Woman Says Disney Fired Her After Taking Time To Grieve Husband's Death

[Eyorefan]

It technically doesn't matter. It was obviously someone higher in the chain of command than she, so as far as she was concerned this person had the authority. If she had been taking too much time, then she should have been called and informed she needed to return to work. She said she took her vacation time plus 30 days. Now I know that people grieve differently, but it does seem a little excessive. But Disney really should have called her and explained to her that she needed to return to work as opposed to waiting until she returned.

It absolutely matters. Disney is a large company so I have no doubt that they have employee handbooks that they give to all their new employees that those employees then sign for saying they have received, read and understood all of the company policies and that their failure to follow them can lead to their termination.

So if the women was in violation of these policies (which, just judging from the amount of time she was gone I would guess she probably was) then they had every right to fire her.

Again, we don't know the whole story. For all we know Disney was in constant communication with her. Honestly though, they have no obligation beg people to report to work or resonably communicate with them.

 

[fosse76]

It absolutely matters. Disney is a large company so I have no doubt that they have employee handbooks that they give to all their new employees that those employees then sign for saying they have received, read and understood all of the company policies and that their failure to follow them can lead to their termination.

So if the women was in violation of these policies (which, just judging from the amount of time she was gone I would guess she probably was) then they had every right to fire her.

Again, we don't know the whole story. For all we know Disney was in constant communication with her. Honestly though, they have no obligation beg people to report to work or resonably communicate with them.

What I meant was that someone clearly from management told her she could take the time. It therefore no longer matters what the policy is, as someone that had authority told her to take the time. If the person who gave her the time ultimately is determined to not have had the authority, then someone with the authority should have called her and said (a) either yes she can take what she needs or (b) she needs to return to work. Either way, she is not at fault and therefore should not have been fired.

 

[mpoppins76]

my baby son passed away March 18th, my job told me to take as much time as i needed. i took 4 weeks off and was paid for it. i had about 6 weeks vacation, 1 week sick and 1 week paternity leave. my hr was able to use the paternity leave/sick and a few weeks of my vacation time to cover the 4 weeks i was out. i guess it all depends on ur manager and stuff. if they really like you and you are important to them..they'll do whatever is needed to help you out.

I'm very sorry for your loss...

 

[yankspy]

WDW gave her a 30 day leave of absence. It appears she not only took that 30 days, but then used more than that and did very little to communicate her needs to her managers.

30 days as a standard benefit is extremely generous for American companies, especially for an entry level custodian in a huge organization. I know of no other company that would give a custodian a 30 day leave automatically. Heck, I know of no other company that would give a white collar manager a 30 day leave automatically, in addition to any state or federal leave allowed by law.

Just because something is a standard that does not excuse it. While I may not disagree with your argument totally, your support for it could be stronger. I remember a simple statement that my mom used to tell me when I said "everyone is doing it". Her answer was always, "If everyone jumped off the Brooklyn bridge would you do it".

Every time I try to do that I get blasted by the "Disney doesn't do anything wrong crowd", so I just keep my mouth shut and let my sig do the talking.

Critisizing is fine but it is up to you to do something about it. Seeing that there is a problem and doing nothing about it is far worse than not seeing the problem in the first place.

how much was Eisner getting paid? How much did he get when he left?
How much did Michael Ovitz get paid, $38 million in cash and another $100 million in stock options.

and the person here, defending Disney to the hilt is just another piranha. a guy in management, who wants to keep the lie alive by deflecting to 'some other story" that could have happened to him.

this is the management way of doing things. its like the time Reagan was asked about people on welfare and the lack of health care, and he brought up some "woman who was living in a hotel in Manhatten" story and so since that one woman, who may or may not have existed, all the health care for poor people couldn't be dealt with.

Piranha's don't eat each other, they eat other animals. BUT NOT EACH OTHER. and this poster defending Disney Management is a prime example of what is going on in this country.

and they blow smoke and mirrors at you to KEEP THE LIE ALIVE so that they can reward themselves at some other time.


that's a simple truth.

The "LIE" as you called it is nothing new. Rich people have been taking advantage of poor people since the begining of time. As far as truth, nobody knows that in this case except for the woman and whoever she was dealing with in the company. If you are so upset about the exorbitant salary's of executives, do something about it.

And back in this century, you know the one we live in now! Where our fight for freedom got us good holidays, wages, and benefits and the one where some Americans are living in worse conditions than people in Africa, where the American Dream turned sour and turned into American Greed. In Europe we learned from the war and created harmony through the EU. In America all that was learned was a hunger for war as the greedy politicians took back handers from big business that thrived on war. America's economy did well from the second world war but Bush got it wrong with his war, it sent your economy down the toilet and the poor at the bottom of the ladder are the ones suffering. :wave:

Anyway now I have replied to your comment I will get back on topic. Any more news on if this woman has got her job back? Have Disney made an official statement as to why she was sacked when it seems she was told the 30 days off was fine and no one pulled her up in those 30+ days off she wasn't at work.

To think that the EU is operating on some high moral ground is naive. They were created and operate on the same greed that is inherent in all human beings. America did not invent greedy politicians, they have always been that way, in any country. Finally, there are many things that are causing our economy to suffer. This is a question that unless you are an economist or have thoroughly read Adam Smith should not attempt to answer. O.K. one more, perhaps you should pay more attention to history and realize that we have also had numerous labor movements in this country as well.

It absolutely matters. Disney is a large company so I have no doubt that they have employee handbooks that they give to all their new employees that those employees then sign for saying they have received, read and understood all of the company policies and that their failure to follow them can lead to their termination.

So if the women was in violation of these policies (which, just judging from the amount of time she was gone I would guess she probably was) then they had every right to fire her.

Again, we don't know the whole story. For all we know Disney was in constant communication with her. Honestly though, they have no obligation beg people to report to work or resonably communicate with them.

Just because someone is not obligated to do something that does not mean that they should not do it. I am not obligated to hold a door open for someone or give up my seat on the bus for someone with a broken leg but I still do it. A little common sense from the person or persons that she was dealing with might have gone a long way. A little common sense on her part could have also gone a long way, although I give her more slack because she did lose a spouse. :wave:

 

[Eyorefan]

Just because someone is not obligated to do something that does not mean that they should not do it. I am not obligated to hold a door open for someone or give up my seat on the bus for someone with a broken leg but I still do it. A little common sense from the person or persons that she was dealing with might have gone a long way. A little common sense on her part could have also gone a long way, although I give her more slack because she did lose a spouse. :wave:

I just really think there is a big gap of time in this whole thing, and that there was probably a big communication break down on one end or another. I have seen plenty of stories of people getting fired that sound really harsh, until you hear all of the information. :wave:

 

[psuchad]

I think people are getting a little carried away here with the argument over "take as much time as needed." There are certain limitations that should be expected when you hear this. What if she decided that she needs a year off? How about 10? Is an employer expected to keep the doors open for your return no matter how long it has been? I know where I work, a statement like that would imply "within your earned vacation time" otherwise you would need to request unpaid leave. Did she in fact request a leave? There is also a point when an employer has to assume that the employee has abandoned the position. If that person returns two months later you can't fault them for letting them go for not taking their position and duties seriously.

 

[Disneygal127]

Thats just crazy.....:hammer:

 

[Wilt Dasney]

We're firmly in the realm of speculation here, but IF it comes out that they made no effort to contact her before firing her, it's inexcusable IMO...and I don't care what the official policy is. Policies are typically made by bureaucrats to cover other bureacrats, and they should be trumped by common sense. There comes a time to step out from behind the handbook and show a little humanity toward somebody who's going through the darkest season she'll ever experience.

Again, we don't know the facts, but it disturbs me to read what sound like pretty callous rationalizations for the POSSIBILITY that they didn't contact her at all by appealing to rulebooks or minimum obligations. That defense might hold up legally, but I don't think it would count for much with The Judge Who awaits all of us.

 

[JustPlainBill]

how much was Eisner getting paid? How much did he get when he left?
How much did Michael Ovitz get paid, $38 million in cash and another $100 million in stock options.

and the person here, defending Disney to the hilt is just another piranha. a guy in management, who wants to keep the lie alive by deflecting to 'some other story" that could have happened to him.

this is the management way of doing things. its like the time Reagan was asked about people on welfare and the lack of health care, and he brought up some "woman who was living in a hotel in Manhatten" story and so since that one woman, who may or may not have existed, all the health care for poor people couldn't be dealt with.

Piranha's don't eat each other, they eat other animals. BUT NOT EACH OTHER. and this poster defending Disney Management is a prime example of what is going on in this country.

and they blow smoke and mirrors at you to KEEP THE LIE ALIVE so that they can reward themselves at some other time.


that's a simple truth.

No need for the rhetoric, believe it or not my stories are true and I am sincere in my posts.
I think it is safe to say that Michael Eisner nor Robert Iger had anything to do with this woman's termination. I'm guessing it was most likely carried out by a front-line supervisor or middle manager at best who probably isn't making the millions you suggest. I agree management can be very abusive and corrupt. My whole reason for being a manager is to try and influence positive change for the worker where I can. I've worked in the trenches myself, punched a clock, suffered under the yoke of tyranny of management in my youth. It is presumptuous for you to pretend to know me.

 

[yankspy]

I just really think there is a big gap of time in this whole thing, and that there was probably a big communication break down on one end or another. I have seen plenty of stories of people getting fired that sound really harsh, until you hear all of the information. :wave:

Agreed. There seems to have been a great deal of miscommunication that occured. I was just pointing to the obligation aspect. Forgive me. My ego seems to have gotten the better of me today because I generally try not to get involved in these type of argumentative threads too much but temptation got the better of me. I was sort of a logic major so I often like to nit-pick.:wave:

 

[yankspy]

We're firmly in the realm of speculation here, but IF it comes out that they made no effort to contact her before firing her, it's inexcusable IMO...and I don't care what the official policy is. Policies are typically made by bureaucrats to cover other bureacrats, and they should be trumped by common sense. There comes a time to step out from behind the handbook and show a little humanity toward somebody who's going through the darkest season she'll ever experience.

Again, we don't know the facts, but it disturbs me to read what sound like pretty callous rationalizations for the POSSIBILITY that they didn't contact her at all by appealing to rulebooks or minimum obligations. That defense might hold up legally, but I don't think it would count for much with The Judge Who awaits all of us.

Which judge would that be.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Which judge would that be.

Judge Judy.

I'm not too picky on what people call Him/Her/It as long as they don't act like they're unaccountable. (Now we're REALLY driving the train off the rails.) :lol:

 

[fosse76]

Well, from reading that article, it said should took vacation days, and when they were used up, she took an additional 30 days. I guess the real questions which don't have an answer to, is did they know she was taking those additional 30 days? Even if they didn't, one would think they would have called and sent her a letter for not showing up to work. So someone had to have known she was still on leave. It's entirely possible she received a termination letter on the 30th day of her leave and then went back to work the next days as if it didn't arrive. Who knows! A previous poster said something I agree with though. The time she took was very generous of the company if they are hiring back. My company, while giving ample vacation times, gives very little bereavement (3 days).

 

[TubaGeek]

Question: Are there any entry level positions that can actually progress somewhere where you make real money? I mean this lady was there for 8 years and still made chicken feed!

 

[coasterphil]

Disney, and this is just my opinion but I'm sure most would agree with me, is absolutely terrible about communicating with CMs. They'll probably blame it on the fact that there are so many employees, but that doesn't make it ok.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

It's okay to be lazy, just don't let it get so bad you can't work more than a few hours a day. If the Germans come for you again, you'll need to put up just a tiny bit of a fight until we can get over there and save you one more time. :wave:

.

What a jockey. :wave:

 

[fosse76]

Question: Are there any entry level positions that can actually progress somewhere where you make real money? I mean this lady was there for 8 years and still made chicken feed!

When I worked at Six Flags, most of management had started out working those entry-level positions at the park (or another park). But those are usually the type of people who suck-up to management. If you read the book Mouse Tales, it's clear Disney operates in the same category. It's all about who you know and whether or not they like you.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

It's all about who you know and whether or not they like you.

And this is different from every other career how?????:shrug:

 

[JustPlainBill]

When I worked at Six Flags, most of management had started out working those entry-level positions at the park (or another park). But those are usually the type of people who suck-up to management. If you read the book Mouse Tales, it's clear Disney operates in the same category. It's all about who you know and whether or not they like you.

Why would you promote someone you didn't like?

 

[The Mom]

Disney, and this is just my opinion but I'm sure most would agree with me, is absolutely terrible about communicating with CMs. They'll probably blame it on the fact that there are so many employees, but that doesn't make it ok.

You're absolutely right; the bigger the organization, the less communication there is, and the more employees (especially easily replaced ones) fall through the cracks.

Look at how much fun it is dealing with government agencies, ala DMV or IRS.