Wow. Moving someone to another location and then suddenly firing them for "communication standards?" Unless there's some highly compelling evidence to indicate otherwise, it's pretty clear cut what happened here. I guess they calculate it's better to pay a fine for a wrongful dismissal than to have a supervisor that is sympathetic to workers.
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
165 points (100.0% liked)
British Columbia
1707 readers
25 users here now
News, highlights and more relating to this great province!
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
As a society, we should ensure everyone that goes through something like this ends up a millionaire who never has to work again.
That'll motivate workers to unionize more than anything else we could possibly do.
Want to fix this? It'll take a) jail time, and b) asset seizure.
Corporate structure deliberate distributes responsibility for things like this such that:
- It's very hard to find one person to blame, let alone prove malfeasance.
- If by some chance you do find a smoking gun, the fine for doing so is usually less than the profit of the transgression
If, eg, Howard Schultz and his direct-reports faced fines and/or jail time directly, and those fines were orders of magnitude the harms of the action, then you'd see some of this stop.
I would offer that we hit the entire corporate/franchise structure with a % of revenue fine. That shit will get fixed real quick.
In this region of Canada, at least, the maximum penalty for wrongful dismissal is ... Standard severance.
Source: a dear friend launched a successful human-rights complaint against a very deep-pocketed employer who blatantly violated clear medical orders and then fired him when he objected. Like, 100% dead-to-rights on a claim with no normal upper limit. Except here it maxes out at a pittance.
Maybe there too.
Depends on lawyer and time at employer. in Canada you can get severance pay + termination pay + closing pay
You'd think so.
He thought for sure.
His lawyer strongly suggested it.
Nope.
Need a better lawyer because you aren't fully terminated till you sign the agreement. Had two friends deal with it. Company thought they would just do standard termination pay, lawyer got one person that plus severance for senior position and years, plus they owed an agreed upon closing pay for ending employment. They other person got every hour of pay they ever worked past their original signed salary weekly hours. Company thought theyd give a few weeks termination, ended up costing them half a years salary in OT
Let each person rise and fall according the merits of their work and quality of their duties. No person is entitled to anything. Even respect has to be earned and prove why anyone should treat someone with dignity and honour.
Let each ~~person~~ business rise and fall according the merits of their work and quality of their duties. No ~~person~~ business is entitled to anything. Even respect has to be earned.
Are you just saying "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" with more words?
You’re a real idiot bud. Each person is entitled to a good life.
If employers can merge and negotiate collectively, so can workers. And if you're unswayed by that argument, remember that their right to free association lets them negotiate collectively regardless of what you think about it.
Let each person rise and fall according the merits of their work and quality of their duties
Fine, sure. 100% inheritance tax, coming right up.
What does this even mean in this context? Part of our communication standards at work is that a critique must include concrete examples.
Okay shitwit.
I have never been in a starbucks so I cannot actually boycott them, I will however continue to not go there.
Support independent coffee shops.