Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43

Thread: pca/maternity leave/not rehiring question...

  1. #21
    been abused by caregivers enough long ago. if i want to take their key to my house w/o notice and change the lock, i damn well will if their actions endanger me or my kid. bottom line. it's MY house, not a public workplace. or if they steal, grossly slack off, etc. 2 weeks notice in so. cal. with an abusive helper left me absent many things from my house.

    fortunately, haven't had these issues in 13 yrs.

    btw, my helpers have been treated like friends. not one was treated badly. i don't think we can allow an already vulnerable person (as, admit it or not, some pwd can be in a heartbeat) to not be able to hire and fire at will. i would agree to a recourse in court for the caregiver, however.
    Last edited by cass; 02-19-2010 at 02:12 AM.

  2. #22
    Moderator Obieone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Manitoba,Canada
    Posts
    5,630
    Quote Originally Posted by cara_m View Post
    lol and crying here. Chick I just wrote a three paragraph response and timed out. Lost it all. Briefly, I agree with you on everything, but still had much to say. I shall return.lol

    p.s. how do I prevent to time out.

    If you view "preview post" during your response every so often as your typing it should prevent you from timing out Cara. Another way is to copy and paste from a word doc or wordpad if it is especially long ! It must be terribly frustrating to loose your work like that!

    Obieone
    ~ Be the change you wish to see in the world ~ Mahatma Gandi


    " calling all Angels ...... calling all Angels ....walk me through this one .. don't leave me alone .... calling all Angels .... calling all Angels .... we're tryin' and we're hopin' cause we're not sure how ....... this .... goes ..."
    Jane Siberry

  3. #23
    I have never had a caregiver, so maybe I shouldn't comment. But I guess I will.

    I cannot imagine being forced to allow someone in my house, or caring for my self, one minute longer than I wanted to. It'd be bad enough if circumstances forced that - let alone a law.

    You don't have to see a doctor you don't like (at least no law forces you). Why a caregiver? The thought just gives me shivers.

    I never had any job with workers "rights". If I did a good job, they paid me. If I was ok with the working conditions and the pay - I didn't quit. I guess it is a different mindset.

    btw - I hate losing long posts too! If you just highlight it and hit CTL-C (or edit, copy) you don't even need to save it any where like word - it's just on the clipboard, and you can paste it back if you need to.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by TAM63 View Post
    I cannot imagine being forced to allow someone in my house, or caring for my self, one minute longer than I wanted to. It'd be bad enough if circumstances forced that - let alone a law.
    ...
    I never had any job with workers "rights". If I did a good job, they paid me. If I was ok with the working conditions and the pay - I didn't quit. I guess it is a different mindset.
    I don't think anyone suggested any laws to 'force' anyone to employ a pca, especially if the work was poor and/or there was indication or threat of harm.

    I don't think it was suggested here at all that giving "notice" meant continuing to allow a worker into one's home for X days/weeks regardless of the circumstances and continuing to subject yourself to the worker despite having fired them. I don't think even our wacky Canadian 'socialist' friends here suggested anything so black and white either .

    It's bad enough having to deal with strangers coming to do your most intimate of care, but it's crazy to think anyone would, much less should, continue allowing pca's into their home when they don't feel safe. But sometimes, for some, options can be very slim, as is the luxury of choice, so the need to handle a bad situation with care and sensitivity becomes that much more important - for YOUR sake.

  5. #25
    Thought I'd put in my two sense. I practice labour and employment law, but do so in Canada (Ontario) so it may not apply exactly the same way in different states/provinces.
    Under employment standards legislation (non-unionized employees), employees can be dismissed "with cause" without any notice or monetary payments. "With cause" means they have been a poor employee. I always tell employers they should be ready to provide documentation to support this (e.g. theft, poor performance evaluations). Without documentation, an employer may be liable for unjust dismissal.

    Employees can also be dismissed "without cause" at anytime. Dismissal without cause requires a notice period (minimum 2 weeks plus an additional week per year of service - usually). In lieu of notice an employer can choose to pay an employee for the required notice period. Therefore, anyone can lose their job at any time without a reason (outside of the union environment) even if they are doing a great job so long as the employer is willing to write a big cheque.

    Feisty, unless you have given her verbal or written notice in the past regarding poor performance, you may be perceived to be dismissing her without cause. Thus, she may be entitled to notice or payment in lieu. This will affect you only if she decided to pursue it in court. Employers get away without payment all the time if the employee decides not to pursue the matter due to costs, time etc. Honestly, this is the route that I would choose and be prepared to pay the 2 weeks notice in a settlement should she pursue legal action – except that there is a big human rights issue (below) which has you in deep.
    Having said the above, I’m not familiar with California’s “at-will” employment. I expect it would work relatively the same.

    The factor that throws another twist into the mix, and is probably the most significant factor working in her favour, is human rights law. Pregnant women are protected from dismissal due to pregnancy/child birth under the ground of sex in our human rights code/ your Civil Rights Act. You mentioned that this is not the reason for letting her go, but it will be difficult to establish this if she decides to pursue a complaint especially if there is a lack of prior notice of poor job performance and given the timing of dismissal.
    I hate to say it, but unless you think she won’t pursue a complaint, I’d let her come back and start documenting her poor performance. Then let her go. Or let her come back for a time and let her go with payment in lieu of notice.
    Maybe you have hours available to support both employees until you can properly dismiss the former?

    If there is any message that I think everyone would benefit from your situation, Feisty, is to document, document, document. I know it may seem difficult with the personal nature of pca work but, if someone is doing a bad job, document it so you have your ducks in a line when you are ready to let them go. This is helpful for proving dismissal with cause or proving you are not dismissing based on a human rights ground (gender, race etc.)

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by TAM63 View Post
    You don't have to see a doctor you don't like (at least no law forces you). Why a caregiver? The thought just gives me shivers.
    A ridiculous comparison, but as you said yourself:


    Quote Originally Posted by TAM63 View Post
    I have never had a caregiver, so maybe I shouldn't comment. But I guess I will.

  7. #27
    I may be wrong, but I don't think the same type of law applies in the US. And even if it did, I don't think it would apply to an individual like it would a corporation.

    Firing someone because she is pregnant, for example, is a "no-no" - but that would be hard to prove.

    If there was no written employment contract requiring notice, I suspect there likely would be no restrictions at all.

    I think having her back, and then firing her would be worse for all concerned, than just not having her back at all.

    Again, I could be mistaken - but I believe that to assume that US law is similar at all to Canadian in this type of matter I think might be a mistake too.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by orangejello View Post
    A ridiculous comparison, but as you have said yourself:
    Why is it ridiculous?

    You're trusting both with your health and well-being to some extent. And paying both for their services, in fairly intimate matters.

    While I've never had a caregiver, true, I've had doctors. And if I was having someone in my home, to deal with me in an intimate fashion, I believe I would feel that I deserved to choose, and shouldn't have to keep someone that I wasn't comfortable with.

  9. #29
    Here's the discussion of California law - sounds like as long as it isn't discrimination (which apparently not, since she was kept on while pregnant) there is unlikely to be any legal obligation to give notice.

    http://www.calbar.ca.gov/state/calba...581&id=12442#3

    The only thing is some sort of implied contract, but I can't see how that would apply here (I'm no lawyer however).

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by chick View Post
    I don't think anyone suggested any laws to 'force' anyone to employ a pca, especially if the work was poor and/or there was indication or threat of harm.

    I don't think it was suggested here at all that giving "notice" meant continuing to allow a worker into one's home for X days/weeks regardless of the circumstances and continuing to subject yourself to the worker despite having fired them. I don't think even our wacky Canadian 'socialist' friends here suggested anything so black and white either .

    It's bad enough having to deal with strangers coming to do your most intimate of care, but it's crazy to think anyone would, much less should, continue allowing pca's into their home when they don't feel safe. But sometimes, for some, options can be very slim, as is the luxury of choice, so the need to handle a bad situation with care and sensitivity becomes that much more important - for YOUR sake.
    I thought the idea of giving notice meant the person would continue to work for that time period. And I'd hope no one would want someone to continue in an unsafe situation - I certainly never meant to imply that.

    I guess for such intimate care, I don't feel that anyone should have to even feel uncomfortable. If they want a different carer, that should be their choice. But I certainly agree with you, from reading the forum, it can be hard to find good carers - everyone really has my utmost sympathy there.

Similar Threads

  1. We must leave!!!
    By van damn in forum Life
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 08-31-2008, 06:57 PM
  2. just started maternity leave - i'm bored
    By Liz_skivington in forum Family
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-30-2007, 05:48 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •