wrongful termination?

bgrimes · January 2002

I have an employee who was just re-hired. He first left us on his own, then in a few months wanted to come back. His work skills and ability are very good. He had a problem with 'attitude' and 'speaking his mind' too openly. I will admit, the General Manager wasn't too crazy about him. When re-hired, he was told he was 'on probation' and if any old habits surfaced he would be gone. It took less than two weeks....the manager let him go. Now he is citing harassment and wrongful termination. The probation was verbal. He is not in a protected class and Mo. is an at-will state. Does he have a case?

John Vering MO · January 2002

You do not state enough facts to be able to give an opinion. Someone can claim harassment or other discrimination even if that person only worked one day.
John Vering
Missouri co-editor
800-243-5070

Gar · January 2002

I agree with John. Why is he claiming harassment, etc.? Why was her fired?

Robert Kaiser MO · January 2002

If he is not in a protected class and he does not have an employment contract, then he is likely out of luck. He can only claim actionable harassment if it is based on the same factors that make up protected classes, ie: race, sex, age, religion, national origin, etc. He can only claim wrongful discharge if he was discharged in violation of some public policy, ie: for reporting a crime, or refusing to violate the law. It is not wrongful (as that term is understood by courts) just because he doesn't think it's fair. Based on what you have said, I wouldn't lose any sleep.

Theresa Gegen TX · January 2002

Hey, everyone is in a protected class (everyone has a race, national origin, and gender). And lots of other people are over age 40 and protected. The question is, what is he claiming the harassment is based on? What facts does he have to support harassment? If his facts are none other than he was hired back on probation, he wouldn't have much of a case.

Good Luck!

bgrimes · January 2002

Sorry, guys, I'm new to HRhero...didn't mean to be so vague. My terminated employee feels that the General Manager 'had it in for him'...laying in wait for any opportunity to fire him. The employee feels he's entitled to "freedom of speech" and bad-mouthing his supervisor was his given right. He was terminated by the General Manager for his criticisms of the employee's immediate supervisor. As I said before, he was told he was on probation after his re-hire. He worked a week when the problems surfaced and was let go. There was no counseling or warnings performed. He was just let go. We gave him another chance here because of his skills and hoped his attitude improved. But the guy doesn't have any humility....and it did him in. A lesson on us. Thanks, everybody, for your input.

Gar · January 2002

Now, this IS important. Is your employer a private company or public entity such as a municipal government?

Robert Kaiser MO · January 2002

Being a jerk is not a protected class. "Freedom of speech" has no legal meaning in the private workplace, and is even very limited in the public workplace. Being disruptive in the workplace, and having a personality conflict with your supervisor is grounds for termination regardless of what kind of employer you are.

Rockie · January 2002

This is a perfect example of why some companies hesitate to rehire individuals once they leave the company, especially if they had problems. Those problems are usually still either at the company or with the employee.

We had an employee who was very gifted technically, but she created havoc whereever she went. (I also knew her when she worked at another organization and she had the same type issues and was asked to leave there). She wanted to come back to our organization, but because of her past history, no one wanted to work with her. She felt we were discriminating against her, but we finally just had to tell her that she was not a good match for the others in the department because of the issues that she had previously. We told her the issues were still the same and the work conditions were still the same as when she left. Finally, she got the message.

Diane in FL · January 2002

Actually, within the first 90 days of employment an employer doesn't have to give a reason to terminate someone. This may vary state to state, but the best source to find your answer is your state's Unemployment Compensation office.

js · January 2002

I think what you are saying is that in an "at-will" state an employer does not have to give a reason for termination. This is true-- but it is true on the 91st day as well, and continues to be true on the 1,000th day. There is no special amount of time to be worked in an at will state. However, even in at-will states you run the risk of wrongful termination. You may not have to state the reason for termination but if the employee can show that you were terminating as a retaliation for their seeking federal rights, or you have violated Title VII, or a host of other reasons including employment contract, verbal or written...and you can be facing action.

wrongful termination?

Comments