Posted on 03/21/2009 6:22:35 AM PDT by PurpleMan
A jury decided last June that Wachovia had violated his rights under the Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act, which requires employers to provide workers returning from service a salary, status and seniority similar to what they had before leaving. It was left to Judge Arterton to decide damages.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Is this - Good because a soldier is "taken care of"? Bad because the amount is "excessive"? Good because the law is followed? Bad because big business is being "punished"? Good because a judge does the right thing? Bad because the NYTimes never say good thing about the military?
I guess it's whose ox is being gored.
Didn't Wells Fargo "buy* Wachovia?
Cheers!
. . . Mr. Serricchio [was awarded] about $400,000 in back pay and interest, $390,000 in punitive damages, and reimbursement for his legal fees, which are likely to top $500,000.
From the article...
“By the time Mr. Serricchio returned, his employer, the securities division of Prudential Financial, had merged into Wachovia Securities, now a part of Wells Fargo. His clients had dispersed, and Wachovia offered him a job paying only a $2,000-a-month advance on his commissions, far short of the $80,000 a year he had been earning when he left. Mr. Serricchio declined the offer.”
this is good because an employer tried to screw a US Military man........All else dont really mean squat to me.
I guess he got an attny that got him the $$$......Oh well
Jury found the company guilty, it is obvious they were.
—
It was left to Judge Arterton to decide damages:
She did so on Thursday, affirming the jury’s verdict and awarding Mr. Serricchio about $400,000 in back pay and interest, $390,000 in punitive damages, and reimbursement for his legal fees, which are likely to top $500,000. His new salary will be $144,000 for one year, the court ordered, after which he will be back to working on commission.
1)One man’s excessive is another man’s justice.
2)All law breakers should be punished, so who cares if it is big business?
It’s good because the Reserve components make up the bulk of combat service, and combat service support troops in the Army.
Back in the day, in my Reserve outfit, we were told of a case concerning USRRA where a mill worker notified his boss at 5:00p Friday he had annual training beginning at 6:00a Saturday, and would not be at work for two weeks.
The company attempted to fire the mill worker. They lost under USRRA. A judge pointed out that all the law said was for the reservist to give “advanced notice” of his training, and 5:00p Friday the day before AT constituted “advanced notice.”
Some companies just don’t give a sh%t about reserve military duty. That’s why USRRA was written, and it’s good to see a Company forced to realize that the freedom the Company enjoys to make money is not necessarily free.
“...reimbursement for his legal fees, which are likely to top $500,000.”
One wonders why the military did not not use their extensive JAG Corps to defend him?
I guess they’re more concerned with going after those who... We’ll, let’s not go there. (wherever there is. :~) )
I’m just posing the good-bad questions that come with a story that has good-bad aspects in the public forum.
My guess is because this case was heard in Federal Court, not at court martial.
Yea, I know. I was about to make another point but thought better of it.
I was once an Army Guard Battery Commander. Had a case where a troop who was a truck driver was constantly being dispatched to another state on drill weekend.
He was doing all the right things, giving plenty of notice (1-2 months in advance), but his dispatcher was ignoring his drill obligations.
Finally had to call him in for article 15. Suspended any punishment, but made it clear the soldier HAD to fix this problem.
In desperation the soldier called not his dispatcher or department head, he called the owner of the company! Laid out his problem to the man and the very next day, the dispatcher was GONE. Fired. Out of the company.
Problem solved.
Wasn’t in your shoes or position at the time but it seems odd that the leadership solution was to have the Soldier given an Art. 15 forcing him into a desperation call the owner which could have gotten him fired.
It would appear that leadership-to-leadership “prayer meeting” would have been a more appropriate (and equally effective) method.
It worked out in the end, but just curious
In insurance there is two reasons for a big settlement. One is to justly compensate the victim. The second is to send a call to the business being charged and any others out there who might get a big idea to do the same thing.
It’s not just about ‘punishing big business’ or ‘that person doesn’t deserve that much money’, it’s about get your act together or you could feel this pinch.
If they only had to pay $10,000 or so, would they or any others who got the grand idea to do something this immoral and illegal learn anything?
When the chain of command fails, you go to the top.
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.