Posted on Jun 26, 2016
Legal loophole allows companies to fire military reservists who go to war
79.3K
35
8
23
23
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
LTC Jason Strickland he hit snake eyes with the 9 Circus of Appeals. I would think that the employer would have to provide a paper trail of poor performance to justify the dismissal. Just stating his performance was dropping is not enough. I have luckily always been employed with state jobs that offer protections on top of all USERRA Law. My experience has always been positive leaving for deployments, regarding my civilian employment. State government jobs would not like the bad publicity of mishandling deployed service members as well. It still happens regarding civilian promotion, but is more difficult to prove. I had a friend who would always put his Reserve status and experience on his resume, and never get any calls for interviews. When he scrubbed his resume of all military, he instantly got multiple calls. It's not right, but still exists.
(4)
(0)
Having been an ESGR Ombudsman working USERRA cases, there are some unclear aspects to this case that need to be clarified.
This doesn't fit a good definition of a legal loophole.
"Forced to sign"; not a good sign. He never should have signed such a document.
What reason was given by HR for the firing? The timing of the action is questionable.
This doesn't fit a good definition of a legal loophole.
"Forced to sign"; not a good sign. He never should have signed such a document.
What reason was given by HR for the firing? The timing of the action is questionable.
(1)
(0)
Another reason we all need to belong to organizations and associations that work to change issues like these. ROA now includes NCOs and POs and I suggest joining one or more reserve oriented groups to get the support we need to have this changed. They also provide a great law review section that helps clarify many of these issues. http://www.roa.org
ROA's member newsletter, The Reserve Voice, is published Twice-monthly. Subscribe Here Reserve Voice Archive
(1)
(0)
Read This Next