awww crap....

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="stepping_up" date=1232198139][quote author="ipoplaya" date=1232195113]Anyone monkey in HR knows to never ever fire a woman over 40 without good solid documentation, written warnings, etc. unless it is for gross misconduct or as part of systematic workforce reduction plan.</blockquote>




why a woman over 40?</blockquote>


Because sexism and ageism are two hot employment issues and no one wants to be accused of discrimination.
 
[quote author="No_Such_Reality" date=1232198559]Wow, stunning display of stupidity.



sorry your wife was subjected to such gross incompetence. Given the alternatives, consider yourself lucky. The firm likely won't survive, or is it public sector?</blockquote>


public... they are probably the largest blood banking industry in the US.
 
[quote author="tmare" date=1232198924][quote author="stepping_up" date=1232198139][quote author="ipoplaya" date=1232195113]Anyone monkey in HR knows to never ever fire a woman over 40 without good solid documentation, written warnings, etc. unless it is for gross misconduct or as part of systematic workforce reduction plan.</blockquote>


why a woman over 40?</blockquote>


Because sexism and ageism are two hot employment issues and no one wants to be accused of discrimination.</blockquote>


The protections granted to those over 40 under ADEA and ERISA are stronger, well litigated with precedent, etc. Good HR people should know to take more care and diligence with regards to terminating someone over that age.



Gender-based claims are most commonly filed and won by women. More and more men are suing based on gender-related claims, but its still only a small fraction. As a result, organizations are much more likely to have claims from women so additional care is normally taken to mitigate liability.
 
[quote author="ipoplaya" date=1232210016][quote author="tmare" date=1232198924][quote author="stepping_up" date=1232198139][quote author="ipoplaya" date=1232195113]Anyone monkey in HR knows to never ever fire a woman over 40 without good solid documentation, written warnings, etc. unless it is for gross misconduct or as part of systematic workforce reduction plan.</blockquote>


why a woman over 40?</blockquote>


Because sexism and ageism are two hot employment issues and no one wants to be accused of discrimination.</blockquote>


The protections granted to those over 40 under ADEA and ERISA are stronger, well litigated with precedent, etc. Good HR people should know to take more care and diligence with regards to terminating someone over that age.



Gender-based claims are most commonly filed and won by women. More and more men are suing based on gender-related claims, but its still only a small fraction. As a result, organizations are much more likely to have claims from women so additional care is normally taken to mitigate liability.</blockquote>


40 seems awefully young as a cutoff for ageism-related complaints.



Bix, good luck to you and your wife!
 
[quote author="caycifish" date=1232244438][quote author="ipoplaya" date=1232210016][quote author="tmare" date=1232198924][quote author="stepping_up" date=1232198139][quote author="ipoplaya" date=1232195113]Anyone monkey in HR knows to never ever fire a woman over 40 without good solid documentation, written warnings, etc. unless it is for gross misconduct or as part of systematic workforce reduction plan.</blockquote>


why a woman over 40?</blockquote>


Because sexism and ageism are two hot employment issues and no one wants to be accused of discrimination.</blockquote>


The protections granted to those over 40 under ADEA and ERISA are stronger, well litigated with precedent, etc. Good HR people should know to take more care and diligence with regards to terminating someone over that age.



Gender-based claims are most commonly filed and won by women. More and more men are suing based on gender-related claims, but its still only a small fraction. As a result, organizations are much more likely to have claims from women so additional care is normally taken to mitigate liability.</blockquote>


40 seems awefully young as a cutoff for ageism-related complaints.



Bix, good luck to you and your wife!</blockquote>


As a woman over 40, I appreciate this comment, I sort of thought it would be 50. I'm sure when I'm 50, I'll think it should be 60. :cheese:
 
[quote author="Serious Weapon" date=1232380682]Sorry to hear about your old lady... Promise us that you will not to go postal at her old job.</blockquote>


Naa, no postal here. Shooting somebody is too quick, I want to hurt them in the pocketbook and put them through lawyer hell. That would be a good start.



-bix
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top