Tell HN: Fired after 7 years during maternity leave paperwork filing
76 comments
* Contact an employment attorney immediately. That means make the time to start calling potential representation tomorrow, don't wait until next week to start searching.
* US Department of Labor Complaint (as this touches FMLA): https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/contact/complaints
* Do not discuss it further with anyone except your partner and your attorney ("lawyer up").
* Apply for any unemployment benefits immediately.
* Create a paper trail with any existing documents and any further communications with the employer. Do not communicate in any medium you cannot generate a paper trail.
Not an attorney, not legal advice.
* US Department of Labor Complaint (as this touches FMLA): https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/contact/complaints
* Do not discuss it further with anyone except your partner and your attorney ("lawyer up").
* Apply for any unemployment benefits immediately.
* Create a paper trail with any existing documents and any further communications with the employer. Do not communicate in any medium you cannot generate a paper trail.
Not an attorney, not legal advice.
The only step OP should take is finding a lawyer that will work on contingency. There are plenty of employment lawyers who will take the case and bill you hourly, but if you can't find one to take it on contingency that is a good sign you don't have a real case.
Putting down the pitchforks for a moment, we are in a wave of industry wide layoffs. Some quick Googling says that you qualify for pregnancy disability leave in California at 36 weeks (about 4 weeks before birth). Getting ready to file the paperwork doesn't qualify you or infer any protected status.
Putting down the pitchforks for a moment, we are in a wave of industry wide layoffs. Some quick Googling says that you qualify for pregnancy disability leave in California at 36 weeks (about 4 weeks before birth). Getting ready to file the paperwork doesn't qualify you or infer any protected status.
> The only step OP should take is finding a lawyer that will work on contingency. There are plenty of employment lawyers who will take the case and bill you hourly, but if you can't find one to take it on contingency that is a good sign you don't have a real case.
This!
Unless you're working in a dinky little mickey-mouse outfit, I will bet good money that HR consulted their lawyers before firing. Which means we have two parties here, and one party has already been advised on a course of action by their lawyers.
It's a shitty thing to do, but my money is on the company being in the clear, legally.
You can bet your ass that the company covered theirs.
This!
Unless you're working in a dinky little mickey-mouse outfit, I will bet good money that HR consulted their lawyers before firing. Which means we have two parties here, and one party has already been advised on a course of action by their lawyers.
It's a shitty thing to do, but my money is on the company being in the clear, legally.
You can bet your ass that the company covered theirs.
I hope we can agree no one here is qualified to make a determination wrt the merits of the case. OP should find their attorney (agree they should be judicious in choosing one), preserve evidence, and notify regulators. Let the regulator determine if they will take action. That’s their job, not an internet forum’s, and it is free to file the complaint(s). Their purpose is to investigate claims.
No pitchforks (I would agree that isn’t helpful), simply taking steps to ensure assertion of someone’s rights and that a rigorous independent examination of the situation occurs.
No pitchforks (I would agree that isn’t helpful), simply taking steps to ensure assertion of someone’s rights and that a rigorous independent examination of the situation occurs.
I'm so sorry. I have so much sympathy.
I worked at Goldman Sachs for 13+ years. I was laid off in the January cull. I've always been a top or near-top performer. I had to take a few months off because my wife got breast cancer and my father had a cardiac arrest that left him unable to care for himself. I was advised by the "Wellness" people to not communicate my reason for FMLA/MLOA. As soon as I heard major layoffs were coming, I knew I'd be selected. Literally every person I've seen take a medical or family leave (aside from maternity, ironically) has been laid off/fired at the next possible opportunity. There are class action implications without question, if it could be organized.
I worked at Goldman Sachs for 13+ years. I was laid off in the January cull. I've always been a top or near-top performer. I had to take a few months off because my wife got breast cancer and my father had a cardiac arrest that left him unable to care for himself. I was advised by the "Wellness" people to not communicate my reason for FMLA/MLOA. As soon as I heard major layoffs were coming, I knew I'd be selected. Literally every person I've seen take a medical or family leave (aside from maternity, ironically) has been laid off/fired at the next possible opportunity. There are class action implications without question, if it could be organized.
Yeah, this sucks -- considering everything. I would like to see metrics on this.
Like the chance if you take FMLA/MLOA, your odds of getting "laid off" during the next round of layoffs. Particularly at GS.
Like the chance if you take FMLA/MLOA, your odds of getting "laid off" during the next round of layoffs. Particularly at GS.
Did this restructuring fire/lay off other employees at the same time ? If yes, then it will be difficult to prove that she was let go due to pregnancy unless she has concrete evidence.
Regardless, if she feels that she was let go due to her pregnancy, talk to an employment attorney for advice. They may tell you if your case has merit for a potential lawsuit but remember that these are extremely hard to prove and burden is on your wife to prove. The company just has to show that she was laid off with others as part of "restructuring".
"I am livid". Yes you are right now. But even if you talk to an employment attorney and say you may have a case, you have to calculate whether the potential payout will be worth the hassle since legal stuff is nightmare and you probably want to focus on the pregnancy and not legal battles. So, take time to cool off and then decide whatever it is you decide.
Regardless, if she feels that she was let go due to her pregnancy, talk to an employment attorney for advice. They may tell you if your case has merit for a potential lawsuit but remember that these are extremely hard to prove and burden is on your wife to prove. The company just has to show that she was laid off with others as part of "restructuring".
"I am livid". Yes you are right now. But even if you talk to an employment attorney and say you may have a case, you have to calculate whether the potential payout will be worth the hassle since legal stuff is nightmare and you probably want to focus on the pregnancy and not legal battles. So, take time to cool off and then decide whatever it is you decide.
Yes, everything you say is true.
However, if they've done this in the past, all firings would be discoverable -- as it would show a pattern of behavior. Particularly all firings after requesting FMLA.
However, if they've done this in the past, all firings would be discoverable -- as it would show a pattern of behavior. Particularly all firings after requesting FMLA.
Frankly, I hope you sue and hope you win. Shitty companies do shitty things like this all the time.
Also HR stands for Happiness Removal.
Also HR stands for Happiness Removal.
Consult an employment lawyer.
I second this. I have friends who consulted an employment lawyer in similar circumstances - and were able to negotiate additional severance.
Yes it's very likely that if the company was aware of the pregnancy that this was illegal.
Wait! In a restructuring it's illegal to fire someone who is pregnant? That's nonsense.
It's not illegal to fire someone who is pregnant. It's illegal to fire someone because they're pregnant. You have to be able to point to another reason, such as performance.
Meaning, if you're doing layoffs, and you thought to yourself, "Let's fire person X! They're about to have a kid and won't even be around for two months. That'd be a waste of money!", you would be breaking the law.
Meaning, if you're doing layoffs, and you thought to yourself, "Let's fire person X! They're about to have a kid and won't even be around for two months. That'd be a waste of money!", you would be breaking the law.
A court case could determine through discovery if it was really "restructuring" or just an excuse to fire this one person in particular.
We don't not have enough information to make an educated assessment here.
We don't not have enough information to make an educated assessment here.
Hint: the restructuring is most probably a made up excuse, they just wanted the pregnant lady gone.
Hmm, it should be a slam-dunk case, the lawyer just needs to ask "Show the court all the paperwork regarding this 'restructuring'. What structures were before, what are they now, and what's the rationale?".
Hmm, it should be a slam-dunk case, the lawyer just needs to ask "Show the court all the paperwork regarding this 'restructuring'. What structures were before, what are they now, and what's the rationale?".
[deleted]
In a civilized nation, that certainly would be the case. You're probably right that parent meant USA instead.
exactly. in china and in some european countries, being pregnant automatically protects you from being let go for almost any reason until after maternity leave completes.
being aware doesnt make it illegal. only if it was because of the pregnancy.
The fact that the company is reputation.com is the biggest irony ever.
They're not goodreputation.com
Getting fired is something that happens to the best of us. Restructuring could really be the reason, fresh labor is cheaper, and it does not sound like you have much evidence or reason to prove otherwise.
Without more to go on, I suggest you move on and don’t prolong the grief. And equally importantly, waste time in getting a new job.
Without more to go on, I suggest you move on and don’t prolong the grief. And equally importantly, waste time in getting a new job.
> Without more to go on, I suggest you move on and don’t prolong the grief. And more importantly, waste time in getting a new job.
I suggest they disregard random HN advice like this and ask a lawyer.
I suggest they disregard random HN advice like this and ask a lawyer.
Seconded.
Get a new job right before giving birth? I'm sure that will go well for everyone.
Yeah, cost savings, it's great! Gotta get that 0.3% bottom line improvement. Doesn't matter how much of someone's life they put into the company.
Yeah, cost savings, it's great! Gotta get that 0.3% bottom line improvement. Doesn't matter how much of someone's life they put into the company.
Yeah, the 'just give up' part was annoying enough, but the 'get a job' ending took it over the top...
I imagine that the poster is also american... like in most countries you probably don't want to miss out on the 84 weeks (in canada) of paid leave
Is this an americans don't have rights thing?
I feel that in most countries this situation is so illegal that you basically wouldn't be able to ask for a more slam dunk case.
I feel that in most countries this situation is so illegal that you basically wouldn't be able to ask for a more slam dunk case.
[deleted]
> and it does not sound like you have much evidence or reason to prove otherwise
Even without filing the paperwork, being [visibly] almost nine months pregnant is evidence enough to make a scene.
There's a reason everybody conspicuously squawks about their disabilities and sexual orientation these days-- it makes them a walking EEOC complaint. Pregnancy counts.
OP needs to see an employment attorney ASAP.
Even without filing the paperwork, being [visibly] almost nine months pregnant is evidence enough to make a scene.
There's a reason everybody conspicuously squawks about their disabilities and sexual orientation these days-- it makes them a walking EEOC complaint. Pregnancy counts.
OP needs to see an employment attorney ASAP.
Fired or laid off? Restructuring sounds like layoffs.
The very obvious implication of this post is that the employer said one thing and meant another.
Fired with the excuse of layoffs.
To be honest you should probably delete this post and just go directly to a lawyer. Naming the company could make things harder for you and your wife if they are able to identify her. Lawyer up or move on.
Naming the company was the right thing to do. And it's so fun it's literally called Reputation.com.
And of course it has to be some shitty tracking company, completely useless, but it's where all our best minds are working right now.
We score a capitalism trifecta with this post.
And of course it has to be some shitty tracking company, completely useless, but it's where all our best minds are working right now.
We score a capitalism trifecta with this post.
I'm no lawyer myself, but there's a reason lawyers usually tell their clients to shut up until they've had the opportunity to go over the details, and then to shut up until the case is over. If there's even a chance of taking legal action, detailing such stories online if they can be traced back to you (how many pregnant women recently got fired at this company? I'm willing to bet it won't be a large number).
I assume it won't be too much of a problem in this case as the case resolves around OP's wife rather than OP himself, but if this stuff does end up in court then any statements that can be traced back to OP may be used against them in court.
In a just world, you can share your experiences and opinions freely. In practice, things like "reputation damage" can lessen the payout or be grounds for a counter lawsuit if the company is scummy enough.
OP is free to say as they wish as long as they don't go into libel/slander territory, but freedom of speech does not guarantee freedom from consequences and words you vent in anger can hurt your case in court.
It's up to OP to weight the importance of sharing their experience and opinions against the possible impact on a theoretical court case, but I've never heard of anyone getting a worse settlement because they didn't share the details before legal consultantion got involved.
I assume it won't be too much of a problem in this case as the case resolves around OP's wife rather than OP himself, but if this stuff does end up in court then any statements that can be traced back to OP may be used against them in court.
In a just world, you can share your experiences and opinions freely. In practice, things like "reputation damage" can lessen the payout or be grounds for a counter lawsuit if the company is scummy enough.
OP is free to say as they wish as long as they don't go into libel/slander territory, but freedom of speech does not guarantee freedom from consequences and words you vent in anger can hurt your case in court.
It's up to OP to weight the importance of sharing their experience and opinions against the possible impact on a theoretical court case, but I've never heard of anyone getting a worse settlement because they didn't share the details before legal consultantion got involved.
[deleted]
>And of course it has to be some shitty tracking company, completely useless, but it's where all our best minds are working right now.
whoa there. I hope for all our sakes that's just hyperbole. maybe "it's where all our best paid minds are working right now" but to say that best in a blanket term is working in that field is even a bit pessimistic for my pessimistic views.
whoa there. I hope for all our sakes that's just hyperbole. maybe "it's where all our best paid minds are working right now" but to say that best in a blanket term is working in that field is even a bit pessimistic for my pessimistic views.
Thank you for naming the company. I really appreciate it.
The OP was made in an attempt to anon, but...is this actually a self-dox? How many expecting within months just got released from the company that has been clearly named? Also, fired vs laid off seems like something to inquire about. Did this "tech" company not take advantage of the trend of laying off ~10% of employees during the restructuring?
What are they going to do, fire their wife twice?
(I think there are some more plausible things one could imagine happening but I’m curious how likely they actually are? The things I’m imagining don’t feel very likely to me but maybe I’m missing something)
(I think there are some more plausible things one could imagine happening but I’m curious how likely they actually are? The things I’m imagining don’t feel very likely to me but maybe I’m missing something)
I'm not suggesting this as something to protect the wife. The op created a new account for not wanting this to be connected to his "real" HN account. What I was suggesting had nothing to do with retaliation from evilCorp, but more along the lines of rational decision making for OpSec. There is so much data about us out there that has been collected, that the slightest misstep allows for anon accounts to become doxxed. Again, not for what could happen to the wife, but by using the named corp along with the approximate due date of the wife having just been terminated is pretty strong clues into naming the OP (again not concerned with the wife's info at all for this). Knowing the name of the OP would probably only be a few steps from knowing the actual HN username even if it was another anon account.
Countersue for slander/libel/defamation/some other sort of "illegaly saying bad things", and use that as leverage.
I guess I can imagine legal threats but I assumed this poster came from the us where libel cases are not easy to win. And I also assume that if the poster and their wife are working in tech they can afford to pay a lawyer to tell them whether some legal threat has any merit or not (on the other hand, OP posted here, seemingly instead of contacting a lawyer so maybe I’m wrong).
Other comments seem to suggest that OP revealing themselves to the company would be terrible for them but I don’t really understand the mechanism.
Mostly I assume that if some competent company lawyer were to discover this, they wouldn’t go to the CEO saying ‘how do we best seek revenge’ but rather ‘what were you thinking? Here’s how we might avoid liability if it looks like they might fight this’. Maybe you think that’s putting too much faith into company lawyers?
Other comments seem to suggest that OP revealing themselves to the company would be terrible for them but I don’t really understand the mechanism.
Mostly I assume that if some competent company lawyer were to discover this, they wouldn’t go to the CEO saying ‘how do we best seek revenge’ but rather ‘what were you thinking? Here’s how we might avoid liability if it looks like they might fight this’. Maybe you think that’s putting too much faith into company lawyers?
It's only anon because I don't want it tied to my main HN account.
okay, but do you really think that you didn't just self-own this one? with all of the data out there about people, you honestly don't think someone can find out your wife's name, then find out who she's married with, and then find out what accounts that person (you) has on websites? hell, your wife's now previous employer probably has teams of people that could do this in 5 minutes.
I'm sorry, but I just hope your emotional state isn't blocking logic here.
I'm sorry, but I just hope your emotional state isn't blocking logic here.
And what precisely are they going to do to him if they find out? I mean,maybe its not the smartest if this comes down to a court case, but the most important thing reputation wise is to not have this be the first result when someone googles the wife's name, and the semi-annonyminity accomplishes that.
> And what precisely are they going to do to him if they find out?
Who are "they" in your question. I'm assuming you mean they===namedCorp. I am not thinking those lines at all. The "they" that I'm thinking of is anyone else that might possibly be interested, for the lulz or just practice/fun/games, to find out the info. The fact that a new anon account was created means the OP didn't want it tied to their real account for whatever reasoning they had, yet pretty much laid out a red carpet for someone to walk it back. Okay, maybe not a red carpet, but definitely a better trail than Hansel & Gretel left.
Who are "they" in your question. I'm assuming you mean they===namedCorp. I am not thinking those lines at all. The "they" that I'm thinking of is anyone else that might possibly be interested, for the lulz or just practice/fun/games, to find out the info. The fact that a new anon account was created means the OP didn't want it tied to their real account for whatever reasoning they had, yet pretty much laid out a red carpet for someone to walk it back. Okay, maybe not a red carpet, but definitely a better trail than Hansel & Gretel left.
I meant "they" as in the public at large,not the corp.
And then what precisely? So some random internet person doxes them. This is hardly a news story. What would the negative consequences of that be?
And then what precisely? So some random internet person doxes them. This is hardly a news story. What would the negative consequences of that be?
i think the point is that his main HN account is anonymous, and by revealing this in a new account, the anonymity of the main account is not affected. the problem is not to find out who posted this story, but to connect it to everything else that he has written here.
What will they do? Help? :)
No, they most certainly will not.
Will they sue? Well possible, but I find that if the facts are on your side, it makes it a tough case for any potential lawsuit.
Will they sue? Well possible, but I find that if the facts are on your side, it makes it a tough case for any potential lawsuit.
Oh my god I interviewed with that company and it was one of the most unprofessional experiences I've ever had.
do tell?
Hiring manager brought me into their building. Immediately complains about my outfit (jeans and a polo). He smells like he just smoked a pack of cigs. Proceeds to walk me by about 7 SWEs playing pingpong. Their interview process was pretty basic at the time - this was like 4 years ago - and consisted of a couple technical rounds and a behavioral iirc, at least in the Scottsdale office. They still managed to ghost me.
To be fair, the sight of ping pong is a positive sign in my book. Table tennis is a good and healthy thing to do in a lunch break. 8ball even better!
Laying people off to avoid paying for maternity leave is illegal but quite common. It’s difficult to prove though.
She can file a complaint. If she can prove it was over her pregnancy she can win, but the company can simply lie and say it was part of larger layoffs. Her best bet is to get someone clueless and angry to admit it was over her pregnancy.
Have her pick a fight with her boss over text message. If he admits it she sues and submits that as evidence. If he doesn’t there’s really no way to prove it.
She can file a complaint. If she can prove it was over her pregnancy she can win, but the company can simply lie and say it was part of larger layoffs. Her best bet is to get someone clueless and angry to admit it was over her pregnancy.
Have her pick a fight with her boss over text message. If he admits it she sues and submits that as evidence. If he doesn’t there’s really no way to prove it.
>but the company can simply lie and say it was part of larger layoffs.
Which they would have to prove by showing others laid off.
>Have her pick a fight with her boss over text message. If he admits it she sues and submits that as evidence. If he doesn’t there’s really no way to prove it.
This some of the worst advice you could offer someone.
Which they would have to prove by showing others laid off.
>Have her pick a fight with her boss over text message. If he admits it she sues and submits that as evidence. If he doesn’t there’s really no way to prove it.
This some of the worst advice you could offer someone.
You can go all the way sue and demand discovery. If granted you’ll get all the email talking about her. But that is expensive and time consuming.
I wonder how they will get this post deleted.
What does "in the process of filing paperwork" mean exactly? She opened a Word document and started to write a letter to HR or she actually asked HR for the required documents, making her intention known to the company? The two are very different things but both could fit that description.
She was working with HR.
That is BIG illegal.
If there’s nothing else besides what’s stated, near certain that you can find a lawyer who’ll take that case on contingency. Reputation is gonna get spanked.
Consult with an employment attorney ASAP.
1) Take this post down. See point 2.
2) Talk to a lawyer.
3) Take this post down. See point 2, again.
2) Talk to a lawyer.
3) Take this post down. See point 2, again.
No point.
1. It’s already posted.
2. The post is claiming what happened.
3. No let this company be name and shamed.
1. It’s already posted.
2. The post is claiming what happened.
3. No let this company be name and shamed.
Just saying, from a family of lawyers, while this post will "feel good" to get validation, blow off some steam, shame the company, and get some internet points.... it's not a good idea. Never is. Just talk to a lawyer, take care of it, and THEN maybe shame them when it's all done.
> and THEN maybe shame them when it's all done.
You’d expect the settlement, once ultimately reached, to have terms preventing this, no?
You’d expect the settlement, once ultimately reached, to have terms preventing this, no?
Is she visibly pregnant? Has she talked about being pregnant at work? If so, she could have a strong case for discriminatory firing.
Attorney is the best (only really) course of action here, schedule a free consultation (or a few) and see if you have a case.
Also, while understandable, showing your cards like this is risky as it'd be easy for the company to identify who you are.
Also, while understandable, showing your cards like this is risky as it'd be easy for the company to identify who you are.
I heard one similarly depressing story from someone who left a well-known and well-liked (here) company, but it's not my story to tell.
So it would be lovely to hear from people who've taken maternity leave, been able to return to work gradually, gained promotions and thrived - can we name those companies too?
OP, I hope your wife finds a good lawyer and negotiates a good settlement at least. In the UK they'd have a hard time avoiding that.
So it would be lovely to hear from people who've taken maternity leave, been able to return to work gradually, gained promotions and thrived - can we name those companies too?
OP, I hope your wife finds a good lawyer and negotiates a good settlement at least. In the UK they'd have a hard time avoiding that.
I don't think highly of Reputation.com at all, so I'm not going to say that this is impossible, but there's a solid chance that this is a larp.
1) Almost everybody who posts here is smart, and it's really low-IQ to post the details and company name here when it sabotages a possible life-changing legal case.
2) "In the process of filing the paperwork" is a really weird phrase to use in this context.
1) Almost everybody who posts here is smart, and it's really low-IQ to post the details and company name here when it sabotages a possible life-changing legal case.
2) "In the process of filing the paperwork" is a really weird phrase to use in this context.
Emotional people lashing out is something high iq people do just as much as low iq people.
(Not that i believe the BS about the average HN poster being high IQ)
(Not that i believe the BS about the average HN poster being high IQ)
> Emotional people lashing out is something high iq people do just as much as low iq people.
Of course smart people react emotionally too, but when the stakes are high, a smart person would be likelier to be more calculating.
> (Not that i believe the BS about the average HN poster being high IQ)
Define high-IQ.
Not everybody here is a genius, but I'd bet most people here are very comfortably above the average IQ for their population group. Dumb people will never spend their time online reading and discussing computer science and related topics.
Of course smart people react emotionally too, but when the stakes are high, a smart person would be likelier to be more calculating.
> (Not that i believe the BS about the average HN poster being high IQ)
Define high-IQ.
Not everybody here is a genius, but I'd bet most people here are very comfortably above the average IQ for their population group. Dumb people will never spend their time online reading and discussing computer science and related topics.
Today she was just fired, due to "restructuring". There are plenty of other US-based employees still working there. Her manager didn't even show up to the meeting.
I am livid. The company is Reputation.com.