" do not trump my freedom unless the causes are mutually agreed upon beforehand.

 

So I guess we'll agree to disagree.

[DaveTN]

At Will" employment is complete BS and should be abolished.

An employer shouldn’t need a reason to let you go; and they certainly shouldn’t have to explain it to anyone; unless they are contesting your unemployment claim. I’ve seen more worthless workers get fired and yell discrimination than I have seen be discriminated against.

If an employer wants to fire you, you are more than likely gone it’s just a matter of when. It may not look as bad on your employment record as if you force them to have cause.

They are places where you have job protection...most union shops.

[DaveTN]

When you are offered a job you are agreeing to an understanding between you and the employer, are you not? The employer tells you the job responsibilities and the compensation for meeting those responsibilities, correct? That agreement is called a "contract" by the legal definition, if I am correct.

No, if you have an employment contract you are not under "employment at will".

[midtennchip]

 
When you are offered a job you are agreeing to an understanding between you and the employer, are you not? The employer tells you the job responsibilities and the compensation for meeting those responsibilities, correct? That agreement is called a "contract" by the legal definition, if I am correct. Said contracts can be verbal or written, but today's employers protect their selves by sticking with verbal contracts so that there's no record of said contract unless there happens to be a witness to it, or a recording of it. Anyway, what happens when you break a contract? Are there NOT consequences for doing so, or are you free to break a contract with, say, your mortgage holder under the guise of "freedom"? I'm not talking about changes in the needs of the business that warrants a lay-off. That is a cause that is commonly understood by both parties just like if you do not do your job or break a rule of the employer is also understood as cause.

No, that description is not a contract (verbal or written). It is missing a key term which all employment contracts must have. The missing term is length. At will employment, by definition, does not have a length of time. The employee does not guarantee any specific period that he'll work for and the employer does not guarantee the length of time the job will last. Both may terminate the relationship at any time.

[E4 No More]

No, that description is not a contract (verbal or written). It is missing a key term which all employment contracts must have. The missing term is length. At will employment, by definition, does not have a length of time. The employee does not guarantee any specific period that he'll work for and the employer does not guarantee the length of time the job will last. Both may terminate the relationship at any time.

I get your point, but you are referencing At Will for your point. Government set up At Will to protect the employers; not the people for which they are supposed to represent. They do this under the pretense of attracting business for the good of the very people that it screws, but it is still BS.

[midtennchip]

I get your point, but you are referencing At Will for your point. Government set up At Will to protect the employers; not the people for which they are supposed to represent. They do this under the pretense of attracting business for the good of the very people that it screws, but it is still BS.

I wasn't necessarily referencing an employment at Will situation, but was just talking about the specific situation you described (which is the typical way employees are hired). While there are some (And from my experience, relatively few) cases where employees get "screwed," I talk to many terminated employees (usually more than a few each week) who THINK they have been screwed, but in reality, probably should have gotten fired. Most of the time, those employees refuse to believe that they weren't very good employees and want to find ANY other reason. The majority of the time, the fired employee was just a difficult person (too many complaints, didn't get along with other employees, didn't get along with customers, had a generally poor attitude, etc). It is very hard to find a definitive "cause" to point to, but the employer just gets tired of it. Edited July 24, 2014 by midtennchip

[E4 No More]

Let me make my point with real life examples after first pointing out that At Will means that the employer doesn't have to cite a reason for the termination, but they cannot then dispute unemployment compensation as a result. If they cite a reason then it has to be documented to deny unemployment compensation and offers no protection for violations of federal equal employment regulations.

 

1. As stated earlier, my spouse came under the supervision of a district manager who was a Muslim of Arab origin who made discriminatory remarks concerning women in position of authority over men. Her previous district manager gave her glowing evaluations and she had no disciplinary actions; however, her new district manager soon, and without warning, terminated her, and Pizza Hut cited At Will protection. Is that BS?

 

2. I am legally disabled. While working night shift at a gas station for a local oil company my manager gave me constant glowing remarks concerning the work that I did. When my district manager found out that I was legally disabled requiring minor accommodations that had no impact on the business he demanded a letter from my doctor indicating my diagnosis and enumerating what accommodations that were required to be made. When I provided such documentation, (although I understand that such demand was illegal to begin with), I was then terminated by my manager who stated that he was reluctant to do so even though he was ordered by the district manager to terminate me. Kimbro Oil Company cited At Will protection. Is that BS?

 

3. While working for Rent-A-Center I had a black co-worker who desired the position of store manager at another store. I was within earshot of the regional manager when he was discussing the position with our store manager when the regional manager made the statement that he wasn't going to "...put that N___ in a store located in a "white neighborhood" regardless of his qualifications I reported what I heard to the co-worker in question who confronted the regional manager about it when he was informed that he wasn't getting the promotion. The regional manager then terminated the co-worker citing At Will protection. Is that BS?

 

4. I know of another co-worker at another company that was terminated under At Will protection when his new boss didn't like having to make accommodations for his disability. This person would not be considered annoying or difficult to work with, and he had outstanding work ethic. Is this BS?

 

You can put perfume on crap but it remains crap regardless of how you want to justify or minimalize it.

[midtennchip]

Let me make my point with real life examples after first pointing out that At Will means that the employer doesn't have to cite a reason for the termination, but they cannot then dispute unemployment compensation as a result. If they cite a reason then it has to be documented to deny unemployment compensation and offers no protection for violations of federal equal employment regulations.
 
1. As stated earlier, my spouse came under the supervision of a district manager who was a Muslim of Arab origin who made discriminatory remarks concerning women in position of authority over men. Her previous district manager gave her glowing evaluations and she had no disciplinary actions; however, her new district manager soon, and without warning, terminated her, and Pizza Hut cited At Will protection. Is that BS?
 
2. I am legally disabled. While working night shift at a gas station for a local oil company my manager gave me constant glowing remarks concerning the work that I did. When my district manager found out that I was legally disabled requiring minor accommodations that had no impact on the business he demanded a letter from my doctor indicating my diagnosis and enumerating what accommodations that were required to be made. When I provided such documentation, (although I understand that such demand was illegal to begin with), I was then terminated by my manager who stated that he was reluctant to do so even though he was ordered by the district manager to terminate me. Kimbro Oil Company cited At Will protection. Is that BS?
 
3. While working for Rent-A-Center I had a black co-worker who desired the position of store manager at another store. I was within earshot of the regional manager when he was discussing the position with our store manager when the regional manager made the statement that he wasn't going to "...put that N___ in a store located in a "white neighborhood" regardless of his qualifications I reported what I heard to the co-worker in question who confronted the regional manager about it when he was informed that he wasn't getting the promotion. The regional manager then terminated the co-worker citing At Will protection. Is that BS?
 
4. I know of another co-worker at another company that was terminated under At Will protection when his new boss didn't like having to make accommodations for his disability. This person would not be considered annoying or difficult to work with, and he had outstanding work ethic. Is this BS?
 
You can put perfume on crap but it remains crap regardless of how you want to justify or minimalize it.

If the facts are as you state (and I don't dispute them), at will doctrine would not protect any of those employers. Title VII and ADA would prohibit those actions. Those are not legitimate at will terminations.

[macville]

Sorry, but this response is a complete load of crap! Keep in mind that I once WAS an employer and my opinion hasn't changed since then, so this is not hypocrisy. I treated my employees with the respect and dignity that they deserved, and some of that included termination for cause.

 

When you are offered a job you are agreeing to an understanding between you and the employer, are you not? The employer tells you the job responsibilities and the compensation for meeting those responsibilities, correct? That agreement is called a "contract" by the legal definition, if I am correct. Said contracts can be verbal or written, but today's employers protect their selves by sticking with verbal contracts so that there's no record of said contract unless there happens to be a witness to it, or a recording of it. Anyway, what happens when you break a contract? Are there NOT consequences for doing so, or are you free to break a contract with, say, your mortgage holder under the guise of "freedom"? I'm not talking about changes in the needs of the business that warrants a lay-off. That is a cause that is commonly understood by both parties just like if you do not do your job or break a rule of the employer is also understood as cause.

 

Freedom? The preamble to The Constitution does NOT read, "We the business entities of The United States...." I believe it specifically says "people" instead: therefore, business entities are neither a protected group nor are they indicated to be applicable to what follows, meaning that the freedoms which are spelled-out in The Constitution. 

 

 

"Abused by some"??? Why is it that I can recall several case then? If only a few are abusing it then statistically I should only have personal knowledge of one.  Also, as an employer you are responsible for the managers underneath you.

 

Yeah, I must be a freedom-hating communist because I believe that a business entity's "freedoms" do not trump my freedom unless the causes are mutually agreed upon beforehand.

 

So I guess we'll agree to disagree.

That's great, but not required. I am not saying it's right, but since the job is actually owned by the owner, it is their right to do what they want with it.

 

Words, unless written down and signed do not make a legal contract. So if you've signed a contract for your job then you are not at-will.

And who owns and run businesses??? People! The people who own/run businesses are a protected class and have rights as such.

No, that's not statistics, that's just conjecture as your experiences doesn't prove anything statistically.  It's the same reason people think that mass shootings are going up while in reality are going down.

Who forced anyone to take a job? If you don't have a contract then obviously if, in an at-will state, you take such a job then you've agreed that you can be fired at any time for any reason. It's your freedom to take or not take the job in the first place!

[E4 No More]

That's great, but not required. I am not saying it's right, but since the job is actually owned by the owner, it is their right to do what they want with it.

 

Words, unless written down and signed do not make a legal contract. So if you've signed a contract for your job then you are not at-will.

And who owns and run businesses??? People! The people who own/run businesses are a protected class and have rights as such.

No, that's not statistics, that's just conjecture as your experiences doesn't prove anything statistically.  It's the same reason people think that mass shootings are going up while in reality are going down.

Who forced anyone to take a job? If you don't have a contract then obviously if, in an at-will state, you take such a job then you've agreed that you can be fired at any time for any reason. It's your freedom to take or not take the job in the first place!

Conjecture? Isn't that what you offered? Sorry, we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

The majority of businesses are corporations formed to protect the "owners" from personal liability for their conduct. In other words, you can get a judgment against the business, but not against the owner who actually did ______.IMO you can't have it both ways. You are either an individual or an entity, and entities shouldn't be protected claiming their freedom that is not granted in the Constitution.

Edited July 24, 2014 by SWJewellTN

[E4 No More]

If the facts are as you state (and I don't dispute them), at will doctrine would not protect any of those employers. Title VII and ADA would prohibit those actions. Those are not legitimate at will terminations.

Yes, but you have to be able to prove that now, don't you? Should employees carry around recording devices every day to protect themselves from their employer?

[midtennchip]

Yes, but you have to be able to prove that now, don't you? Should employees carry around recording devices every day to protect themselves from their employer?

 

No, that's what witnesses are for.  

[E4 No More]

No, that's what witnesses are for.  

You mean the witnesses who are afraid of losing their jobs? Ya, right! It's amazing how memories blank and hearing dulls in these situations.

[midtennchip]

You mean the witnesses who are afraid of losing their jobs? Ya, right! It's amazing how memories blank and hearing dulls in these situations.

 

Including you?  I thought you were one of the witnesses.  There are also protections for those witnesses.  Sounds like no law would stop any of this is the witnesses won't come forward.  Wouldn't matter if it was at-will or not if the witnesses won't come forward.

[E4 No More]

Including you?  I thought you were one of the witnesses.  There are also protections for those witnesses.  Sounds like no law would stop any of this is the witnesses won't come forward.  Wouldn't matter if it was at-will or not if the witnesses won't come forward.

Actually, I told the fellow that I would be happy to testify. He thanked me and I heard nothing more about it after that. It's not like I can file a case for him, right? You see, I have a very hard time keeping my mouth shut when I see something wrong, (you are either part of the problem or part of the solution type of thing), but my confronting the regional manager would have accomplished nothing but getting me fired. I did, however, say something to my SIL's husband who was an executive of the company at the time. He did nothing about it either other than to tell me sometime later that the dude was fired for something totally unrelated.

Edited July 24, 2014 by SWJewellTN