Can an employer punish an employee for missing work, due to a court date?
The only “court date” for which an employer is legally required to allow you to take time off without penalty is jury duty. This does not mean they must pay you. Some states require employers to pay employees for jury duty, many do not.Otherwise, there are no laws in the U.S. specifically requiring an employer to grant you time off without consequence. The “rules” for a court date are based on standard practice and the company’s policies as published in its employee manual pertaining to time off.Typically an employee is expected to give an employer some notice of his or her intent to take time off for any purpose, and this would apply to a court date equally.At the risk of sounding facetious, an employer cannot physically compel an employee to come to work or remain at work under any circumstances. Obviously, if you have a court date, you do not want to miss it. The penalties, depending on what you’re going to court for, can range from fines to dismissal of the case (if you are the plaintiff) to jail time, so you should go regardless of your employer’s policies.All an employer is obligated to do is treat you equally with all other employees and in accordance with written policies. You can generally use personal time off (PTO) or vacation time for a court date, but you cannot use sick time (if your company separates this from PTO.)If your employer feels you have not given adequate notice, or that the amount of time you are taking off is excessive, or they are simply unwilling to deal with your absence, they are generally within their rights to terminate your employment. (This depends on whether you have an employment agreement and whether your company and/or state have an “At Will” employment environment.)You should ask your company HR representative to be sure.
Do you think that the US should implement some punishment or prohibit the employment of illegal immigrants as Canada did?
Canada does not prohibit the employment of “illegal Immigrants”, they just make it IMPOSSIBLE.No SIN - no job -EVERSIN = Social Insurance Number. You need it to get housing, get a job, pay taxes, open a bank account, get a credit card, get a driver’s licence, health care card, go to school, send your kids to school and for just about anything.The funniest thing about your SIN card is that once you have showed it once or twice, in the right places, it just spreads to where it is needed.Computers…
So, how can you fine an employer for hiring an undocumented/illegal alien if it's against the law to even ask?
"Pre-Employment Inquiries and Citizenship: Employers should not ask whether or not a job applicant is a United States citizen before making an offer of employment. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 12986 (IRCA) makes it illegal for employers to discriminate with respect to hiring, firing, or recruitment or referral for a fee, based on an individual's citizenship or immigration status." http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/inqui... So, if an employer began asking whether the applicant was indeed legally authorized to work, they would be in violation of the law. What do you want employers to do then?
Should employers be punished for hiring illegal aliens who commit crimes?
That is the optimum solution to the problem. Better than a wall. For that reason its a tougher lift than building a wall.The Chamber of Commerce will bring in the Mainstream Repubs. like Senator Grahamisty (Pun) Jeff Flake, etc.The DEM party will fight it because it destroys their next dependent voter base. But it will force things on the nation that will NOT appeal to anti big Government AND DEM party activists alike. Then unless it establishes a solid system for identifying legal workers the employers are going to caught in a vicious cross fire.If you impose real penalties the people who openly hire someone illegal they will be forced NOT to hire any applicants that MIGHT be illegal. So if a Hispanic comes in to apply for a job, and he has no verifiable legal status, the employer will not hire.YES, you guessed it, Equal Employment opportunity (EEO) lawsuit. Small business employers can't afford that. Don't think for one second that won't happen.DEMS will hate it because once you have a national ID system every voter now has an identity card. So why NOT require ID when you vote?OK, then what we need is a way to positively identify all LEGAL workers. Again you guessed it, a national identity card. At the least a link open to employers that allows someone to run a criminal type history on prospective employees.Then anyone with legal status has to register and be cleared to work. Everybody ends up with a number, fingerprints and DNA on file.Before they are hired, they have to be fingerprinted to verify who they are.
If a store employee is caught stealing money from their employer, how much effect does this have on their employability?
I gotta say it depends on the jobs, previous work history, and amount of theft, as well if they were charged.I made a stupid mistake with my first job, I obviously had no previous work history and I got charged. My first crime even though it was a misdemeanor I had to pay restitution (pay back what I took) and got 6 months probation. So now I have that on my background for 7 years (so far it's only been 3). Since I had no previous work history it's hard for me to find jobs, but add to that an actual crime where I stole from my employer (yes, I know, stupid). It is very hard to get a job in retail (or anything that handles money) and even some non-retail jobs won't hire me. I went to an agency where I talked to someone who handled the employment from that agency to a factory that deals with vegetables (or something like that) and was told they wouldn't even consider me. Seriously? I should add it was a chain store and I've been "banned" from all of them, so imagine not only not being able to get a job but also not being able to go somewhere you went to regularly.It's true not everyone will be prosecuted (it depends on the business) but you will most likely always have to put that employer on your resume and why you "left", I honestly leave it blank because I don't want to put that I was fired for theft. I already don't have a good work history, I'd rather talk about it in an interview and hopefully they'll undertand that I'm not that person.So you see, my advice would be: do NOT ever do anything to ruin your current employment by doing something you're not supposed to (like stealing) because there's always a chance that it will ruin future job opportunities even if it wasn't something big. Nobody wants to hire someone who previously stole from their employer. I work at a restaurant, trying to get a second job (it's not going well) and I have a small child and a husband to take care of (my husband can't work full time).You have to think about your future and decide what's more important; having $200 you can easily get from a register at work or having that job (or potentially better job) and not ruin your future employment. We learn from our mistakes but sometimes thinking things through and thinking about the future would be better to prevent mistakes.
Do employers intentionally demotivate their employees.?
There are good bosses and bad bosses. Good bosses recognize the value of good employees and try to create an environment where those employees get recognition for their work. Good bosses also want to see their employees learn and grow so both (the boss and employee) can advance and become greater assets to the company. Bad bosses (some on power trips) do exactly what you said, make their employees feel they don't have value (and it's not just making the employee feel they don't have value for another employer). Unfortunately, when your employees don't feel valuable they don't do quality work. Why should they? Unfortunately, in some cases employers do intentionally demotivate their employees, but I believe these cases are uncommon and not the norm.
How can we start to punish employers who do not train, invest or hire entry level employees in white collar industries?
Some companies already do consistently train entry level employees. When a new member joins my team out of college, I expect minimal useful work out of them for the first 6 months or so. During that time they are learning the programming languages and technologies we use, understanding the business strategy and their role in it, and learning how to interact with with their teammates. Some new grads also need to learn some basics about professional behaviour - showing up on time, listening more than talking, etc. I understand banking is similar.That said, we expect people to bring in a baseline of skills, usually developed in college, because in the process of developing those skills they'll find out whether this is really the right career for them. If people joined companies prior to specializing, we'd wind up with people who should be surgeons trying to write code and developers cutting people open. That would give a new meaning to the word hacker!There are entry level jobs that don't require college and will train you, but you should expect to spend at least 5 years learning and doing very basic work. College takes four years, after all, and since you're bringing in no skills you have to start with unskilled work. I find that most people who want “training” really want to be paid to do the skilled job while they learn, a multi-year process, without actually having the skills.Also, teaching fundamental concepts on the job is less efficient than training them in an educational setting. So rather than forcing companies to train people, if you think we need more training, we should subsidize college. Of course we already do, and it's partly funded by corporate taxes. And on top of that all large companies voluntarily sponsor many scholarships.
Is it legal for my employer to punish me for being sick?
have worked at the same place for 4 and a half years and have only missed 4 days (including the 2 I just missed). When I came back to work with my doctor's note I was questioned about why I was sick and they acted like I was lying. When I checked my schedule they scheduled me in the worst part of the restaurant (I have been scheduled the front bar for the past 3 years) when I asked what this was about they told me it was because they did not believe that I was sick. I was furious. When I mentioned that I've only missed 4 days in 4 and a half years they just told me to suck it up. Yes, I will complain and did mention to them that several employees have missed several days on holidays, etc, because they were hung over yet nothing was done to them. (Yeah, not a great argument but I'm so p*ssed about it). Is this legal what they are doing or am I screwed with the crappy employment laws?