Jump to content

john2236

Members
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I agree, but sometimes get to thinking it's best to give a little less detail, and only relevant info for anonymity on my part. Thanks again though
  2. Thanks adjusterJack, I spoke with someone from HR who said everything is in order, and that the other person was mistaken when they told me about the date thing. So I was going to delete this thread, but don't think I'm able to Thanks again
  3. I've been researching this on my own for the last hour and think I found what I needed. WORKER'S DISABILITY COMPENSATION ACT OF 1969 (EXCERPT) Act 317 of 1969 418.381 Claim for compensation; time limit; extension of time period; payment for nursing or attendant care; compliance. "The employee shall provide a notice of injury to the employer within 90 days after the happening of the injury, or within 90 days after the employee knew, or should have known, of the injury." I'd still appreciate any additional input that you all have though, and thank you
  4. pg1067, I read through this thread, and the link that you posted in part. In the link that you provided, there is the following section: "Previous Conviction Record It is unlawful to deny any license or employment, to refuse to hire, or terminate, or take an adverse employment action against an applicant or employee, by reason of his or her having been convicted of one or more criminal offenses, if such refusal or denial is in violation of the provisions of Article 23-A of the New York State Correction Law. The Correction Law provides the standards to be applied and factors to be considered before an employment decision may be based on a previous conviction, including the factor that it is the public policy of the State of New York to encourage the licensure and employment of those with previous criminal convictions." When I clicked on the link for "Article 23-A" there was not any information on that link. However, I looked up Article 23-A, and it states, in part: §752. Unfair discrimination against persons previously convicted of one or more criminal offenses prohibited. No application for any license or employment, and no employment or license held by an individual, to which the provisions of this article are applicable, shall be denied or acted upon adversely by reason of the individual's having been previously convicted of one or more criminal offenses, or by reason of a finding of lack of "good moral character" when such finding is based upon the fact that the individual has previously been convicted of one or more criminal offenses, unless: (1) There is a direct relationship between one or more of the previous criminal offenses and the specific license or employment sought or held by the individual; or (2) the issuance or continuation of the license or the granting or continuation of the employment would involve an unreasonable risk to property or to the safety or welfare of specific individuals or the general public. There is also guidance on what unreasonable risk, and such is. I'm wondering what your take on this is in the context of the original post?
  5. Wednesday the 3rd at around 1am I was at work and had an injury. I was working on a production line where we manufacture parts that are roughly 100 pounds each. The work involves picking up 100 pound pieces of steel out of metal raw material bins, and loading them into machines. I was picking up one of the last parts in the bin which meant I had to lean over the side of the bin deep down to pick up the part. When I went to lift the part up I felt something in my abdomen. It felt like something was tearing. The pain was sharp and lasted five or six seconds before beginning to quickly fade. While it didn’t completely fade, the pain did fade to only a minor irritation that has persisted till now. When it first happened, I told my supervisor that I felt a pain in my abdomen from lifting the parts, and that the pain had faded. I also said I didn’t feel comfortable lifting them anymore. It wasn't my normal job, I usually perform a different task there, but the machines I normally work on were temporarily down, so my supervisor was fine with my not lifting any more of those parts. Because the pain had quickly faded within minutes, I didn’t think much else of it since the pain had faded so quickly, and I thought I was fine. Or at least would be in a day or two. Having said that, two weeks passed, and the minor irritation/pain has persisted, so I went to go to my doctor just to be on the safe side (I also remained working the entire time). My doctor said that it would probably be best not to see him, but to go through my employer’s doctor (and process) since the problem originated at work. I brought it back up to my supervisor this past week on Wednesday, and was told that he would talk to the head manager about it when he came in. The following day my supervisor gave me a piece of paper approving me to go to the specific doctor that they wanted me to see at urgent care. I filed a full report at the doctor’s office saying the day and everything that the injury happened. When I went into work today I was asked to file an incident report for my employer’s records. They said that I had to put down the date that I went to the doctor as the injury date, rather than the date that it actually happened, in order for the medical bills to be covered by the employer. I filled out the incident report with the correct information, and didn’t lie on it, and the supervisor said that the head manager would have an issue with it. I said that if he has an issue with it I would speak to him directly when he would be back to work the following day (tomorrow). That is a conversation I will likely have with him tomorrow. My questions for you all here on findlaw include, what should I do? Also, in the state of Michigan, what are the statutes and case law surrounding these things? Would I be screwed if I filled out a report with my employer that is false and conflicts with the report I filed with the doctor’s office? From an employer’s perspective, would they be somehow liable for not sending me to the doctor’s office right away, or isn’t there some type of situation where an employee wouldn’t know the extent of their injury till a few days later requiring a doctor? I know this is long, and I don’t want just free legal advice. I like to navigate through everything and do my own legal research, I’d just like some advice on where to start in researching this myself (where to find the statutes and what not), and maybe some opinions on the topic. I do have an MBA so I'm roughly familiar with the legal system and employment law. I just haven't used my MBA much after graduation and I'm rusty. Again, I’m in Michigan. Also, I should note, I hope it’s nothing more than a pulled muscle or something, and I want to work, so I’m not trying to screw the employer over, but I’m just trying to make sure I protect myself here and know the applicable legislation surrounding such an issue. Thank you,
  6. Thank you Tax_Counsel, I guess it's much like non-authoritative literature published by the AICPA and other accounting organizations that provide guidance on GAAP, but aren't actually explicitly stated in GAAP. Similar type of thing, but employment law rather than accounting. That makes sense. Thanks again.
  7. Just noticed something. Why does the link posted by cbg to the DOL website say on the page "The Health Care Industry and Hours Worked?" This leads me to believe that it isn't necessarily applied to other companies that are outside of health care
  8. Thank you, I have two more quick questions. What's the outcome for a company found doing what I described? I mean the penalty for not paying an employee their wages, violating the over time law for miscalculating an employees hours, and if they do fire an employee for filing a complaint (not a civil rights discrimination, but just retaliatory), what are the penalties and outcome ?
  9. Also, thanks for the link FindLaw FN, that is helpful. It says that a report to someone internally is also protected, which is something I was wondering about
  10. sorry CBG, I was looking at my phone when I made that last post and thought it was you. My cellphone screen is too small. Everything everyone is saying makes sense, and I may follow up with this sometime in the near future. The only issue I really have is that if I do file something, and continue working there, it may be uncomfortable in my daily interactions with management. I'm going to have to weigh things out. I wish there was a way to an anonymous complaint to the department of labor or someplace so that they could do an investigation of the company without my name being brought up.
  11. I'm a little confused now by the conflicting posts. Does anyone have any reference to the federal statute or court opinions that cover this to back up what's being said? Also, out of curiosity, if it is against federal labor law and someone was to file a complaint, is there some type of protection for the employee to avoid being harassed for filing such a complaint? I've heard managment say that in Michigan it is an "at will" emplyment state, so they can let an employee go for any reason they see fit. While they can certainly fire an employee for being late to work or leaving early, if an employee filed a complaint and is then fired for clocking out early, but all of the other employees who clock out early remain employed, wouldn't that be grounds to prove that the employer fired me as retaliation for following up on them for violating labor laws? Thanks again and no, I would say I'm doing well CBG. There are a lot of factors to consider, such as not making much more than minimum wage, driving time and cost to get to and from work (45 min-1.5 hours each way+ gas and car ware and tare), rent for an apartment that I'm hardley ever at because of working, student loan payments for a degree that didn't help me find work, etc. Don't forget quality of life when working in a factory all day every day, just to have them try to cheat me out of my pay to their benefit.
  12. I work in a factory seven days a week from 5am-5pm. I get to work around 4:55am and clock in at that time. When I get off I have to clock out, and if I clock out even a minute early my pay is deducted by 1/4 hour (If I clock out at 4:59pm I only get paid for 45 minutes rather than 59/60). I realize that the logical thing to do would be to wait for the time to change to 5:00, but I'm just wondering about the legality of it. When there are close to 100 people waiting to punch out and leave and only two time clocks that extra minute may mean waiting in line for 20 minutes at times.
  13. Thank you Tax_Counsel, I think the other two response cleared that up for me and I see what you are saying now in your previous post. It makes sense to me now. I also think that Fallen was just going to the extreme to get the point across that one shouldn’t put 100% faith in what someone says because they are a practicing attorney. Everyone has their strong and weak points, and everyone in a service profession is subject to human error at some point. I don’t think it was meant to be taken that those with an academic professional background are just as likely to be clueless as to things in their profession as anyone else without such a background. I interpreted it as it’s possible for some without the educational background & associated licensure to be knowledgeable, if not more so, than someone with the educational background & licensure, even if it is a rare exception.
×
×
  • Create New...