-
Welcome to our legal community! Click here or the create new topic button to ask a question and receive answers and comments from our friendly and helpful legal community.
Articles that answer frequent legal questions are in our Law Guide. Important legal news is reported in The Law JournalYou can find a lawyer near you in the Lawyer Directory. If you know that you need to hire an attorney, you can submit a case review from a lawyer.
favortism
- Thread Starter petrarca
- Start date
- Status
army judge
Super Moderator
You say you're an officer.
Are you a police officer, security officer, bank officer; what kind of officer were you?
How long had you been so employed?
How long had the other person been so employed?
Were you a probationary employee?
What has the union told you?
What is the nature of the incident that brought about your termination?
I am a public safety officer and have been so for the last 3 1/2 years. The officer I was with has been on the job about the same amount of time give or take a few months. The incident was a minor policy and procedure violation, and all of the blame is being dumped on me when we both had equal parts in the violation. The union has filed a grievance and is willing to take it to arbitration if need be. I feel I am being targeted and want to get this resolved in my favor. If that means through the union and an attorney of my own that is what I will do. Any suggestions?
I am a public safety officer and have been so for the last 3 1/2 years. The officer I was with has been on the job about the same amount of time give or take a few months. The incident was a minor policy and procedure violation, and all of the blame is being dumped on me when we both had equal parts in the violation. The union has filed a grievance and is willing to take it to arbitration if need be. I feel I am being targeted and want to get this resolved in my favor. If that means through the union and an attorney of my own that is what I will do. Any suggestions?
army judge
Super Moderator
Okay. My first suggestion is very simple. Don't characterize it as "the incident was a minor policy/procedure violation".
All of us are innocent until proven guilty. You don't have to prove what you didn't do. The administration must now prove what they've alleged you've done.
In other words, what incident? What violation? Get it? Good.
Moving on, I now need to know some of the basic details. What is your department alleging you to have done? Are you a sworn law enforcement officer? Have you given any statements? Have you admitted to anything? Did you ask for a lawyer when charged? Have you invoked your rights? Do you have any negative items in your work history?
The most important thing you need to do, is acquaint yourself with your bargaining agreement. Then make sure you know your departmental rules, policies, and procedures.
Okay, when you're ready give me your answers. Then tell me "exactly" what you've been charged with doing. Then cross-reference it with the exact policy, rule, or procedure; you're alleged to have violated.
Finally, whew, did the other person "rat" you out? What's the deal with the other person? Something's missing that you may not know about. Did the other person take a deal to "rat" you out?
Patricia_Young
New Member
I am not at all sure there IS anything you can do outside of the union grievance process.
There is nothing in employment law which requires every employee be disciplined exactly the same way (or at all) for the same infraction of company policy. Your only possible cause of action outside of the union would be if the difference in treatment is because of a protected characteristic of yours (or the other employee's) that is protected by Title VII, such as your age, race, gender, religion, ethnic origin, etc. or similar state laws if any.
There is nothing in employment law which requires every employee be disciplined exactly the same way (or at all) for the same infraction of company policy. Your only possible cause of action outside of the union would be if the difference in treatment is because of a protected characteristic of yours (or the other employee's) that is protected by Title VII, such as your age, race, gender, religion, ethnic origin, etc. or similar state laws if any.
I wrote a statement giving the whole story from A to Z, both our work records are without dicipline. We were both diciplined for the same incident wich was failure to write a report (wich was both of our obligations), only he was written up and I was let go. I think this is an obvious case of favortism. Other the union route I would like to have a plan B
Patricia_Young
New Member
I understand you would like a "Plan B". It's just very unlikely there is one. In order for there to be a "wrongful termination" under the LAW, one of three situations would have to exist.
1. You were terminated for the same violation of policy because of a protected characteristic of yours under Title VII. For example, BECAUSE you are black and the nonterminated employee is white. Or BECAUSE you are originally from Argentina and the nonterminated employee is originally from Sweden. Or BECAUSE you are Catholic and the nonterminated employee is Jewish. Or because YOU are a female and the nonterminated employee is a male. The fact that you MAY be black or from Argentina or Catholic or a female would not be enough. The disparate treatment has to be BECAUSE of one or several of the protected characteristics and the burden of proof in a court of law would be on YOU.
2. You were terminated for the same violation of policy because you availed yourself of a legally-protected right. For example, BECAUSE you reported an alleged safety violation to OSHA or BECAUSE you filed a Worker's Comp claim or BECAUSE you inquired about your FMLA rights or BECAUSE you refused to commit an illegal or unsafe act. The fact that you MAY have reported such a safety violation or filed a Work Comp claim or asked about FMLA or refused to commit the illegal or unsafe act is not enough. The disparate treatment has to be BECAUSE you asserted a legally protected right.
3. You were terminated for the same violation of policy because the employee who was not terminated was a relative of a decision-making employee AND the employer was a government entity AND there is a civil service prohibition or something in the government charter that prohibits nepotism. For example, the other employee was not terminated BECAUSE she was the sister-in-law of the police chief and you worked for the Police Department and the mayor encouraged the Chief to let the sister-in-law go unpunished.
"Wrongful termination" is a legal concept. It does not mean that the termination was "unfair". It means there was a specific law or public policy that was violated in your termination.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_dismissal
1. You were terminated for the same violation of policy because of a protected characteristic of yours under Title VII. For example, BECAUSE you are black and the nonterminated employee is white. Or BECAUSE you are originally from Argentina and the nonterminated employee is originally from Sweden. Or BECAUSE you are Catholic and the nonterminated employee is Jewish. Or because YOU are a female and the nonterminated employee is a male. The fact that you MAY be black or from Argentina or Catholic or a female would not be enough. The disparate treatment has to be BECAUSE of one or several of the protected characteristics and the burden of proof in a court of law would be on YOU.
2. You were terminated for the same violation of policy because you availed yourself of a legally-protected right. For example, BECAUSE you reported an alleged safety violation to OSHA or BECAUSE you filed a Worker's Comp claim or BECAUSE you inquired about your FMLA rights or BECAUSE you refused to commit an illegal or unsafe act. The fact that you MAY have reported such a safety violation or filed a Work Comp claim or asked about FMLA or refused to commit the illegal or unsafe act is not enough. The disparate treatment has to be BECAUSE you asserted a legally protected right.
3. You were terminated for the same violation of policy because the employee who was not terminated was a relative of a decision-making employee AND the employer was a government entity AND there is a civil service prohibition or something in the government charter that prohibits nepotism. For example, the other employee was not terminated BECAUSE she was the sister-in-law of the police chief and you worked for the Police Department and the mayor encouraged the Chief to let the sister-in-law go unpunished.
"Wrongful termination" is a legal concept. It does not mean that the termination was "unfair". It means there was a specific law or public policy that was violated in your termination.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_dismissal
Last edited:
- Status
Share this page
