Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Did his duty - then lost his job (Reservist fired by IBM)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:24 PM
Original message
Did his duty - then lost his job (Reservist fired by IBM)
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/289803p-247960c.html

Michael Warren, a native of Port Jefferson, L.I., is suing International Business Machines Corp. for firing him because since 9/11 he's been called up too often by the Army Reserves.
Today, Warren serves his country in a time of war as he wages a second David vs. Goliath war against one of the giants of corporate America.

Warren's attorney Brendan Chao says IBM is in violation of Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act and the New York State Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act, laws that protect reservists from being fired for military service.

After Chao filed suit on behalf of Warren, IBM moved for dismissal in summary judgment. IBM says Warren, an Internet security expert, was fired as part of a "zero-tolerance policy" after leaving a "threatening" voice message for a female co-worker in London.

"Liz, this is Michael Warren," his message said, after playing phone tag involving a big bank deal. "I'm gonna try you on your mobile. Pretty soon I'm gonna hunt you down and kill you. I'm gonna get on a plane. ... And I'm going to, um, errrrh, I'm going to track you down. I'll talk to you in a minute. Bye-bye."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. IBM was sold to some Chinese outfit, weren't they? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. No Just the PC assembly business.
Just the PC assembly business-- which was a very small part of the company -- losing money almost since the beginning -- and had pretty much been off shored and out sourced (both in the US and over seas).

They have been looking for a buyer since 1993 when Akers was fired.

(I just got my annual report over the weekend)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tempest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. 10,000 U.S. IBM employees will be affected by sale
Edited on Mon Mar-14-05 02:45 PM by Tempest
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49474-2004Dec8.html

Headquarters for Lenovo's PC business will be in New York, but its principal operations will be in Beijing and here in North Carolina, where 1,900 of the 10,000 IBM employees expected to switch to Lenovo now work.



China has said it may close down all U.S. operations, and the operations of all foreign IBM sites, and move them to China.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. if he really made that message then he
doesn't have a legal leg to stand on...these days you just don't leave a message like that, even if you're good friends and it was in 'lighthearted fun' ...believe me, i've lost a job before over something i thought was funny and lighthearted (don't worry, it was a shit job anyways)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. The judge sided with him
from the article:

After listening to the tape, Manhattan federal Judge Denny Chin ruled in favor of Warren, and scheduled trial for May 9.

"A reasonable jury could find that Warren was joking when he left the voice mail," Chin wrote, "and that discharging an employee with an excellent eight-year employment record was exceedingly, and irrationally, harsh."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mairead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Not according to the judge
The recipient stated that she didn't feel threatened.

And IBM kept him on til after a particular deal was wrapped up, which the judge found 'egregious'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kiraboo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:31 PM
Response to Original message
5. Not only would I have him fired, but I'd file a harrassment
complaint as well, if he did indeed make the call.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. The he should be glad he didn't call you
The article makes the circumstances quite clear, and it wasn't harassment by a long shot. They were looking for a reason to can the guy, and right after he made the company some serious money in a financial deal.

--p!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MARALE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'm sorry
Nobody leaves a threatening phone message by saying "bye-bye". It was obiviously a joke, playing phone tag can get that way sometimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Exactly - I imagine this kind of kidding goes on in the Pentagon
and CIA.

BTW, I'm rethinking I better be more careful the next time I tell a user I have to kill them (Unix term).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
11. This has been quite common post 9/11
I have know people who were out right threatened that thier employers could not "hold" their jobs for them. When a friend of mine took a letter from her commanding officer explaining the law and offering to speak to the employer if they had any questions, her boss then went on a crusade to find fault with her work so to find reason for termination before her deployment.

Loss of position or promotion is another thing that employers do to discriminate against reservists/guardsmen. I know an officer in the reserves who is a Federal Marshall in his regular career. After a deployment the officer returned to find the promotion that was supposed to be his before he deployed was given to another employee. This is in diredt violation of federal law, more than a little irony that the federal government doesn't respect their own laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yosie Donating Member (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. DOD and DOJ are NOT prosecuting these cases
Edited on Mon Mar-14-05 02:59 PM by Yosie
This was a relatively rare problem in the past - usually came up with respect to the "two weeks active duty for training" absence. The DOD would detail one or two Reserve JAG Corps lawyers who could take the time away from their civilian practices. The DOD usually won. (I did two of these cases)

Sadly, DOJ did not develop any expertise in this area.They could rely on JAG Corps Reserve lawyers.

After Desert Storm there were a lot more of these cases. Still handled the same way, the DOD would detail one or two Reserve JAG Corps lawyers who could take the time away from their civilian practices. Again, the DOD usually won.

But in this war -- with more recalls, and with longer recalls, neither DOD nor DOJ is bringing these cases, and DOD is not authorizing Reserve JAG Corps lawyers to take thses cases, and the "union decertification" lawyers have found a new niche specialty -- Veterans' Reemployment Defense (defending the employer). And employers are getting in earlier and building a case that the reservist was fired "for cause."

And, my take is that "management seminars" are telling employers to go back over a reservists employment history to build a defense to a Veterans Reemployment suit.

As usual - no matter how you slice it - the last guy in the last rank is getting screwed while Halliburton and the defense contractors grow fat (but still can't supply armor for the Hummers).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VegasWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-14-05 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
13. Looks like some IBM managers are going to take the hit on this one.n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC