Erroll 80 #26 March 29, 2006 QuoteBelieve me when i tell you that firing people under the third case is being overused by the companies. Who determines whether the employee's firing was justified or not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 3 #27 March 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteBelieve me when i tell you that firing people under the third case is being overused by the companies. Who determines whether the employee's firing was justified or not? I would suppose that at the first level it would be an administrative determination, subject to appeal (by the dissatisfied party) to a higher authority and/or court. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #28 March 29, 2006 Spain's plan doesn't sound too bad really. In the US, various states and companies have generous severance rules for RIFs (to me that means firing without real cause of the individual, rather because of business sizing needs). Those packages are also based on years of service. It's not easy, but it does give opportunity to find new work and still live for a while. It also means that a major RIF in a company must be very serious, as the company must pay out a lot to do that type of activity. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #29 March 29, 2006 Basicly the employer. However if the employee does not agree, he can take the case to a tribunal that does only those type of matters. In 2 or 3 weeks there is a hearing where the employer has to prove why it is justified to fire the employee. More often than not, the dissatisfied ex-employee does not need a lawyer (cheaper) because the burden of the proof lays on the employer, and the judge is not biased towards the company. If the company cannot prove that it was justified then they have two options, readmit the employee, or pay as if it was an unjustified dismissal. The employee cannot ask for more money than he is rightfully entitled, i mean if he wants more money for damages, then he needs to take the case to an ordinary tribunal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #30 March 29, 2006 QuoteImagine if someday, in the U.S., President Quayle signs a bill into law drastically reducing seniors’ Social Security benefits Oh great another clueless rich kid draft dodging chickenhawk IDIOT to run the country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
