|
Estate update: Uncle is likely deep in dementia and probably had a stroke/tia or two. No signs of a PoA or Living Will and even less of him doing the needful. Edit: he's been baker acted toplitzin fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Sep 16, 2017 |
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 07:56 |
|
|
Got a whites are under attack email from a former client of mine yesterday. That's all from me for today.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
Hi! I've never done this before so I'm going to give it my best shot. (NY) My very good sister-in-law coincidentally demoted from area manager(4 stores) to general manager (1 store) when she's 8 months and 1 week pregnant and her record is verifiably better than most of the other area managers. Let me tell you about my very good sister-in-law. She has a very good toddler and an unexpected, but not unwelcome, very good baby on the way. She had to drop out of high school because she had one of those pain disorders that causes you to be in pain all the time. When they managed to fix it, she enrolled in community college and got a job at {Donut Store Chain} to pay for it. She was a model employee, rose rapidly, and got on with the owners (of that franchise group of 4 stores) so well that they made her manager and fast-tracked her for area manager. Sent her to training at corporate and everything. The plan was that they would then pay for her to finish whatever college she needed to keep moving up, or something like that. Those owners were forced out when Corporate mandated a refurbishment but neglected to actually do the refurbishment when paid, or something like that. I'm hearing these things second hand and there are no answers to my questions. In comes the Investors. They don't listen to advice, included the need to hire more general managers. Sister-in-law has been doing her own job plus the job of two managers for months. Don't do what are supposed to be critical repairs. They suck, but SiL keeps soldiering on because she needs the insurance until after the baby is born and she can look for another job. She never receives a single written or verbal warning, and now, at 8 months pregnant, they're "going in a new direction that doesn't include her at her current level". She has all the reports that she's equaling or outperforming all the other area managers. Also, they told her this in a parking lot. She is already scheduling a deeper consultation with a lawyer, but I thought I'd post here just to see if anyone has any advice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
Talking to a lawyer is good but don't get your hopes up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:46
|
|
|
Concur with euphro. Time for her to plan to look for a new job post baby.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Beachcomber posted:Hi! Tell her to enroll in Cobra benefits immediately.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
therobit posted:Tell her to enroll in Cobra benefits immediately. Unfortunately, this. Then talk to a lawyer, but with lowered expectations.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
therobit posted:Tell her to enroll in Cobra benefits immediately. They're not firing her. Does this still apply? She's willing to keep suffering the constant degradation rather than quit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
Beachcomber posted:They're not firing her. Does this still apply? She's willing to keep suffering the constant degradation rather than quit. They're not firing her yet
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 03:19
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:They're not firing her yet She can apply for cobra before she's lost her job?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
She has all of the elements for a solid EEOC charge of discrimination based on sex/pregnancy. Whether it gets anywhere will depend on all of the actual facts and arguments that the company can put forward. Eg who else, if anyone, did they demote and why? It doesn't sound like there's any direct evidence of discrimination, so it will be a matter of who's side seems more convincing. She has 300 days from the demotion to file a charge, so don't put it off forever. If she files a charge ehile working there, she may very well experience retaliation. This of course is also illegal, but it would have to be the grounds for a second charge. If she files thr company may very likely try to settle with her through mediation. If not, expect thr investigation to drag on at least a year.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
Beachcomber posted:She can apply for cobra before she's lost her job? That I don't know, but new owners + sudden demotion + potential discrimination does not sound like long term job prospects She should at least start looking into it EwokEntourage fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Sep 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:That I don't know, but new owners + sudden demotion + potential discrimination does not sound like long term job prospects The new owners started 11 months ago. She got off a call earlier (recorded) and they wouldn't give her a reason other than "We think it'll be better for the company" and they couldn't give her a reason she didn't get any warning whatsoever that this was even a possibility. When she asked about the commendations she's received over the past weeks for reducing OT, they just said it wasn't up for debate. She's pretty clearly done. Incidently, NY has a new FMLA law coming into effect Jan. 1st.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 04:53
|
|
|
Sorry, I misread that at first and thought she had been terminated. As others have said, tell her to talk to a labor lawyer about if she has something actionable, see about an EEOC complaint, and to consider that they are likely going to find a way force her out anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:That I don't know, but new owners + sudden demotion + potential discrimination does not sound like long term job prospects You don't do anything with COBRA until you leave the job. This is also likely bad advice if she does lose her job. COBRA is extremely expensive and does not have the tax credits of ACA. Loss of job with insurance is a qualifying event that allows you to enroll in ACA asap. Now this is less good in the era of trump, but in New York, she'll probably be ok. COBRA is expensive as gently caress, more than most ACA plans, even unsubsidized.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 05:41
|
|
|
Beachcomber posted:The new owners started 11 months ago. She got off a call earlier (recorded) and they wouldn't give her a reason other than "We think it'll be better for the company" and they couldn't give her a reason she didn't get any warning whatsoever that this was even a possibility. When she asked about the commendations she's received over the past weeks for reducing OT, they just said it wasn't up for debate. She's pretty clearly done. nm posted:You don't do anything with COBRA until you leave the job. Ok I should have just prefaced this with the general "I don't know poo poo about employment and/or healthcare law and/or programs" and so forth. I just meant that, like others have said/implied, she is not in a good situation and continued employment seems iffy at her job, and she should prep for the worse, especially considering her current situation with children/pregnancy. On the other hand, hopefully this spurs more knowledgeable people to continue to tell me how I am wrong while also providing useful advice. However, I would reiterate looking into COBRA with the added caveat (thanks to nm) that looking into the ACA is a good idea (subject to however you republican elected officials might have hosed over health care in your state in order to spite the first black president) Gonna claim this as a Legal thread success on my LinkedIn. Also someone buy me a red title to not trust anything I say as future forewarning EwokEntourage fucked around with this message at 06:51 on Sep 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 06:47
|
|
|
One other thing re:cobra. If you take cobra, you can't switch to aca until the standard open enrollment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 07:08
|
|
|
nm posted:One other thing re:cobra. If you take cobra, you can't switch to aca until the standard open enrollment. Sounds like this guy knows better than me. I was thinking that if she is pregnant and about to have a baby, make sure there is coverage. IF she can ride out until the baby is born and file suit after, PPACA coverage is better if it is still around and she qualifies. Is there a spouse in the picture who is earning enough money she would not qualify for PPACA/Medicade coverage? Here in Oregon the kids qualify up to a household income of 65k.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 07:15
|
|
|
Most states have coverage for children http://www.chipcoverspakids.com/FAQs/Pages/EligibilityandBenefits.aspx Also Someone said above that all of the elements of discrimination were met. I don't necessarily see a prima facie case on those facts . In particular there is no strong evidence for element 4 . Maybe her lawyer can suss out some more facts tho.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 08:31
|
|
|
The fourth element is generally that similarly situated employees outside of the charging party's protected class were treated differently. In this case that would be any man or non-pregnant woman in her position who was not demoted. Thr poster is alleging that there were less qualified men who were retained at that level. The close timing of the impending birth and demotion alone can give rise to an inference of discrimination Even without a clean comparator you can still proceed by proving that the company's arguments are pretext. Basically, if they're stated reasons are lovely and don't make sense. If they say that she had to be demoted because she's a low performer, then they'll have to back this up and your sister could provide info to thr contrary and request that the men's performance is looked at. They obviously knew there was a potential for liability because they purposely didn't tell her the reason, so she'd have to wait and see their arguments in response to the charge. She can get a copy of the company's response to see if it's full of poo poo and then she'd get to provide a rebuttal (to prove pretext). Did your sister discuss needing time off after giving birth or have any pregnancy related health issues that required any time off or other accommodations? Does the company have a policy regarding accommodating pregnancies? Pregnancy cases can often involve ADA and retaliation claims, too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
The consultation is a good idea. Her damages are likely low at this point (mostly the wage difference between the two positions), so it's unlikely that an attorney would take her case in this early stage on contingency. That could change if she's terminated. Attorneys often say "go ahead and do the EEOC process and then get back to me," which usually means they don't think it's worth their time. If they say that it sounds like a "good case" but they don't want to take it on contingency then theyre likely BSing you. If the company tries to settle via mediation, they very well might try to offer more than a paltry sum in exchange for ypur SiL agreeing to resign. She should probably avoid quitting for this reason (leverage) and because it would limit her potential damages, since it would be very unlikely ahe could prove constructive discharge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
She was planning to take the legally allowed amount of time off at some % of pay in NY state. I'll try to find out if she told the owners, but I don't want to press her too hard because she's teetering over a precipice. Also she's tearing herself to pieces for giving so much of herself to these people. I think she probably did tell them. Edit: She didn't. They have previously expressed disdain that pregnant women can work until it's time to give birth. Not recorded, unfortunately. The lawyer told her to get started on EEOC. Beachcomber fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Sep 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Real estate/tenant law: Can a person be compelled to leave quickly at the end of a lease? Ie: I want my currently on the lease roommate out of this house ASAP when the lease ends. Besides hoping she acts like an adult and moves, do I have to renew the lease on my own then treat her like a squatter if she stays and to then start eviction proceedings with the assistance of the current landlord/rental company? (Alternately, I'm looking at buying the house from the current landlord at lease end which would change what if anything?)
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Depends on the state, but generally if she doesn't leave then yes you'll have to evict her
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
Your landlord cannot forcibly eject one person off of the lease. They can remove all tenants and then rerent to just you, but you're taking them at their word on that. Does the lease convert to month to month automatically, or require renewal?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Unload My Head posted:Your landlord cannot forcibly eject one person off of the lease. They can remove all tenants and then rerent to just you, but you're taking them at their word on that. Depending on jurisdiction, yes they can.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 00:00
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Depending on jurisdiction, yes they can. Fair. I'm not familiar with the wild west of the deep South.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
For a little levity: https://twitter.com/annalecta/status/910197606231527424
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
Unload My Head posted:Your landlord cannot forcibly eject one person off of the lease. They can remove all tenants and then rerent to just you, but you're taking them at their word on that. I believe the lease converts, but i plan on being fully communicative with regards to renewing/purchasing. IE: 90 days out "hey' id like to renew the lease to me only, or if the landlord is willing i'd like to make an offer on the house" Edit: lease auto renews unless given at least 60 days notice. so at that time i'd communicate "I want to renew without other tenant." toplitzin fucked around with this message at 00:25 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 00:21
|
|
|
Ur Getting Fatter posted:For a little levity: That's a very smart letter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
Gonna crosspost from GiP question thread here. I hope some of you lawgoons can point me towards some resources. I'm meeting the guy in question most days so getting a look at papers etc won't be a problem and there are fairly strong lawyer NGOs around that might be able to help him once they get around to him, but that could be months and we hope to have some information ready by then otherwise they might not bother and just say 'contact the Americans directly'Nuclear War posted:I don't think this goes here, but I have no idea where to go to ask for resources to help out so I hope you guys can point me to anything at all since while it doesn't concern a veteran it's drat close to. If this is totally inappropriate let me know and I'll delete.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
Nuclear War posted:Gonna crosspost from GiP question thread here. I hope some of you lawgoons can point me towards some resources. I'm meeting the guy in question most days so getting a look at papers etc won't be a problem and there are fairly strong lawyer NGOs around that might be able to help him once they get around to him, but that could be months and we hope to have some information ready by then otherwise they might not bother and just say 'contact the Americans directly' This is the process that the state department has in place, FWIW. Some organizations that could help. joat mon fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Sep 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
Nuclear War posted:Gonna crosspost from GiP question thread here. I hope some of you lawgoons can point me towards some resources. I'm meeting the guy in question most days so getting a look at papers etc won't be a problem and there are fairly strong lawyer NGOs around that might be able to help him once they get around to him, but that could be months and we hope to have some information ready by then otherwise they might not bother and just say 'contact the Americans directly' I'd also contact the office of Congressional Representative Seth Moulton. This is a cause dear to his heart, so his staff should have all the most current resources ready to hand. I'd try the Washington, DC office first; the Salem office is more concerned with Massachusetts local issues.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
I live in the US and recently traveled to Australia on vacation where I rented a car on several occasions. Last week I received two speeding infractions from Victoria due to speed cameras clocking me at 12 km/h over the limit. Assuming I never travel to Australia again, is there likely to be any legal penalty for ignoring these tickets?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 13:46
|
|
|
Aghama posted:I live in the US and recently traveled to Australia on vacation where I rented a car on several occasions. Last week I received two speeding infractions from Victoria due to speed cameras clocking me at 12 km/h over the limit. Your rental car company will probably just bill it to your credit card with an additional fee.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
you'll get a booting
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
Leviathan Song posted:Your rental car company will probably just bill it to your credit card with an additional fee.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Aghama posted:Well the rental car company obviously passed on my address to the state since they sent me the infringement notices directly, it seems unlikely that they would then go back and fine the rental company. I am not thrilled about the prospect of paying $500 for going 7 mph over the limit, especially since both infractions were within 30 minutes of the other. The person who owns the car is ultimately responsible for fines in Australia, they checked the box telling them where you live to give you the chance to pay it before the state goes and makes the rental car company pay it, in which case they're going to charge your credit card and a processing fee on top of it. Speeding fines in Australia are ridiculous, it's why you don't speed there if you're not prepared to pay heavy fines.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
In a hypothetical scenario where the rental car company did not have your CC details, they would have to: 1. Pay the State. 2. Initiate some sort of proceedings in AUs against you to collect (I'm not an AUS lawyer) 3. Once a judge of some sort reached a veredict against you, the rental car company could ask the judge to issue an exequatur to a US judge in your jurisdiction 4. Said judge would analyze the AUS judge's ruling and, assuming it complied with some minimum legal standard would, 5. Start some sort of legal proceeding (not a US lawyer, either). 6. Summon you so you could exercise whatever legal defenses were available to you. 7. Sentence you according to US law within the guidelines of the AUS sentence. Obviously all that poo poo is expensive so in real life they will just blackball you from renting a car with them (until they lose your records), and maybe if you ever want to live in AUS you'll have some sort of derogatory mark in your credit report. Edit: according to wikipedia, exequatur isn't a thing in US law, so idk if there's a formal instrument for executing a foreign judge's sentences.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 07:56 |
|
|
Hmm, the terms & conditions from the company don't mention anything about being able to charge for the actual Infringement Penalty, just for any fees associated with providing the details to the notifying authority:quote:Traffic Infringement Charges: You are responsible for all traffic and parking infringements during the period of the rental. If Redspot is notified of an infringement during or after the end of the rental it will provide to the notifying authority details necessary for the authority to hold You liable for the infringement. Redspot will without notice charge to Your credit card an administration fee to cover its costs in providing these details. It's even more galling since the Great Ocean Road has the most schizophrenic speed limits.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 21:06
|
|