Posted on 08/19/2004 1:12:36 PM PDT by Cagey
Florida is a Right To Work state. When I was there, I was employed under the strict understanding that I could be let go for any reason; one worked at the discretion of the employer.
I see that hasn't changed much...
You'd swear the report came from Leningrad...
OMG --- A city employee is fired! Maybe this should be in Breaking News....
Huh?
That is just plain low. You take care of family first.
I worked in a hospital several years ago, not as a nurse. The management made it very, very, clear that if we didn't show up for work on a hurricane or snow day, we would be in trouble.
If you couldn't get in, they sent a vehicle for you. Certain jobs it goes with the territory.
But a 30 year employee one year from retirement? I have to question that.
He made an informed decision. He knew the risk and advantages to both sides of the decision. Now he gets to live with it. I see no problem from either side.
This one hits close to home.
We live in a town on the SW coast of Florida.
When my husband took his job s with the local city government, he had to sign a form that said "in the event of a storm, he would be at the emergency center for up to 72 hours."
So everytime there's a storm scare, he packs his bags, packs some food, takes a sleeping bag and heads off to his job.
Before he goes, he secures our home, and we've made all kinds of arrangements in the event we have to evacuate. We also have made arrangements for his mother (who was in fact evacuated this past Thursday).
It's part of the job, and the employees necessary for the emergency maintenance of city systems have been told, if you don't show up for the "emergency duty" you won't have a job when you do show up. Everybody from top management on down has duties and they show up for them.
To allow leeway for one employee would put the entire system in jeopardy, IMHO. It's a condition of the job and you go into it with eyes wide open when you accept employment in that specific job.
I guess it sounds lousy, but they did warn him. If making the right decision was always easy and never had repercussions, why even the Dims might start doing it. The man made an informed decision and I commend him for it. On the other side, if they warned him, then didn't follow through, they would have no way to control their workforce...
The guy made a choice knowing what could happen. Maybe he should have took his mother home like he said he was going to do and he would still have his job.
The man is 61 years old, he had to know not returning to work could cost him his job.
Sorry, life sucks sometimes.
I have to question it too. I think there may be more to the story than is written here. He was warned and made his choice, but I think most managers would have told him if he felt he needed to be with his aged mother, go for it and they would have covered for him.
The employer must allow up to 8 weeks of unpaid vacation leave to accomodate the employee to take care of their family.
sorry, he was told that he had to be at work, he CHOOSE not to knowing full well of the consequences. I feel bad that the guy was fired, but he put himself in the position.
After 30 years he must have known the rules.
FMLA is not that simple. There is paperwork that must be filled out etc. You can't just call in one day and say my Mom, Dad etc is sick, I'll be out for awhile. Although this guy might not strike some as important, I'd say ensuring that the waste water system is up and running after an emergency is a pretty important job.
I think the free traders would tell you the job isn't his, he has not right to it, and he should shut up and find another one and stop whining.
They have the legal right to fire him, but do they have the moral right?
I dont' think they specified his mother as ailing, just old.
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.