Conference 7.286::digital

    It would seem to depend. I've seen mail around here reminding people
    of certain illegal activities or activities explicitly prohibited by
    policy. Also the reminder that being involved in those activities is
    grounds for dismissal. I can't imagine that being against the law.

    After all people should be told what the rules are so they know better
    then to break them.

    Now if the activity were not against the law or policy then there might
    be grounds for complaint.

    			Alfred

    I agree. It surely depends on what the "certain thing" is...
    
    Edward

    Actually posting the memo without the *authors* permission is not
    permitted by policy. 
    
    			Alfred

    From what's been said, there is certainly a lot of room for
    interpretation here.  
    
    We have "mandatory" meetings at which those not present usually have
    legitimate reasons - prior commitments to customers, illness, training,
    etc.  While no-one's ever said someone would be sacked for not showing
    up, I would expect, at very least, a 'comment' on a performance review
    if I chose not to show up because I didn't like the meetings.
    
    "Ill will" like anything else you 'think' can't be grounds for anything
    UNLESS you've evidenced such mental ramblings through words and/or
    deeds.  While Digital can't fire me for hatred not exhibited, or
    wishing someone dead, there's a limit to how much negativity can be
    expressed.  (If you want to know where the line is, it's probably just
    a teeny bit past where my semi-controlled mouth takes me.)
    
    Generally, I'd much rather my manager told me in advance of the things
    considered grounds for dismissal rather than surprising me.
    
    Don
    

    Pinch of salt needed here...
    
    Without knowing all the circumstances, I can only imagine that the
    manager is feeling under pressure, possibly sensing "rebelion" - ie:
    people not willing to work, not doing as they are asked, and/or being 
    disruptive to other poeple's work, my guess is the intent is actually 
    good : Maintain the group performance, the method is the questionable bit.
    
    What is the motivation and contribution level of the group ?
    
    Paul

    I don't know if the base note came from the US or not, but;
    
    FYI:  In the US, all At-Will employees, that means employees who do 
    NOT have a contract, can be fired for no reason at all.  That means 
    just what it says, you can be fired for any reason, no reason, no good 
    reason, and DEC doesn't even have to tell you why you were fired.   
    
    Why do you think so many people put up with the expense, restrictions and 
    problems of a union?  For the contract the union negotiates on their
    behalf that protects them this kind of thing, that's why.
    

    I suspect that .7 is correct in his legal wisdom, but it's also true
    that anyone can sue anyone in the U.S.  Digital would have to convince
    a court that the no damages should be awarded to a fired employee. 
    That is why we have policies on corrective action, discipline, and
    termination.
    
    Mark

re                      <<< Note 2445.7 by NETWKS::GASKELL >>>
>                   -< They don't have to give you a reason >-
    
>    Why do you think so many people put up with the expense, restrictions and 
>    problems of a union?  For the contract the union negotiates on their
>    behalf that protects them this kind of thing, that's why.
 
    I get the feeling that you have not worked for long, if ever, in a
    union shop; I have.  
    
    When the fan gets dirty, the brothers and sisters find out that
    contracts seldom are written to protect employees.  If you talk to
    telephone workers (IBEW/CWA), auto workers (UAW), teachers (AFT) many
    will talk about the the union protects them from just these injustices
    and then will cite NUMEROUS 1st/2nd hand examples.  What escapes them
    is that those examples demonstrate that they were not protected at all.
    
    Politics/friends/connections/good_management_practices are what
    "protect" you in a union shop just as they protect you in a non-union
    shop.  After you have exhausted the corporate bureaucracy and its rules
    - which usually work -, about the only "protection" you have from
    indiscriminate termination is the threat to take your case to a state
    Labor Relations Board (in the states) filing a complaint for
    age/sex/etc. discrimination.  
    
    At that point, assuming you have a "reasonable person in a reasonable
    situation" case, the legal department usually leans on the offending
    manager to preclude an expensive settlement.  They realize that once
    you have filed a complaint with the Labor Relations Board, the Union
    will feel obligated to represent your case, at the union's expense.  If
    the union does not and you win, they run the very real risk of having
    to refund at least your past dues and face de-certification.
    
    As always, For What It's Worth
    Dave

    
    Re: .7
    
    > FYI:  In the US, all At-Will employees, that means employees who do 
    > NOT have a contract, can be fired for no reason at all.  That means 
    > just what it says, you can be fired for any reason, no reason, no good 
    > reason, and DEC doesn't even have to tell you why you were fired.   
    
    Perhaps this is a nit, but the above is not 100% correct.  Contract
    or no contract if you can prove that you were fired for a reason that
    violates one or more laws you can get reinstatement and back pay. 
    For example, if you can prove that you were fired or denied employment
    because you were over 45, or a member of certain minority groups, etc.
    
    Steve
    
    
    

    
    
    >  That'ss why we have policies on discipline,  ... and corrective
    >      action.
    
      Look at the front of the orange book.  There's a new change-bar'd
    paragraph explicitly stating that the policies do not form the
    basis of an employment contract,  and that the interpretation
    is at the whim of management, and specifically not the courts...
    
    
      A recent Bar-association journal  had an article on how to write
    policies and procedures such that they wouldn't pass the 'jackson
    test'  (A reference to a case which established a few basic 
    criteria under which a p&P book could be held to represent an
    employment contract even though the company stated otherwise.)
    
      Sure enough,  the change-bar'd sections pretty closely matched
    the recommendations of the article,  hence  lessening the chance
    of the 'orange book'  being used as the basis of an employee 
    lawsuit.
    
    
    						-al
    

    
    
    re: .10
    
    	All the corporation has to do is show that they have hired an
    over-age, minority or .... and they are scott free. A manager can
    fire you because you wear a bow-tie, and if you protest, ie. sue,
    they need only exhibit another employee with a bow-tie and voila
    you lose. At will is just that you work or are fired "at will" of
    the "company".
    
    				fred deady
    				

    .8 "She" gets her information from the Boston Union Guild 
    publication "Your Rights On The Job".   
    
    I am not in favor of unions but neither am I happy working all
    day, paying taxes year in year out, with only a handful of laws to
    protect my job.  I feel as if I am being ripped off twice over.