BNSF-unfair work practices Written by lost sole on 07/31/2011I worked for the railroad for 22 years and then Warren Buffet buys the company and it goes to hell. When the new management took over it was like starting from day one. Interviews, drug tests, personality tests, backround checks, being told that you did not graduate high school, were too fat-why put people through all of that to be called in and let go for something that I did not even do. I don't know if it was fate-but I guess it happened for a reason.
Read 9 Replies   |   Add a Reply

     

Posted by frogleghorn on 08/01/2011:
You had plenty of time to get your GED and I guess that's why you got the axe. I know that you've probably worked a lot of hours, but you should have done online courses.

Posted by Sphincter Detector on 08/03/2011:
Froghorn, I whole heartedly disagree with your comment but I can tell you are a very logical and systematic thinker. Given the luxury of time and opportunity ( you don't know what people's personal and familial situations are), certainly most people would go back to school. But I suspect this is not the case for many. The true issue here is he was hired dispite having a GED and was not required to get one during his tenure. This is technically a legally binding acceptance of the worker's skillset and ability to perform the job hired to do. Therefore termination of this nature constitutes unlawful dismissal. The company should have made their new requirements in writing and provide appropriate notice to the employees so they could have an opportunity to comply with the requirement. Instead what they did was akin to firing the housekeeper because she doesn't know how to drywall. It's bogus,completely illegal, and would net you a nice big payday if you had the resources to fight it.

Posted by frogleghorn on 08/05/2011:
I don't think it was an unlawful termination. Its been like that for years where most jobs require you to already have a high school diploma or GED or working on getting one before you even get hired. I dropped out myself and the only reason why they even offered me a job is because they told me since I'm working on correcting the situation of not having a high school diploma, they will hire me. If I leave the GED program, I'm out the door. I worked 90 hours a week and still made it. He had no excuse waiting 27 years to get it. He probably was making bocoup money by then being with the company that long and he could have taken himself back to school and getting it.

Posted by Sphincter Detector on 08/08/2011:
You would be correct if he was originally hired with the stated condition of getting a GED. But this is not the case, they hired him knowingly without a GED , it was not a requirement and never was. Now, 27 years later are thinning the herd under the pretense of lack of education when clearly this was not a requirement upon hiring. This is the first legal issue. The second is that anytime an employer changes the employment credentials for for existing employees, they must do it in writing and give the employees an appropriate amount of time to comply with the new requirement. If they fail to this this, this can result in "forecible attrition" where the employee is either forced to quite because they can't keep up with the new job scope or is "unlawfully termindated" for being suddenly underqualified. This is why it is unlawful, and it is absolutely irrelevent that the gentleman had 27 years to get his GED.

Posted by frogleghorn on 08/10/2011:
I see what your saying but the railroad was from the sounds of it taken over and the way around the laws is that everytime a company is taken over, they can do whatever to their employees. They had to start everyone from scratch and they didn't want to take into consideration their experience. One of my jobs was like that where they were taken over and all those employees that wanted to stay with the company had to start from rock bottom and they got rid of those who had flaws in their credentials. That's how come a lot of my coworkers that knew about the takeover had to get their issues in order before the takeover because they knew they could lose their jobs if the takeover happened.

Posted by lost sole on 08/14/2011:
I have my high school diploma-that was not my issue, the issue was that I was unlawfully terminated

Posted by Sphincter Detector on 08/15/2011:
In the case of a take-over or corporate merger, the acquiring company has what's called "retention preference", meaning their employees get first dibs on filling any new roles, or absorbing duplicate ones created from the merger. In this case, the acquiring company does not need to justify the lay off, which is why it's so gauling that this particular company felt it was prudent to add insult to injury by conjuring up bogus 'cause for termination' which serves only the purpose of reducing the payout packages. If they can prove the employees were fired rather than layed off, they don't have to pay the severence. It's dirty pool.

Posted by Flo on 08/31/2011:
I don't think society will support your bickering that a high school drop out should still get a 6 figure career.

Posted by Sphincter Detector on 11/03/2011:
Flo..your comment has merit if you support the idea that education = compensation. I happen to beleive that it is ones' work that mertis his compensation and by my logic the harder you work, the more you should get paid and so all waitresses and construction workers, and nickel minors and teachers and etc etc should be making 6 figures. But life just isn't so, and instead the 6 figures are going to Wall street money movers on bankers hours, and well we all know how happy everone is about that these days. It is fundamentally incorrect to assert that it is "ok" to hire someone for a job at a certain pay, on the basis of their current skill set, then fire them later for not having other skills that were never a requirement and never apty communicated , nor was the employee given an opportinty to get the required skilss after they were made into a federal issure. This is unlawful termination no matter how you justify it.

Add a Reply