Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 31

Thread: Supervisor Lied to Get Me Terminated (Nevada)

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Supervisor Lied to Get Me Terminated (Nevada)

    I worked for a nonprofit organization that receives annual funding from the government. I had an employment agreement. Although it specifically stated my employment was at-will, it also stated my period of employment was one year (program year). My salary was stated in annual dollars. And, my position is budgeted on an annual basis.

    I was a manager. My supervisor was the Director. All terminations must be approved by our Board of Directors. I don't believe our BOD would approve a no-cause termination in the middle of a program year... especially a manager sitting in a mission-critical position.

    The facts. I was terminated for cause. The reasons listed in my termination letter were outrageous and completely false. I appealed the termination and a hearing was convened by the Board of Directors, who subsequently upheld the termination. During the hearing I satisfactorily proved that all of the reasons given were false. However, this appears not to have made a difference.

    I have since learned that my position was never filled after my departure. I now believe, since I know the Director was in deep trouble with exceeding our budget, that she actually wanted to eliminate me to save money and her own job. I can't say whether the BOD conspired with her nor whether they were completely aware of our budget crisis.

    I would have settled for a no-cause discharge and, perhaps, a small severance. But now she has destroyed my reputation, cost me an excellent reference, and created a difficult financial period with the lack of notice.

    I could easily prove in court that my boss lied. Do I have a valid complaint? If you would like more specifics, such as what my boss lied about, please post your request and I will elaborate.

    Thanks. Harry

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,876

    Default

    Have you asked to be heard by the BoD?

  3. #3
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    14,175

    Default

    If you were an at will employee, then you could be fired for any reason which does not violate the law. Needing to cut the budget and letting you go does not violate the law, even if your boss as less than truthful about the reason.

    What were the accusations generally?

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default General Accusations

    The original allegation was that I used organization resources to create a computer program which I claimed as my own and offered to lease to the organization. The program was intended to replace a program the organization was currently using that I found to be inadequate.

    I argued that programming was not remotely associated with any of my responsibilities, was completed on my own time using my own resources (including knowledge and skills developed long before I joined the organization), and the Director was free to turn down my offer.

    I also argued that the program I created was completely different from the existing program in performance and written in an entirely different computer language.

    At the appeal hearing the Director changed her allegation to one accusing me of copyright infringement of the existing program. However, she admitted that neither she nor anyone on her staff had even looked at my program, nor had she obtained any legal advice regarding her allegation of infringement.

    More to come.

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default General Allegations 2

    The Director also alleged that I created an external access to the organization's server (accessing the server remotely) for personal use. She could not state why I would want remote access for personal use because I had complete access to the server from my work computer. However, I argued that it would serve no purpose because I never had internet access from where I lived, nor did I have the knowledge necessary to create a remote connection to the server.

    The Director also alleged that I removed a program that I had previously loaded on the organization's server. This program was one I had donated earlier. The program was not designed to accommodate a change in program years and was never updated. The Director admitted at the hearing that an icon still existed on her desktop, the program's initial screen appeared, but an error message soon appeared. I argued at the hearing that the program was crashing and why.

    Finally, she argued that I had copied confidential documents from her computer to the server without authorization. At the hearing I pointed out that the server's operating system backed up the harddrives of all networked computers to the server's harddrive in a process called "synchronization". This feature was installed by the consultant who installed the network and I had nothing to do with it, nor did I have the knowledge to install or remove this option.

    Does everyone see a pattern. It's quite obvious the Director wanted to get rid of me and chose this "witch-hunt" method to accomplish her objectives.

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to Pattymd

    Many of the members of the appeal committe were also board members. I was also told the Director contacted and obtained approval from all board members for the termination. The appeal hearing was the only existing procedure for contesting the termination before the board.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    7,179

    Default

    Nothing that you have mentioned makes your termination illegal.

    I could go through your post step by step, but it isn't necessary. Nothing you have posted gives you a claim upon a Wrongful Termination.
    Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

    I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

    Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Responde to ElleMD

    I do not argue that my employment could be construed as "at-will". Nor do I argue that the Director could terminate my employment for any or no reason. However, when the Director believes our board of directors would likely refuse a no-cause termination, the question then arises whether an attempt by the Director to lie to the board by creating events and circumstances that didn't exist or occur to provide a cause would then constitute "wrongful discharge" or at least "bad faith employment practice".

    Any thoughts?

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to cyjeff

    Granted, wrongful discharge may be far-reaching. However, if it can be proven that a supervisor deliberately lied in order to obtain the otherwise unobtainable termination of another, how could that be legal? Furthermore, if that person occupies the organization's top spot and the lies were presented to the organization's board of directors, does that not constitute some form of misrepresentation in any venue? Certainly if she were to make the same statements in court this would be perjury. Yes?

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    7,179

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by harry4631 View Post
    Granted, wrongful discharge may be far-reaching. However, if it can be proven that a supervisor deliberately lied in order to obtain the otherwise unobtainable termination of another, how could that be legal? Furthermore, if that person occupies the organization's top spot and the lies were presented to the organization's board of directors, does that not constitute some form of misrepresentation in any venue? Certainly if she were to make the same statements in court this would be perjury. Yes?
    It is legal because there is no law that makes lying about a coworker illegal.

    Again, employers do not have the same level of evidence that courts do.
    Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

    I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

    Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

  11. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to cyjeff

    I know I'm the one posting in order to find answers, but I'm not entirely sure I agree with yours. I would like to believe there exists some remedy available because of the Director's fraud, slander, defamation and the like. If I could also demonstrate my employment existed under an implied contract (yes, our organization's policies require just-cause for termination including a series of prior actions), I also question whether the Director's actions could constitute a breach of a Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing because of the budget implications.

    Your thoughts?

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    7,179

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by harry4631 View Post
    I know I'm the one posting in order to find answers, but I'm not entirely sure I agree with yours. I would like to believe there exists some remedy available because of the Director's fraud, slander, defamation and the like. If I could also demonstrate my employment existed under an implied contract (yes, our organization's policies require just-cause for termination including a series of prior actions), I also question whether the Director's actions could constitute a breach of a Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing because of the budget implications.

    Your thoughts?
    If you don't believe me correct, an appointment with an attorney is always a possibility.

    However, before you do so, you should consider your accusations.

    You created a software program and then offered to sell it back to the company. In most cases, all products created by an employee during employment belong to the company. Make sure you bring your employment agreement to the meeting. As far as copyright infringement, if your presentation of your software to the board was constructed as a demonstration against the existing software, your boss may be correct. Most software companies specifically prohibit the use of their software in a presentation for a competitor.

    You did remove a piece of software from the company's computers. When you put anything on a company computer, that software becomes the property of the company. In other words, you gave your company a gift and your superior is correct that you removed it without permission.

    Eliminating your job because of budget cuts is a perfectly legal reason for letting someone go. Somehow, the myth that a company cannot fire employees because of financial hardship got started. It is false.

    If you used any software manuals or help text in creating your software, you did breach the security of the company's servers. Your boss may be wrong as to the method, but not the action. The law cares not if you copied them from the server or to a memory stick while you were in the office.

    Such an action violates the license with the original software vendor and opens the company to legal liability.

    Slander and libel are only on the table if the person is not speaking the truth... or speaking what she believes to be the truth. People are legally entitled to their opinion.

    Lastly, you do not have to be given any reason for termination. Therefore, saying that the reasons are incorrect has no legal merit unless the reason for termination violates a protected characteristic.

    Implied contracts are a very slippery slope... you better have more than your opinion of it to make it fly in a court of law.

    Good luck.
    Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

    I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

    Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

  13. #13
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to cyjeff

    Thank you for your reply. Several corrections to your assumptions.

    1) Removing the computer program
    2) Copyright infringement
    3) Using organization resources
    4) The budget

    The software I donated read the computer date to conduct several calculations. It was tuned to the program year, and when the computer date exceeded the program year, the software didn't know what to do. I had intended to update it for the organization, but was never able to do so. I didn't remove it. The program I wrote should still be sitting on the server where I loaded it.

    Also, I am an excellent VB programmer from my military days. This was not remotely close to my job- which was primarily with organization finances, enrollment, special projects (such as ensuring we complied with federal safety, health, and facility regulations). But I also managed our network. This mostly involved computer inventory and purchasing (eg., printer cartridges). Nothing taxing. Programming of any kind was not included as a responsibility. Work-for hire does not apply any more than if I had been a licensed plumber by trade before this job and expected to get paid if I came in on a Saturday and fixed a toilet.

    Software copyright infringement requires, not just similar functions, but also a similarity in code. Otherwise we would see an onslaught of infringement suits between spreadsheet, word processing, and database software companies. In fact, I spoke with an attorney on this one issue who confirmed that my program did not infringe on the existing program. The existing program consisted of one type of transaction (enrollment) and relied on MS Access to operate. The code was canned code created by the core software, not the creator. My program could operate independent of MS Access (MS Office did not need to be installed). It managed enrollment, but included several dozen other routines ranging from tracking attendance and monitoring immunizations, to tracking teacher qualifications and training. Furthermore, the organization's operations are governed by federal regulation. Everything I obtained for my programming ideas came from these regulations (nothing proprietary) which I obtained copies of from the internet. Also, there currently exists numerous other commercially available software packages that also accomplish similar routines to my own. I should point out here that I worked on the program for more than a year and the Director was aware of it the entire time. She didn't act until the day after I presented the lease proposal.

    I should also remind you that her claim of infringement was made before the board without anyone having ever seen my program or obtaining the opinion of an attorney.

    As I had stated earlier, the circumstances would be quite different had the Director simply eliminated my position and laid me off rather than building a case for my termination for cause. My argument is primarily directed to the fraud, defamation and slander issues. As for an implied contract, I realize this issue is a difficult one. But there is precedent. Although my offer letter included an employment-at-will clause, everything else is stated in annual terms. The organization has never terminated anyone in mid-program year without cause, nor had we eliminated a position because all positions are funded annually. We have a probationary period where post-probationary employees are considered "permanent", performance reviews that include continuation, remedial training, and termination clauses, a progressive disciplinary policy that includes an "only after... " termination clause. The term "At-Will" is not found anywhere in our policies and procedures. All of these are clear indications that an employee should feel secure after the probationary period short of a just-cause termination, and then only after progressive discipline or remedial training has failed. All of this leads me to believe the Director created this multiple-ethics violation charge against me because she knew she could not otherwise have me terminated. She argues the ethics violations supercede all of these policy requirements.

    One last note. I never had the opportunity to present my software to the board. Had I done so, I would not have used the existing program at all.

  14. #14
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    14,175

    Default

    If they be believe it to be true, it ins't slander/libel. If it takes that much detail and computer savvy to fully understand what you did and how you characterize it, and their honest opinion and understanding is that you are guilty, it isn't slander.

  15. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default To Everyone Reading My Posts

    I was just reminded by another poster that we might be skirting the issue I'm presenting. I know my circumstances are complicated. I need to point out that the issue is not with the termination, but the reason why.

    I would like to present the core question again. If my boss knowingly and deliberately lies about my having violating company policies, and her lies convince the decision-making authority to terminate my employment for cause...

    If I can prove that she lied, do I have a cause of action against her and/or the company? The objective of my action could be as simple as having the reason for my termination chanaged to, say, "laid off because of budget cutbacks".

    There might be a variety of actionable questions, ranging from implied contract, bad faith (failure to follow company procedures), defamation, slander, fraud...

    Is there a possible cause of action and, if so, what direction would you suggest?

  16. #16
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to ElleMD

    Quote Originally Posted by ElleMD View Post
    If they be believe it to be true, it ins't slander/libel. If it takes that much detail and computer savvy to fully understand what you did and how you characterize it, and their honest opinion and understanding is that you are guilty, it isn't slander.
    When someone knowingly makes an untrue statement that harms another, it's defamation. When done orally it's slander. When done in writing it's libel. I'm assuming it requires the receiver to reasonably believe the statements to be true. Then it would be actionable against the presenter of the untrue statement. Malice is when the wrong is conscious and intentional. I'm sure you know these definitions, but I put them in here for other juniors to read. Would they not apply here against the Director? She accused me of removing a program when she didn't have the technical ability to make that determination and didn't check with someone who did. She accused me of claiming my work as work-for-hire even though my job doesn't involve plumbing (see previous posts). She accused me of copyright infringement without looking at my program or consulting an attorney. Sure, the board would believe her. She's the Director. But she made these accusations without any basis whatsoever that would lead her to believe them to be true. I think she sat down one night and thought, "what can I say that the board will believe that is so outrageous an ethics violation the board will have no choice but to fire him without further investigation."

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    7,179

    Default

    You hit the nail on the head.

    A person has to make a KNOWING false statement. Further, that statement has to cause you harm.

    There is some debate over whether or not your former boss knew the statement to be false. That would probably be for a court to decide.

    The second point is the harder one. What damages have you suffered as a result of the statement? Since no reason was required for termination, your termination was not dependent upon the statement.

    What damages have you suffered from the statement that you wouldn't have suffered without it? Before you say it, your personal pride and your reputation have very low established market value in a court of law unless that pride and/or reputation is part and parcel of your self worth - i.e. if you are a movie star or such.
    Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

    I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

    Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

  18. #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to cyjeff

    Thank you, cyjeff.

    The harm was significant. I left a career and moved to this small town when I accepted to position. I believed the opportunity to be a worthwhile and relatively secure change. Because of the small size of Elko and reasons for my termination, I have been unable to obtain suitable employment to replace the lost wages. In a small town, everyone talks and rumors run rampant. Were in not for the Director's actions, I would have remained employed with this organization, at least until the end of the program year when my position may have been eliminated. Also, I would have been able to use them as a reference for similar employment elsewhere. In addition to the loss of wages I also incurred the cost of COBRA.

    If I were to sue, I would seek the wages lost less unemployment income, reimbursement for COBRA, a change in the reason for termination, and a gag order against the organization to ensure the reference is clean.

  19. #19
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    37,332

    Default

    A wrongful termination does not mean that you were fired for something you didn't do. It means you were fired for a reason prohibited by a specific law.

    What law are you claiming was violated by your termination?

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    411

    Default

    It seems to me that Harry has been harmed in that the Director "knew" the BOD would "NOT" allow the termination without cause. He has stated that in several of his posts. Therefore it would appear that his termination along with his wages, insurance, character references, etc., are his "damages". In the absence of the lies told by the director he may well still be employed at least until the end of the program year.

    You just gotta love those (deleted) directors. The one I worked for was about the same kind of cracker jack you had. Don't know where they came up with her but I do know following mine and several other middle management level employee's resignations, (three of which also filed discrimination, [oddly enough the director and all three plaintiffs "employees" were AA], intentional infliction of emotional distress law suit against her and won!), she was given the option to "quit or be fired".

    For what small consolation it is just remember that what comes around goes around. Chances are your directors "time" is only a few foot steps away. Karma and all don't ya know.

    You would be wise Harry to at least consult with an employment attorney in your area. Perhaps even out of the Elko area would be a good idea so long as s/he is still licensed to practice law in the state of NV. Good luck to you Harry.

    KM
    Last edited by cbg; 03-10-2008 at 06:18 AM.
    Information posted by me is my "OPINION". I do NOT give legal advice to anyone as like most here I am NOT an attorney.

  21. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to cbg

    Quote Originally Posted by cbg View Post
    A wrongful termination does not mean that you were fired for something you didn't do. It means you were fired for a reason prohibited by a specific law.

    What law are you claiming was violated by your termination?

    In the research I've completed so far, I've found three exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine. They are exceptions for 1) violation of public policy, 2) breach of implied contract, and 3) breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing. When a a termination falls into one of these three exceptions, the terminated employee can sue for wrongful discharge. Not all states allow all three exceptions. However, Nevada does. The exceptions I'm referring to in my previous posts are 2) and 3). The bad faith breach not only refers to the contract breach, but also the termination without following policies for either performance evaluations or progressive discipline. Neither of these have anything to do with the Director's fraud and defamation, which could be used as a valid arguement to show she created cause when no cause existed. These two exception could be used to argue, even had valid cause existed, I was still wrongfully discharged because of exceptions 2) and 3).

    It all does seem rather confusing.

  22. #22
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to Kick Me

    I don't recall mentioning my employer was (delete). Guess the cat is out of the bag. I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one to have suffered by an incompetent Director. And, by the way, I currently have an EEOC complaint floating through the system for gender discrimination. I'm sure it won't fly, but it bought me some time to sort this mess out. I filed it because I was the only male in our organization. She became Director after my employment and showed an obvious disdain for supervising me. I concluded she felt uncomfortable because I was not only more educated and experienced than her, but I was also old enough to be her father. I also think there was a fear factor there because, were she to slip up, the BOD had a fully qualified successor (and she knew this).

    Having been with a (deleted)program, you know the process. I'm glad you agree the BOD would not have terminated me in mid-year without a good reason. The Director also had to come up with a reason that she could argue allowed her to skip the progressive discipline requirement. That would essentially call for an ethics violation.

    There is only one attorney within a five-hundred mile radius who is at-all qualified to handle an employment lawsuit. I've spoken with him already (briefly). His law firm is associated with the law firm out of Reno who represents (deleted). Conflict of interest. I called every other attorney in town and no one can take on this type of lawsuit- for any amount of retainer. This might be true, or because of who I'm interested in taking to court. I might end up battling this one pro se.
    Last edited by cbg; 03-10-2008 at 06:19 AM.

  23. #23
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    37,332

    Default

    Please do NOT mention the names of employers on the boards. Only last week we had a poster who was fired because of his description of his employer on these boards, and it was a LEGAL termination.

  24. #24
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to Super

    Quote Originally Posted by cbg View Post
    Please do NOT mention the names of employers on the boards. Only last week we had a poster who was fired because of his description of his employer on these boards, and it was a LEGAL termination.
    I appologize for the slip.

  25. #25
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    14,175

    Default

    Filing a frivolous EEOC complaint is not going to help you. In fact, it could very much hurt. When it appears that you are filing complaints indiscriminately and without good cause or factual support to do so, it just looks like you are out for revenge and not that you have a legitimate complaint based on the facts of your case.

    Who you worked for has little impact on whether or not a lawyer will take the case unless there is a conflict of interest of some kind. More likely the other lawyers did not find a strong case.

    Your director not fully understanding the nuances of what you were proposing to do is not the same as her totally making up the allegations to get you fired. The fact that you did appeal this to the board and they upheld the termination is going to make it even tougher to prove that the employer maliciously made up allegations just to let you go. The chances that the director was in cahoots with the entire BOD is slim. Since you were given the chance to have the decision reviewed by the BOD, it is going to be much harder to prove that the employer acted in bad faith. If this position was only for a year at most and you were informed that it was at will, you are going to have a tough time proving breach of implied contract. It sounds like they acted exactly as they informed you that they could.

    You can try to handle this pro se but if you do not have a legal background, I think you are in over your head.

  26. #26
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to Ellemd

    Quote Originally Posted by ElleMD View Post
    Filing a frivolous EEOC complaint is not going to help you. In fact, it could very much hurt. When it appears that you are filing complaints indiscriminately and without good cause or factual support to do so, it just looks like you are out for revenge and not that you have a legitimate complaint based on the facts of your case.

    Who you worked for has little impact on whether or not a lawyer will take the case unless there is a conflict of interest of some kind. More likely the other lawyers did not find a strong case.

    Your director not fully understanding the nuances of what you were proposing to do is not the same as her totally making up the allegations to get you fired. The fact that you did appeal this to the board and they upheld the termination is going to make it even tougher to prove that the employer maliciously made up allegations just to let you go. The chances that the director was in cahoots with the entire BOD is slim. Since you were given the chance to have the decision reviewed by the BOD, it is going to be much harder to prove that the employer acted in bad faith. If this position was only for a year at most and you were informed that it was at will, you are going to have a tough time proving breach of implied contract. It sounds like they acted exactly as they informed you that they could.

    You can try to handle this pro se but if you do not have a legal background, I think you are in over your head.

    I never said I thought the EEOC complaint was frivolous, only that I'm not so naive that I believed it stood any chance of succeeding. In fact, the gender issue is at the heart of all this. I've been around the block enough to recognize ostracism, and the Director made a point of keeping me beyond arm's length. Yes, it made me feel uncomfortable, but I knew there was little I could do short of quitting. Tell me, Ellemd, what explanation you can provide to justify why, in the two and a half years I worked at this organization I never received a performance evaluation from the Director (in all I should have received seven), was never the subject of any disciplinary action, was never told about any of her employee after-hour get-togethers, et cetera... The point is, she treated me as if I didn't exist and any contact necessary was distinctly formal for the informal nature of the office. I think you get the point. Sex discrimination of this nature is impossible to prove... but definitely not trivial. And, the information the EEOC collects can be subpoenaed. This not only saves me discovery time, but will compound the Director's problems if it can be proven she lied to the EEOC investigator.

    I also never stated I thought the BOD was involved in a conspiracy. What I do believe is that the BOD had no reason not to believe any allegation the Director made. As for the nuances... I have not provided all the details, so for the sake of conversation and to save posting time, let's agree on three things: 1) The Director knew she was lying, 2) She did so to have me fired, 3) She refused, in writing, to provide me documents and witness contact information prior to the hearing because she knew that providing such would give me what I needed to expose her.

    Also, as I stated in a previous post, the one attorney who agreed to speak with me is already collaborating on several current injury cases with the attorney who represents my employer. We didn't get beyond who my employer was and who represented them when he informed me he had a conflict. The other attorneys I contacted wouldn't hear my story... can't take on another case, no expertise in employment law, or no money in an employment lawsuit were the excuses I got. Since they didn't hear my story, saying they probably thought my claim was weak is somewhat presumptuous. That's only a few attorneys. You don't realize how small and isolated Elko is.

    I appreciate your warning about representing myself. If I pursue a lawsuit, I may not have a choice since the nearest attorney I would probably find is in Reno- a very hard five hours away.

    Tell me something, Ellemd. Let's get to the bottom line here. Here's a hypothetical. Assume your immediate boss is not the hiring/firing authority in your company. Requires the final approval of the President. Your supervisor told the President that you did something horribly wrong- that you stole the company's petty cash so your supervisor had you escorted from the building and terminated subject to the President's approval. You know that your supervisor took the money and the security camera got it on tape. When you ask your supervisor for the tape to show the President, your supervisor refuses because of what it really shows. So the President let's the termination stand. Your dilemma? You can't prove your innocence and keep your job without the tape, and your supervisor is blocking your access to the tape.

    Would you roll over and play dead?

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    7,179

    Default

    There is a difference between rolling over and playing dead and beating a dead horse.

    Insert your own animal type cliche here.

    You took it to the BOD. The BOD DID have a reason not to believe her... YOU. They heard what YOU said and decided that her story was more believable.

    Nevermind. You win.

    Get an attorney and sue them into the ground. Make sure you pay a large up front retainer.

    Sue the director, the BOD and anyone else that happened to glance in your direction the day you left with even a trace of disgust.

    Let us know how that works for you.
    Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

    I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

    Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

  28. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    7,179

    Default

    One more thing.

    You keep saying evidence this and she didn't let me see that. You keep assuming that your workplace has to meet the evidentiary standards of a court of law and that any investigation must be held by the same rules.

    You are wrong. 100% every single time. Every single "even if".

    Your workplace doesn't have to investigate at all. If they do decide to investigate, the workplace sets their own rules to do it. If they want to judge whether or not you should be fired by whether or not the next car that passes the front of the place of business is a light or dark color, they can do so.

    If the BOD decided that only one person, your director, could present evidence, than that is perfectly legal. If they decided that it wasn't appropriate for you to have the information in advance so that you could come up with some creative spin, that is legal.

    In fact, that sounds like what happened. They wanted to put you on the spot to test the steel in your story, and you failed.

    You keep demanding rights that you have no right to demand. This is not a court of law.
    Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

    I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

    Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

  29. #29
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Posts
    16

    Default Response to cyjeff

    I never expected to win any arguments in this forum. Although perhaps somewhat passionate at times, my objective has always been to present my situation from every angle, and explore the different interpretations of the events and the various point of views responding to my posts. Isn't that what this forum is intended to provide. I appreciate and respect the different, opposing opinions. They provide much food for thought. And, I have spent a great deal of time researching the law in order to post logical, objective and well thought out assessments of the events and potential legal ramifications.

    Not all issues are as clearcut as one would like them to be, and there is always at least two opposing opinions in every spirited debate. I have kept an open mind to the opinions of all who have posted, even as I vigorously defended my own. Some may find this exhausting, some may find this exhilarating, but all should find it enlightening.

    cyjeff, if I were to make my situation as seemingly simple and easy as your original posts appeared intended then the end result would be the same as given for the countless others you have responded to. What I don't need to hear is that I don't have a claim. I want the hear why. And it would be of greater value to be convinced by substantive commentary such as that which ElleMD has so graciously provided.

    I can see my welcome in this forum has worn out and I will discontinue my posts. Allow me to leave these parting comments. In contrast to ElleMD and the others who have posted in reply, I have found yours to be overly critical, closed-minded, and without value. I suggest you keep more of an open mind to others who post in the future and first look for opportunities hidden within each story and offer suggestions rather than simply closing the door on them. After all, most who post here are looking for a little enlightenment, a shoulder to lean on, and maybe some sympathy and compassion.

  30. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    7,179

    Default

    You are right. I lost my patience with you.

    After the fourth or fifth time telling you that your termination was legal while you pulled yet another detail out, you don't understand that it doesn't matter.

    You were fired. It stinks, but that alone doesn't make it illegal.

    No matter how angry you are, no matter how you think you were wronged, it doesn't matter.

    You are going to keep trying to find that magic BB that will make all the above "no's" and turn them into "yes's" and that detail doesn't exist.
    Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

    I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

    Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Wrongfully Terminated? Nebraska
    By mammyack in forum Hiring and Firing
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-13-2007, 09:22 AM
  2. Terminated while on Worker's Comp Nevada
    By InjuredInVegas in forum Workers Compensation Laws
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-26-2007, 08:40 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-26-2006, 01:43 AM
  4. Nevada Safety And Health Labor Law Poster
    By laborlaw in forum Nevada Labor Laws
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-25-2005, 12:32 PM
  5. Nevada Labor Law Posters
    By laborlaw in forum Nevada Labor Laws
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-30-2005, 12:28 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •