It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Mom Donates Kidney to Son, Loses Job

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 01:09 PM
I just called the company with the information someone previously posted.
Receptionist answered and I immediately started in with the 'I'm calling to voice my concern over the recent firing of Claudia Rendon...". The receptionist had a canned script she was going off of stating that Miss Rendon is on paid leave and will be rehired when a position becomes available.". She then apologized about the article causing me distress. Hopefully public outcry is causing this company to rethink their firing practices...
edit on 14-9-2011 by slowisfast because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 01:17 PM
reply to post by applebaum

Despite the horrific events, I showed up to day two of the new job on time and worked the day. My boss seemed nice enough. I told her what happened the night before. Her response was to fire me immediately. I reside in At-Will employment state. She felt my condition would bring "drama" to the office.

Now that is extremely wrong! And there is no such thing as an "at-will" state in legal terms. Florida is also an at-will state, but it is still fairly easy to bring a wrongful termination lawsuit against an employer. The at-will part makes it more difficult on the employee, but not impossible. I was a witness in a class-action lawsuit brought against a Florida corporation, and the litigants won the lawsuit, because the corporations practices were so deceptive and abusive.

Since it was your second day on the job, you probably don't have a lawsuit, but it was still wrong on the part of the employer.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 01:21 PM
Yes, but I would rather know now than spend 6 months investing myself and then realize they are creepy. Knowing you work for creeps up front is empowering. You don't waste time spinning your wheels. Glad I didn't.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 01:28 PM
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 01:37 PM

Originally posted by JohnnyFever

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Twisted1

Sounds like you are a big D--- I--- C---K to me.

Wow, and that makes you what? Please brush up on civility. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Just because someone believes differently than you doesn't justify your demeaning yourself by calling and bullying another individual. Please, exercise just a tad bit of maturity when you make your posts.
edit on 14/9/11 by applebaum because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 02:05 PM

Originally posted by silverbullett
As sick as this is, FMLA doesn't apply to companies with less than 50 employees. Some B.S. if you ask me.

For a reason, mainly related to very small companies. Many have less than ten employees and having to pay a temp and cover the missing employee can in fact destroy a small business. It depends case by case on the business. If the missing person is skilled you cannot replace them, nor can you afford to train a replacement to cover a few weeks and expect to not go bankrupt.

I have 1 Office Assistant and keep between 3 and 5 Marketing people. When I'm at 3 its because I cannot find enough people which happens often. I have to relocate them from the lower 48 to get the skills I need. When I'm at 3 people my personal income drops to below what they make. Then if I end up with one sick for a week, which happens, I actually have a week I earn zero. Now if I go belly up nobody has a job. It's similar for many small businesses and it would be INSANE to force FMLA on them. You may as well just tell them close your doors now and lay off your people.

It's not unusual for one of my Marketing staff to earn more than I do in a year and yet I still overhear them talking about me like I'm rich. 2 sides to every coin.

This sounds like a flub up though. I hope everyone noticed that she is now getting full pay but retaining an attorney anyway. Now that company has a double problem in that they have to fire somebody else to take her back. If you read the whole thing it sounds like she had already missed a lot of work before this occurred and the two combined could create a major hardship on a small company. There is not enough info in the article to fully understand what took place. Tough situation for both parties. Very sad for her.

Before she retained an attorney they could have worked it out, now it turns into a battle where both sides could loose. A small place like that could easily go under facing a lawsuit of this nature and then nobody wins. Best case is it works out for both sides.

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 02:21 PM

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Twisted1

It seems heartless at first glance, but she lost her mother, uncle, and then had a prolonged leukemia sickness with her father, and then a prolonged kidney sickness with her son, so she wasn't really at work to begin with.

What about all the other employees at her job? Shouldn't the company be allowed to function, so the ones at work will still have their jobs? Why should her situation jeopardize the livelihoods of everyone else?

The positions have to be filled. The company was well within their right, and it seems like they were pretty patient during the first 3 extended absences.

You make some valid points...and I'm sure that while the company had compassion for the extreme circumstances in her life....they went into business to make a profit, and serve the customers that support them.

At what point do they have an obligation to keep someone on board..who do to circumstances beyond their control could no longer seem to serve the business as a valuable employee?

Sounds like that had been very gracious with extended leaves prior... and at some point..they have to look after the interests of their company.

It is sad that this women had to experience so many tough emotional times..all in a short period of time..but that is not her employers fault either.
edit on 14-9-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 02:46 PM
maybe obama in his new job act should include a clause to combat unemployment by declaring that selfless acts of love from a mother to her son shouldn't result in termination.

someone should take out an ad in the newspaper and publish the name of the company and the piece of sh-t manager that made a woman choose between her son's life and her job.

edit on 14-9-2011 by randomname because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 08:38 PM
There is an update to this story. It seems that a mistake was made and the Company has placed the lady on "Paid Leave". She will recieve her full salary until she can be hired back in her orginal position or another position. Below is the Fox update on the story. Good for everyone I hope!

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in