Iraq Vet Gets Pink Slip (Boston firefighter loses job while serving in Iraq)

[sabra]

Source: boston channel

NEW BEDFORD, Mass. -- The budget battle being waged in cities and towns across Massachusetts reached the front lines last week, when a soldier serving his third tour of duty in Iraq received his pink slip.

NewsCenter 5’s Kelley Tuthill reported that Leo Pike, who was deployed to Iraq again in September with the Navy Reserves, opened his mail Thursday and learned that he will be losing his job as a New Bedford firefighter.

“He loves being a firefighter,” said Pike’s fiancée Renee Garbitt. “He loves his job and he says that he’s one of those people that’s happy to go to work every day.”

Garbitt, who is raising their 2-year-old son, Leo, on her own while Pike is deployed over seas, said that the layoffs were enacted with little consideration for the disadvantages the family would face as a result of Pike’s military service.

“He’s going to have to come home to no job and, now, competing with 76 others who have had quite a head start on him,” Garbitt said.

Read more: http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/18852988/detail.html

[benddem]

1. that's illegal!

[AnneD]

2. Damn Skippy....

The city needs to recieve a letter from the VA and his Senator....whats his name John Kerry?

[eyesroll]

4. No, it's not. (Edit: At least, not in this situation, based on the facts in the article.)

If the FD picked him for a termination because he was in Iraq, then yes, it's illegal.

If the FD had to layoff a number of people, and he was in line due to seniority or other objective criteria, like his whole unit got cut (in other words, he'd have been laid off regardless of whether he was in Iraq), then no, it's not illegal.

I do believe the FD cannot consider military absences as a strike against seniority (so if there are recalls or reassignments, he should get dibs on them based on his seniority whether he's in Iraq or not), but that's about it.

[pasto76]

5. Concur

thats a good sum up of USERRA. And yes, they cannot consider a deployment absence as a hit on seniority. The law is pretty good....when the troops know about it and can enforece their rights.
My experience is employers are not always forthcoming...

[jb5150]

7. Either way

It's going to make for bad publicity...

[raebrek]

3. That is what I was thinking

When you have been away fighting a war your employer is required to keep a job open for you when you return. That is what I remember.

Raebrek!!!

[avaistheone1]

6. We are just gong to have to face we can not have endless war and occupation in Iraq

and Afghanistan and have 800 military bases around the world, and then expect the have jobs and a healthy economy at home.

Does anyone see that the country has collapsed? The wars and the Wall Street have sucked all the money out of this country.

[Kalyan]

8. legal but cheap

Did the dept head spend even a few minutes to think before making a decision like this? His decision is bone-headed, to be charitable.

oh, by the way - he will be lying if he says that he supports the troops. Idiot!

[Justice]

9. Not Boston - it is Fall River - completely different city

[TEmperorHasNoClothes]

10. employers shouldn't be held captive when employees choose to enlist, IMHO

I'm not one who believes everyone has to roll over and bow to those who choose to enlist or to assume just because people serve that they are heros. We have a volunteer military, and the rest of the world shouldn't have to be on hold because of that. Employers have to run businesses whether in the public or private sectors, people hired to replace those who chose to join the military shouldn't have to fear firing because of someone else's decision to be enlisted.