if it is argued that it created a hostile work environment yes.
That's an unrelated issue.
It would depend on what your state's laws were regarding the issue of employee's conduct and whether you had proof for your case. Otherwise it could be a "he said, she said" type of situation.
Please post another question mentioning your state, because it makes a big difference. For example, in Illinois, an employee doesn't have to be paid until the next payday, which may be two weeks. In some states, an employee who is fired must be paid within 24 hours, and an employee who quits must be paid within 72 hours. MY FORMER EMPLOYER IN ARIZONA TERMINATED ME ON 6-29-09.TODAY IS 7-07-09.I HAVE NOT RECEIVED MY FINAL PAYCHECK.HOW LONG DOES THIS EMPLOYER HAVE TO ISSUE FINAL CHECK? IVE REQUESTED THE CHECK BE SENT TO MY HOME MAILING ADDRESS.HE SAYS I HAVE TO COME TO THE STORE AND SIGN FOR MY FINAL PAYCHECK.I AM AFRAID TO PHYSICALLY GO TO THE STORE,AS I WAS TOLD BY THE MANAGER ON THE DAY OF TERMINATION,HE WOULD CALL THE POLICE IF I DIDNT LEAVE.
Some sure-fire ways to get fired lawfully usually include crime, integrity, and getting the wrong person upset at you. It may be as simple as the ecconomic conditions which force a company to reduce employees. The bottom line is that if you cost the company more than what you produce, you are of little business value and may be terminated. The circumstances of termination can be very complicated, depending on whether or not there is an employment contract involved. Many employment situations are called Employment at Will. "Employment at will means that an employee can be terminated at any time without any reason. It also means that an employee can quit without reason. Employers are not required to provide notice when terminating an at-will employee." See related links for further discussion of this complex issue.
The answer to this question is not as absolute as one might think. In Minnesota, an applicant for unemployment benefits is not automatically denied compensation if fired for stealing. Just because an employer says an employee was terminated for stealing does not mean the employee was in fact stealing. The first issue is whether or not theft was the cause for termination. If yes, it is critical to examine whether or not theft can be proven. If the employee in fact intentionally stole from their employer, misrepresenting this fact can lead to fraud, overpayment of unemployment benefits, and criminal prosecution. If the employee did not steal from their employer, then the fact that an employer claims theft should be challenged. The third issue is what was stolen. The fourth issue is what was the value of the property stolen. In Minnesota, the answers to these questions determine whether or not the employee was involved with aggravated employment misconduct. Given the severity of this issue and because it is not necessarily black and white, consider seeking an opinion from an attorney.
Forthmost is not a word.
None. You have no right to any information unless you are a union employee, in which case the union contract may cover this issue. You'd have to read the contract.
No one is ever "terminated from employment" in the sense that they are not allowed to work. Certain jobs may be denied various people, though, such as a teacher position to a pedophile, or a bank job for Bernie. It is doubtful that him seeking employment will ever be an issue, though.
That depends on the situation. If the employee was fired for not following company policy, stealing, fighting with co-workers, etc., then those are offenses for which a person can be immediately terminated. Unless the manager was committing the same offense(s), then no, s/he should not be "given the same punishment", nor is it discrimination. Also, there are companies who have a "fire at will" policy, meaning they can fire an employee at any time, for any reason. Discrimination is when you are denied something or treated differently because of your race, religeon, or gender.The fact that someone is doing something that is a terminating offence is an issue of personal responsibility. Thats like trying to argue that someone is not guilty of speeding based on the fact that everyone else was doing it and he was the only one given a ticket, he was still breaking the law. A supervisor cannot be blamed for an employees actions only the employee can, however it is less likely that they will retain the same stature as a manager not being able to retain a good employee.
according to our corporate attorney, under 11 USC sec 525 an employer cannot terminate an employee because that employee filed for bankruptcy. however in regards to financial institution employees, there could be an issue if being bonded is a job requirement and that employee does not qualify to be bonded because of the bankruptcy. if the bonding company will allow the employee to maintain their bond if they file, than the employee would be protected under the above stated code. basically, it is up to the insurance company offering the coverage to the financial institution and their requirements for maintaining fidelity bond capabilities.
You need to ask you employer. If that is you only if you have an employee who made enough to file and will
A disadvantage of single-issue programs is that they may become stigmatized because of the negative connotations of terms such as addiction and alcoholism.