Firing

There are some things supervisors just shouldn’t say even in jest—including anything concerning race, national origin or any other protected characteristic. Comments on those topics regularly come back to haunt employers when employees file discrimination lawsuits.

Employers that fire a worker for being caught sleeping on the job may not be liable for unemployment compensation benefits. On-the-job snoozing can be considered willful misconduct if it’s clear it violates company policy.

Forsyth County Sheriff Bill Schatz­­man has denied any wrongdoing in the firing of Sgt. Michael T. Russell, an Iraq War veteran. Schatzman claims he fired Russell for “disloyalty.” Russell calls it retaliation.

A former employee in Bank of America’s mortgage office in Pittsburgh is suing the bank, claiming he was fired because of his disability.

If you suspect an employee has been stealing, you can and should discipline him. You don’t need absolute and irrefutable proof. It’s enough that you reasonably believed he stole.

Q. We need to cut costs, and have started to explore trimming our staff, starting with those who earn far more than other employees. Are there any dangers in doing so? Can we legally fire a high-earner because of his salary?

Q. An employee frequently comes in late or is absent because of car troubles. Is this a justifiable reason for termination? To avoid this issue in the future, can we ask applicants if they have a reliable means of transportation to get to work?

When an employee takes FMLA leave because her physician says she’s too sick to work and needs to stay home, it’s natural to assume she’ll follow the doctor’s orders. But what if you discover that she isn’t—and is instead working for someone else during her leave? Can you terminate her? Of course.

Employees are typically ineligible for unemployment benefits if they were fired for creating a hostile work environment. That usually amounts to willful misconduct, which disqualifies them from collecting unemployment. But not every crude or stupid action is serious enough to bar benefits, as this case shows.

Q. We recently terminated an employee. He claims he is legally entitled to a letter outlining the reasons for his discharge. Is he correct?