Comments for Quirky Questions

Comment on Joel’s Analysis of Quirky Question # 174: A New CA Claim, Providing Employees with Chairs by Associate/FE

Associate/FE — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 09:34:58 +0000

Rite Aid does not comply with Cal. Labor laws nor Federal or State Disability laws, if think there exist compliance, you are mistakenly wrong. Justice is based on the law and if you read and understand law then it makes sense to make seats readily available. I have evidence to prove that Rite Aid doThey dones not follow the law and they will fight every legal action. They don’t practice their own policies, just see Doreen Benson v. Rite Aid (LA Super); jury decided for plaintiff and no one got disciplined or just promoted.

Comment on Implications of Gross v. FBL, Quirky Question # 139 by Your Questions About Title Vii - Forum Signature Maker | Forum Signature Maker

Wed, 11 Jan 2012 03:01:25 +0000

[...] with their own Title VII. I think you're going to have to be more specific.Powered by Yahoo! AnswersJoseph asks…Can Title VII over ride the employment environment and conditions detailed in a writte…e employment environment and conditions detailed in a written contract between?Can Title VII [...]

Comment on Usurpation of Corporate Opportunity, Quirky Question # 52 by Sayi

Sayi — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 18:44:54 +0000

Hi Roy I see you know about this cases, I’m currently going tru a legal demand, can you please give me hand. please contact me to my email: info@livedesignstudio.com
this is very important

Comment on Quirky Question # 141, Customer Lists as Trade Secrets by top mistakes

top mistakes — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:58:26 +0000

Your site is pretty cool to me and your topics are very relevant. I was browsing around and came across something you might find interesting. I was guilty of 3 of them with my sites. “99% of blog owners are doing these 5 HUGE mistakes”. http://tinyurl.com/blwxft4 You will be suprised how simple they are to fix.

Comment on Quirky Question # 180: Terminating Sales Reps — Traps for the Unwary by Mike

Mike — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 18:43:32 +0000

Do sample have to be returned before commissisons are paid?

Comment on Quirky Question # 184, Mutual Releases or Not? by Todd Stanton

Todd Stanton — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 19:00:45 +0000

My advice is to not make the mutual release or non-disparagement clause a deal-breaker – get the company released and move on. In most instances, it’s just the former employee trying to appear erudite and show he actually read the release. You can do a quick investigation to make sure you’re not releasing a huge embezzlement claim or something else that may be material, but even if you find something, you should ask yourself whether it’s going to be worth it to pursue. You may feign protest to use the mutual clauses as a bargaining chip to avoid paying another week’s severance, but I’d not recommend pushing it too far. Keep your eye on the ball: get the release signed and get on with business.

For the mutual non-disparagement, though, I recommend avoiding language that “the Company” will not disparage the former employee – it’s impossible to control what managers (or others whose comments may be imputed to the company) may say and you don’t want to get stuck in a breach of contract action because a low-ranking supervisor shot his mouth off at a party. I advise getting the former employee to identify the folks about whom he’s concerned, then using in the agreement language to the effect that “The Company will instruct [these individuals] not to make disparaging comments about Employee.”

Hope this helps.

Comment on Joel’s Analysis of Quirky Question # 174: A New CA Claim, Providing Employees with Chairs by kimberly holt

kimberly holt — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 02:01:43 +0000

I work for a Rite Aid store in Ca where this stupid lawsuit started. First of all, if you are applying for a Cashier position, you should not expect to sit on your A## for your shift. We require our cashiers to perform other duties when not ringing up Customers, as does probably 99 percent of any other retail establishments. This is not uncommon.
If there is a medical neccessity, that is fine and we comply readily. But during periods where there are no Customers, we expect our Cashiers to stock items around the registers. This is not cruel or unjust. It is simply one of the expected duties of the Cashiers. There is no way to accomplish this if you are sitting down. This lawsuit was started by some lazy individual who was too stupid to apply for a sit down type job, such as Receptionist. Rite Aid is a great Employer, they are active in Community issues, such as the Children’s Hospital Miracle Network, and the Breast Cancer Association.
I have never in my 42 years of life seen a Cashier at any retail establishment who did not appear to be physically handicapped sitting in a chair behing a cash register counter. If this lawsuit prevails, every reatail establishment can be subject to these laws and to this lawsuit. This is a travesty of justice and I do not believe this lawsuti is justified. I have to add this these opinions are mine alone and do not reflect the views or opinions of my Employer, Rite Aid Corp.

Comment on Joel’s Analysis of Quirky Question # 174: A New CA Claim, Providing Employees with Chairs by LA

LA — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 06:51:25 +0000

Wow…. Trying to screw people out of a decent place to rest. You’re a
Scumbag.

Comment on How to Lose $4 Million When Firing an Executive — What Happens When It All Goes Wrong? by Mark

Mark — Sun, 16 Oct 2011 22:14:18 +0000

I agree with Susan. Fascinating read.

Comment on How to Lose $4 Million When Firing an Executive — What Happens When It All Goes Wrong? by Susan

Susan — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 00:06:37 +0000

Thanks for the great post. I think you should write about your own cases more often!

Comment on Alcoholism and a Last Chance Warning, Quirky Question # 142 by kris

kris — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:38:36 +0000

Excellent article. But, can a Last Chance Agreement in California require that the employee be free of alcohol abuse even while not at work?

Comment on SEVEN OBSERVATIONS ON LEADERSHIP, VICE PRESIDENT WALTER MONDALE by Mark Tobin

Mark Tobin — Fri, 10 Sep 2010 16:07:28 +0000

Great interview with Fritz Mondale. At a time when it seems political gamesmanship is more valued than true leadership, this would be a good video to be seen in every middle school civics class to graduate level public administration seminars.

Comment on Sexual Harassment (Round 2), Quirky Question # 5 by Guest 1

Guest 1 — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:51:24 +0000

Response # 1: Regarding QQ#5, I think one could simply draw the conclusion that the Company’s prompt remedial measures in response to the initial complaint seemed to have worked. Whether it was a matter of misunderstanding, miscommunication, or just the need for some education, it could be that the executive has come to understand the boundaries of permissible conduct and both parties are putting this incident behind them and simply getting on with their professional relationship. In other words, sometimes these remedial measures actually do work.

Now, that said, I think it might be appropriate for someone in HR to check back in with the complaining employee. In fact, it is probably a "best practice" to check back in with a complaining employee after some period of time, to make sure that the initial situation has been taken care of and/or there are not new problems.

In the course of checking back in, I would propose that the HR person allude to the fact that the complainant and the executive appear to be working and spending time together — not in an accusatory way, just as a matter of observation. The HR person could say something positive like, we hope that means the previous issue between the two of you has been satisfactorily resolved and maybe also remind the employee about her right to be free from retaliation, etc. — something to open the door to the employee, in case she had something more she wanted to report.

If the employee says everything is fine, I would make a note to the file about this conversation.