Q: Put on a final for attendence written in november improve above a verbal but handbook says can change to convenience
Can an employer not approve municipal court for absence?
Can attendance guidelines be changed to companys convinience and not adhere to progressive disciplinary process? Can hr state a written can be removed if improvement but can be accelerated to final if problem reocurrs within 12 month period in which they can change and terminate at any given time with or without notice? Are all of these correct to have in an employer handbook? Does having medical approval for high risk pregnancy ADA and having to remind management on. Fighting for rights yiu should have and stress high risk pregnancy still ok due to forgetting or reminding and checking on supervisors work because it can lead to a bad record of attendance and termination ?
A: Your post contains a lot of disjointed information, but asks no question. Please edit your post to ask a specific legal question which you would like answered.
A:
Based on the information provided, there are several issues that raise concerns around the legality and ethics of the employer's attendance policies and actions:
- Employers typically cannot discipline employees for absences that are legally protected, such as approved FMLA, ADA accommodations, jury duty, etc. Denying court attendance may violate local labor laws.
- Attendance policies should be clearly communicated and consistently applied. Changes only when convenient for the company risks discriminatory uneven enforcement.
- Accelerating discipline steps without notice and guaranteeing termination despite improvement seems overly harsh and not transparent. It undermines trust in stated policies.
- Blanket statements about firing at any time violate employment agreements and expected process. There should still be well-documented cause, warnings as applicable, etc.
- ADA and FMLA obligates employers to reasonably accommodate medical issues with pregnancy, doctor appointments etc. Punishing their use raises discrimination issues if not applied evenly.
In summary, while attendance is an reasonable expectation, the described policies appear inconsistently applied, offer minimal protections for employees, and provide lots of unilateral power with little oversight. That is questionable legally and ethically. Clearer standards, transparency, and good faith application are better for employer-employee relations. Consultation with a local employment lawyer could help assess any violations relevant to state laws.
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
