Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:How dare they (Score 1) 191

In Arizona, which IS a right to work state, you get suspended or fired, you DO have difficulty getting unemployment, especially if your former employer doesn't bother to answer the state's questions about the circumstances of your dismissal.

They don't have an appeals process? I live in Florida, and had an employer fire me and dispute my unemployment claim last year, so of course I challenged it because the firing was totally without merit. I had a perfectly clean record with HR, so the state didn't even think twice before ruling in my favor. Given that they suspended him the day before they were going to lay him off, I think he could probably make a reasonable case that Safeway suspended him in order to avoid the unemployment claim, regardless of the video.

Yeah, there is an appeals process, but no way to coerce the former employer to provide details other than faxing in a letter saying the employee was 'terminated for cause'. Since it's right-to-work, that's all they have to say. The less they say, the better for them if they get sued for wrongful termination or some such. And even if you win your appeal, you are not likely to get 'back pay' for the weeks of unemployment you were required to file for but were unpaid for during the appeal.

Comment Re:Slow news day (Score 1) 191

Safeway is a publicly traded company who has a legal responsibility to make profit.

Nope. There is no such "legal responsibility". Corporations are required to do whatever their corporate charter says, and they have great leeway in justifying any action as being within that charter. In short, the executives usually have to act in the interest of the shareholders, and the only way to determine the shareholders' interests is by a vote. Without such a vote, the executives can do anything that's otherwise legal.

More of a fiduciary requirement for the execs to make sure the corporation makes money. Otherwise, the shareholders vote the board of directors out and put somebody who will make them money in their place. That's why you see short-term strategies that puff the shit outta the bottom line right now being followed rather than long-term strategies that insure mediocre but continual profits over the years, even if those short-term strategies fuck up the long range profitability.

Comment Re:Slow news day (Score 5, Insightful) 191

The guy was suspended for a day.... Common I would hardly call that kicking someone when they are down. For all we know he might not even have been scheduled to work that day. So the guy is maybe out at most $100 in missed pay, bummer but I wouldn't call that cause for moral outrage. I do actually agree that this article was posted to incite anti-corporate feelings. That's why I asked the question, and that's why I suggested not shopping there if you don't agree with it. I really feel like this is petty shit compared to real abuses and what makes me upset is the people who are going to get all bent out of shape over this and complain about corporations treating people like shit using this as evidence. Corporations do treat people like shit, but its happening all around you in much worse ways than some guy getting suspended for a day. Be outraged about that.

Being laid off instantly qualifies you for unemployment after you wait the statutory required one week. Being suspended before the announced layoff date, even if it was only for one day, can fuck with the process, especially if the language used in the suspension does not specify a length of suspension, i.e., 'suspended indefinitely pending review'. Since he was scheduled for layoff anyway, no review will be made since he's not being brought back. You cannot collect unemployment if you are 'only' suspended. He'll have to waste time appealing his disqualification with the state, all the while his normal 26 weeks unemployment runs down.

I'd say Safeway fucked him pretty good there.

Comment Re:How dare they (Score 5, Informative) 191

AC, I know you were being facetious, but it did seem a bit petty to suspend the employee the day before he was to be laid off anyway, didn't it?

It's not like they could suspend him after they let him go. Get real.

But by suspending him the day before he was laid off, they CAN fuck with his unemployment benefits in most states. Illinois is NOT a 'right to work' state, so I don't know what the procedure is. In Arizona, which IS a right to work state, you get suspended or fired, you DO have difficulty getting unemployment, especially if your former employer doesn't bother to answer the state's questions about the circumstances of your dismissal. THAT one got pulled on me, and I got screwed outta my unemployment until my 6 months of 'regular' unemployment expired and I then qualified for the 13 week extension.

Comment Re:A bad remake is a foot! (Score 1) 207

And in the 1890's, 1325 bucks was REAL MONEY

I don't know what world you're living in, but $1325 is real money right now. And I suspect my dog might appreciate whatever that works out at in dog money. That aside, one of the big advantages of Project Gutenberg's sister sites is that there are servers outside the US that are not tied to predatory American copyright legislation, so many texts that should (by reasonable, ethical expectations) have passed into public domain have often already done so somewhere.

In the 1880s/1890s you could buy a HOUSE for under $700. THAT'S what I meant by 'real money'.

Comment Re:There's a question about that at Skeptics (Score 5, Interesting) 294

well believe either that page or the one saying that we all have cancer..

Besides, if they didn't ban mobile phones I really, really don't see the point in banning wifi.

Blaming wifi or cell phones is easy. Actually digging around and finding the true cause of the cancer is hard. Besides, you might discover the cause was environmental, say, the coating on some cookware, or contaminants in food, drink, laundry detergent, whatever. And discovering a household product triggered a cancer is actionable. Best blame it on the wifi and shift the attention of the pitchforks and torches brigade.

Comment Re:Hitler must be pissed (Score 1) 207

Actually if Congress hadn't passed new spending increases, the budget would have been balanced. From my recollection, tax revenues did in fact increase under Reagan, as predicted. But Congress passed (and in fairness RR signed into law) spending increases almost double the increased revenues.

Add to that Ronnie Raygun's tax cuts to the 'job creators', the beginning of 'trickle down economics', and you'll understand why the national debt ballooned. Clinton got rid of them, Dubya brought them back.

Comment Re:Hitler must be pissed (Score 1) 207

In many cases you are not free to do this, as celebrities and their likenesses are trademarked and highly regulated. I imagine if you tried to use Ronald Reagan in any significant way in a novel or artwork you'd hear from his estate. Unless it was fair use or parody, and then you have a lot more flexibility.

I'm thinking that's unfair. After all, when Ronnie Raygun did his last acting job, that of El Presidente, he sure used us unfairly. We're still paying down the debt he saddled us with, and we haven't seen a cent of teh 1.5 TRILLION he looted from Social Security to pay for Star Wars.

Slashdot Top Deals

Any circuit design must contain at least one part which is obsolete, two parts which are unobtainable, and three parts which are still under development.

Working...