What's new
By:

Legal or not? In any event, right or wrong?

LogGrad98

LogGrad98

Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
https://www.yahoo.com/health/lay-off-letter-to-woman-with-cancer-causes-outcry-97308014352.html

“You are currently engaged in a battle against cancer that will be demanding physically, mentally, and emotionally,” reads the letter to Carol Jumper, 51, of Hopewell Township. “You will not be able to function in my office at the level required while battling for your life. Because of this, I am laying you off without pay as of August 11, 2014. Your last paycheck will be mailed to you this Friday, 8/15/14. Our thoughts and prayers are with you as you fight this horrible disease. Thanks for your time at Visnich Oral Surgery. I hope your battle is swift, smooth, and successful!”
Click to expand...

We have had more than a few discussions here about this sort of thing. I was wondering what everyone thought about this case. Is the Doctor justified? Or is he a callous ***? Or is he just being nice and saving her embarrassment and giving her the time she needs to deal with this in her life and provide for her to get unemployment?

Aside from this case, what about in general, is this sort of thing ok?
 
If he was being nice and helping her out does anyone know if this was a mutually agreed upon solution? If he surprised her with the generosity of being fired then I'd say he deserves to be condemned for it.

Legally you're not allowed to fire an employee for health reasons like this, right?
 
Kewl comment from the article:

Twenty years ago my son was born with a heart defect. He was going to be in a hospital setting away from our home for two months after surgery. Not only did my company tell me to take a paid leave of absence to be with him but said that I was to hand in any bills from the doctors, and hospital that were not covered by our insurance. They didn't want me to worry about how things were going to get paid. Unfortunately my son died before he could have the surgery. I will always remember how kind they were during a horrible situation.
Click to expand...

^ any companies still do this sort of thing?
 
This is what happens in a society that cannot decide between a European style safety net and Laissez Faire. Everyone wants to play the fending-for-myself-and-I-pay-my-taxes-to-cover-that card. And why blame anyone with all these in your face jackasses constantly pushing their causes?

I guess what I'm saying is this type of thing is created by the bleeding hearts who push way too hard and go overboard.
 
franklin said:
This is what happens in a society that cannot decide between a European style safety net and Laissez Faire. Everyone wants to play the fending-for-myself-and-I-pay-my-taxes-to-cover-that card. And why blame anyone with all these in your face jackasses constantly pushing their causes?

I guess what I'm saying is this type of thing is created by the bleeding hearts who push way too hard and go overboard.
Click to expand...

I'm trying, but I just don't get what you're saying here. Please elaborate.
 
Gameface said:
If he was being nice and helping her out does anyone know if this was a mutually agreed upon solution? If he surprised her with the generosity of being fired then I'd say he deserves to be condemned for it.

Legally you're not allowed to fire an employee for health reasons like this, right?
Click to expand...
Depends on the state. For example, CA is an "at will" workplace; you can be let go whenever the company wants unless you can prove something like age discrimination. Hard to say what the intent was. I think it's important to note it wasn't the lady herself who posted the letter. If I had to wager a guess, I'd be on the side of the layoff being a way to collect unemployment. She's probably used up any leave or vacation days she had. And a small office...I'm guessing she buys her own insurance.
 
enhanced-buzz-29284-1360686629-7.jpg
 
The Thriller said:
Why the hell don't we have a single payer system yet?

We pay for more and get far less here. Wtf?
Click to expand...

Relevance?

The lady was laid off from her job. According to the letter it was because she was not going to be able to function at the level required. How would single payer change that?
 
LogGrad98 said:
https://www.yahoo.com/health/lay-off-letter-to-woman-with-cancer-causes-outcry-97308014352.html



We have had more than a few discussions here about this sort of thing. I was wondering what everyone thought about this case. Is the Doctor justified? Or is he a callous ***? Or is he just being nice and saving her embarrassment and giving her the time she needs to deal with this in her life and provide for her to get unemployment?

Aside from this case, what about in general, is this sort of thing ok?
Click to expand...

He comes off as an ***. It's his right for sure, but I wouldn't take my business to his oral surgery company if I needed it (and my teeth suck so it would be an actual threat with teeth, or not, from me if this guy were in the Denver area).

Though if he was really doing it for the unemployment, ok, that's another thing. However, he didn't even need to write that for unemployment. All he had to do there (unless things work differently in Pennsylvania) is to not fight her claim against him. On the other hand, is unemployment worth more than her insurance she lost from losing the job? Unless she pays COBRA, which is just ridiculously expensive (unless things have changed lately).
 
My understanding is that it is not okay to fire someone due to a disability, which I think this probably counts as. I also believe there are rules regarding what constitutes laying someone off vs terminating them. I'm not an expert, but that's what I believed to be the case.
 
Gameface said:
My understanding is that it is not okay to fire someone due to a disability, which I think this probably counts as. I also believe there are rules regarding what constitutes laying someone off vs terminating them. I'm not an expert, but that's what I believed to be the case.
Click to expand...

Legally I believe this would fall under FMLA, in that provisions have to be made to hold a job for someone who is caring for a sick family member or their own illness. It is possible that her FMLA had run out, she had no more leave, and maybe he was trying to help her out a bit with unemployment, although it seems to me he would have been better served to have just provided her with extra leave time, or given her some financial aid that he could then write off as his business rather than face the PR nightmare this has undoubtedly become.
 
We had something similar happen with an employee several years ago. One of my partners who is also the CFO suggested we let him go immediately. Another partner said, "over my own dead body."

To which the CFO stated that he understood the moral position but was concerned about the precedent.

To which the other partner said, "that is EXACTLY what we want to do."

We all voted unanimously to keep him on payroll but not make him work while battling. Two years and he beat it.
 
E.J. Wells said:
I'm trying, but I just don't get what you're saying here. Please elaborate.
Click to expand...

I think living in a society that is constantly shoving every cause imaginable down our throats combined with the perception that government will take care of everything has a way of hardening us away from each other to the point that this sort of thing is becoming the rule rather than the exception. In my personal work experiences it definitely is not. I've seen some inspiring things happen when tragedy has struck (in particular a stroke and a stabbing). However, I don't give a red cent to charity unless it's discretely to someone I know. I don't care about your cause or his cause or the dog's cause. They can all piss off because I'm sick of hearing all the crying bleeding hearts about how 1 in 4 children are starving and 1 in 4 children are obese and we need to feed the fat ones to the starving ones and we all need to ride trax to ESA to be environmentally friendly while attending a game inside a comforted heated or cooled mega-million square foot facility with dome lighting and huge *** screens that require their own power station.

That's how I view the world and I have a hard time thinking it hasn't numbed us at large from being community to each other. "Gov't will take care of 'em, it ain't my problem". I'm probably wrong and I'm not judging people over my perception either. I believe we are inherently good by and large. But I also think we are practical and adjust based on circumstances (I know that's hard to believe sometimes, but we are the higher intelligent race are we not?). So the good doctor fires his cancer stricken employee instead of having a little compassion, or asking his other employees to work longer hours to donate to her cause, or asking his patients for donations, or holding a training clinic or two in her honor. Instead it's government will take care of her let us cut the fat off this meat.
 
If I also worked for this doctor and saw this kind of treatment for a fellow employee I'd quietly start looking for another job. Soon as I found one I'd jump ship. When I left I'd tell him that if you did it to her you'd do it to me. Since you don't have my back I no longer have yours.
 
What if the guy's business sucked? What if they were already in great debt and paying someone for no work, in addition to paying another person to do the work of the first, causes the whole practice to go under, and therefore many other people also lose their livelihood? Not saying that it was the case, but would the Dr. then be justified?

I just feel like we live in an era of entitlement. The lady received a horrible diagnosis and was subsequently laid off. She felt so entitled however that she distributed this letter to the public to ignite the outrage culture against her former employer.
 
Unless the ADA applies, the employer can do what they want. But just like anything in life, they may feel the backlash from their customer base.

Cancer is covered as a disability under the ADA. So assuming the employer had at least 15 employees (and the ADA therefore applied to the business) they cannot let the person go unless it can be shown that even with a "reasonable accommodation" the job could still not be performed. I would guess most dentist practices would have fewer than 15 employees though.

Dentists....who needs 'em.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top