Posted on 09/16/2014 9:38:14 AM PDT by RandallFlagg
THORNTON, Colo. - Chick-fil-A is releasing an employee's "disciplinary documents," after the company demoted her following surgery for breast cancer.
However, employment law attorneys call the documents "suspect."
(Excerpt) Read more at thedenverchannel.com ...
Have never heard about this. I can’t believe that Chick-fil-A (or any employer) would release confidential records regarding an employee/ex employee with breast cancer history. Neither the personnel nor health records should be public info.
Yeah, so back in June 2012 when the pickle kissers got all excited about Chick-Fil-A saying they supported “traditional marriage” and everyone was supposed to boycott Chick-Fil-A, we must have visited at least 12 times that month.
Read it again. It says they’re releasing her “”disciplinary documents”.
Oh, I get paid Thursday and will be buying a TON of their goodies for the family.
Obamacare has illegitimately terminated thousands of times more health insurance policies than Chick-Fil-A could ever dream of.
That’s fair. If she wants to make it a public spectacle, then Chick-fil-A has every right to defend themselves in like manner.
A Chick-fil-A corporate spokeswoman stated that Richards is an employee of an independent franchise owner and not a corporate employee.
Sounds to me like the franchise should be the culpable party here. Also sounds like the owner has very little compassion. I hope Chick-fil-A revokes their franchise to this person because they are giving the brand a bad name.
Exactly.
But, reading the left’s hate spewing is just priceless.
So a pregnant woman applied and they tell her to call back after she has the baby and they have to settle with her for $10,000? Geezzzzzz......... a lot of lawyers have really screwed America.
This appears to have been done by the franchise owner. If he released disciplinary records without the permission of the employee, he will be sued and lose (and rightly so).
Of course, the media will try to tar the Chik-Fil-A corporate offices with this. They need to do their own investigation, and if this franchisee is guilty of releasing confidential employee info - they need to revoke his franchise pronto, just to limit the bad publicity.
Seems to me if she was written up for disciplinary infractions, the employer has every right to can her.
Of course, the media will gloss over or fail to mention the alleged disciplinary issues and once again portray Chick Fil A management as heartless SOBs who would fire an employee following breast cancer surgery.
All part of that war on women BS.
In both cases they will not understand why. Now that is priceless, and at the same token very saddening.
I understand what you are saying, and at one point in time I even found it amusing. Now it is just upsetting, at least to me, that their stupidity never changes. Because I have lived with their hate & stupidity for too long now I guess.
Agreed.
You and me both.
Here’s the Facebook commentary, if you can stomach it:
https://www.facebook.com/DenverChannel/posts/10152452875703271?comment_id=10152454161218271&offset=0&total_comments=158
This is a ping list for cancer survivors and caregivers to share information. If you would like your name added to or removed from this ping list, please tell us in the comments section at this link (click here). (For the most updated list of names, click on the same link and go to the last comment.)
I love Chick-Fil-A.
But this franchise owner’s story doesn’t sound credible. It sounds more like the owner was worried about the price of insurance and looking for a reason to drop this employee.
Or maybe I’ve just worked for too many companies where this stuff happened - for example, the bosses would talk about finding a way to drop employees without actually laying them off.
Whatever happens, this woman will really need that insurance now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.