Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Pollster1
If any had demanded special accommodations, I would have given in immediately to avoid lawsuits, and then fired them a few weeks or perhaps months later for unrelated reasons.

You do know that any wrongful termination lawsuit they would have filed against you would have prevailed, right?

Homos can do no wrong.

27 posted on 06/28/2013 4:28:46 PM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: fwdude
You do know that any wrongful termination lawsuit they would have filed against you would have prevailed, right? Homos can do no wrong.

Actually, they wouldn't. I learned early on to make sure that hiring and firing decisions were completely opaque, never an explanation beyond cutting back in that area, and that firings were separated by enough time from any event that might be interpreted as a trigger. I was in a seasonal industry, where cutbacks would not be seen as unusual. Every primary or general election was an appropriate time to get rid of people, as were the ends of other contract periods and potential contracts that fell through. In general, firing any "protected" individual is a risk, but that just means an employer has to be extra careful.

38 posted on 06/28/2013 4:39:43 PM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson