Employee rights...is this even legal?

I understand your point 100%, although the entire time I was reading it I was thinking "force shaping". This is a term that the military is familiar with, but you would better recognize it as downsizing or doing more with less. Perhaps this is the beginning of people being let go from their emergency response positions such as FEMA. You have to pay for the entitlement programs that the Obama administration is bringing down the pipe and this may be a sign of things to come.

Perhaps the government is going to force shape the civilian sector in emergency management and ask the other government employees to step in their positions if needed. Your "assigned" duty as call center rep would be a very low risk task. I do understand your concerns though that if you are at a call center, you cannot be at your other obligations.

This is all speculation and my insight into what you have told us, others may have another idea.

We're small county gov't, so this is all very localized. We have the Sheriff's dept, volunteer fire fighters, volunteer EMS, an emergency services department, a pool of volunteers to man the EAC (Emergency Action Center), etc...we are currently without a dept head (going on a year now because the current admin seems no reason to rush to rehire it seems), but my supervisor is doing his best to curb what we may be offered up for by finding a better "fit" for those of us here to "volunteer" within the realm of our current expertise - network stuff, mapping (GIS), make sure VOIP works, etc...right now, none of us are sure what will be asked of us, but I do know that when leadership comes out saying the word "insubordination" before even telling us what we'll be responsible for doing, it leaves a really bad taste in your mouth.
 
In my company if you are asked to go do something, you go do it or you will be fired, simple as that, unless there is a safety issue or its illegal.
 
In my company if you are asked to go do something, you go do it or you will be fired, simple as that, unless there is a safety issue or its illegal.

Well, this is a safety issue, IMHO...guess that's why I'm so floored that they're even talking about it :laugh:

Interestingly enough, I have one coworker that was promoted a few years ago to "Supervisor" and his wife is in a wheel chair...one of the big conversations he had with HR and his boss at the time was just this - there are limits to what he can offer up 24/7 due to other obligations to his spouse, and it was a big concern before he agreed to take the new job. He was in a meeting yesterday and brought this very fact up to HR, to the same person he aired his concerns to...know what she said? She told him that his job description wasn't the same as it was when he took the new job; this was news to him...
 
So, after Sandy skirted our area, the county I work in held a meeting to go over what needs to be improved, what worked, etc...

Out of this meeting came this gem of an idea, and I really want to know if this is even legal to do to your employees. ALL EMPLOYEES will be on call during future emergency events and may be called in to fill whatever role is deemed necessary, and if they do not, they'll be written up for insubordination. Now, mind you, most of the employees don't work in the emergency-related departments and upon hire for their respective current jobs, no where did it state we must comply with something like this during an emergency event such as a hurricane. How can something like this be covered under the usual "And other duties as assigned" when it can be hazardous?? Whenever bad weather's heading my way, I get ready, I'm at home safe with my kids, and work is the last thing on my mind.

I know certain key depts know this type of "on-call-for emergencies" goes with the job they agreed to do, just as I know with my own job, I may be called in if a server crashes or we have a database go south, but that's very different from being told you must show up and do whatever-they-deem-is-needed during an emergency event. All I can think of are all of the potential lawsuits if an employee is hurt en route, or what if we're told we have to man a call center, we give out incorrect info and someone dies?? What about those that have loved ones to care for and they can't do this? They'll be written up?? I am floored that after working for this county for 15 years, out of the clear blue sky I'm being told I will now "volunteer during an emergency". I did not sign up for this type of a role, and neither did most of the staff I know...

"Other duties as assigned" usually falls under what is expected in your regular work week; didn't realize they could force you to volunteer and call it that, but perhaps I'm wrong... :banghead:

Thoughts??

I guess you could very nicely ask for a list of duties you would be expected to perform. Along with a training and certification plan, of course. They surely would not want you to be a risk or liability to yourself, your co-workers, or the citizens whom they have the responsibility to protect and serve.
 
Somebody needs a better PR manager or a smarter management team. Vab's does your company provide public or critical services to the community? Everybody knows these companies are under a lot of heat right now because of the hurricane, but that still doesn't give them much leverage to be heavy-handed and particularly rude about it.

You can threaten people all you like, but when crisis such as this happen and you have to choose between your family or your job, the job be dammed. The company would have been much better off to have offered some incentives (maybe overtime or double overtime for those who come in to perform a 'critical' position during an emergency) instead of the threats. That's the 'carrot'....

Do they currently pay you whether you show up or not? Because that might be the 'stick'....

The comment about the 'job description', while maybe true, was certainly inconsiderate. And of course, the company's fault for courting that person in the first place when maybe they should have picked someone who didn't have those other difficulites in performing their duties.
 
Somebody needs a better PR manager or a smarter management team. Vab's does your company provide public or critical services to the community? Everybody knows these companies are under a lot of heat right now because of the hurricane, but that still doesn't give them much leverage to be heavy-handed and particularly rude about it.

You can threaten people all you like, but when crisis such as this happen and you have to choose between your family or your job, the job be dammed. The company would have been much better off to have offered some incentives (maybe overtime or double overtime for those who come in to perform a 'critical' position during an emergency) instead of the threats. That's the 'carrot'....

Do they currently pay you whether you show up or not? Because that might be the 'stick'....

The comment about the 'job description', while maybe true, was certainly inconsiderate. And of course, the company's fault for courting that person in the first place when maybe they should have picked someone who didn't have those other difficulites in performing their duties.

I work for a small county, local gov't...we are all public servants, but there are departments that perform critical things for the citizens (Sheriff's dept, all our EMS services). To ask your cleaning crew or employees that work desk jobs to show up no-matter-what during a weather event is insane, IMHO...you close county offices due to a hurricane, those employees that never signed up for any type of "emergency-related job" should be at home, prepping and taking care of family.

Yep, I agree, what should have happened FIRST was to ask employees "Who's willing to volunteer during an event?" I am certain there would be those that are up for it, that want to, that live in this county and would be happy to do so...to tell us all WE WILL OR ELSE is insane...emergency-related service has nothing to do with my job, or most of my coworkers, so why force that on any of us and threaten us if we don't comply? Ughhhh :banghead:
 
I guess you could very nicely ask for a list of duties you would be expected to perform. Along with a training and certification plan, of course. They surely would not want you to be a risk or liability to yourself, your co-workers, or the citizens whom they have the responsibility to protect and serve.

That's far too logical...it's not going to happen :rofl:
 
I work for a small county, local gov't...we are all public servants, but there are departments that perform critical things for the citizens (Sheriff's dept, all our EMS services). To ask your cleaning crew or employees that work desk jobs to show up no-matter-what during a weather event is insane, IMHO...you close county offices due to a hurricane, those employees that never signed up for any type of "emergency-related job" should be at home, prepping and taking care of family.

Yep, I agree, what should have happened FIRST was to ask employees "Who's willing to volunteer during an event?" I am certain there would be those that are up for it, that want to, that live in this county and would be happy to do so...to tell us all WE WILL OR ELSE is insane...emergency-related service has nothing to do with my job, or most of my coworkers, so why force that on any of us and threaten us if we don't comply? Ughhhh :banghead:

SOMEBODY has reached the peter principle - promoted above their abilities - to act that way. Yes, your employer is providing critical services that must function, and everybody who takes a job there should know it - but that's not the way to go about it. Much easier ways to motivate people positively.
 
Yeah we should let the victims fend for themselves.:stirpot:

Really? IMHO, leave the emergency-type-work to those that are trained for it, signed up for it and want to do it...how great do you think it'll be when you have forced a group to do something they never even considered in the realm of their job?? Probably not a good combo...keep :stirpot:
 
SOMEBODY has reached the peter principle - promoted above their abilities - to act that way. Yes, your employer is providing critical services that must function, and everybody who takes a job there should know it - but that's not the way to go about it. Much easier ways to motivate people positively.

You have pegged the admin perfectly...you have no idea :banghead:
 
I think this article deals with union workers. Looks like it’s 20 years old, so you'd have to verify it with an employment attorney: http://www.webshells.com/ocaw/txts/doc99933.htm

On the Right To Refuse Unsafe Work

Organized workers have the right to refuse unsafe work under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), and all workers have that right under OSHA. But in both cases the right is a conditional one. Before refusing to do a job, a worker must be sure that the required conditions listed below are satisfied:
Under OSHA, the worker must have a reasonable belief, based on what he or she knew at the time of refusing, that there was a real danger of serious physical injury, even if it is later found that there was no immediate danger.
The danger was so great that the worker could not wait for an OSHA inspector before refusing to do the job.
It helps the case if the employee has volunteered to do another "safe" job in the interim. The worker should stay near the job site unless ordered to leave by the employer. Also, an OSHA inspection should be immediately requested at the time the job is refused.

What if you get fired?

If the employer fires the worker or initiates disciplinary action because of the refusal, employees must file an II(c) discrimination complaint with OSHA within 30 days.
In theory, the II(c) clause protects workers against retaliation for exercising their safety and health rights. In practice, though, it simply doesn't work. Workers who file an II(c) complaint must depend upon the federal government to investigate and prosecute their case in federal district court. The process can take months to years, and according to a 1989 study by the GAG, less than 20 percent of these cases are resolved or prosecuted. An analysis of II(c) complaints in New York City revealed that not one case out of 51 filed by workers in 1991 was settled in favor of the worker.

What about "Concerted Action"?

The rules of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) protect the right to take "concerted action" such as refusing to work to protest unsafe conditions.
"Concerted action" means that two or more workers or an individual act in order to protect other workers, even though the others may disagree with the action.

Under Section 502 of the NLRA, workers can only refuse to work if the conditions are "abnormally dangerous." As with OSHA, this does not mean that the worker has to be correct about the degree of danger. But at the time of refusal, there must have been evidence which would have made other "reasonable" people believe there was a danger.

But the Board has rarely upheld this right. In fact, in the 40-plus years since the passage of Section 502, the Board has found "abnormally dangerous" working conditions in only six contested cases.

In each of these cases the workers had to objectively prove that "tangible and immediate physical dangers" existed at the worksite. Also, the dangers had to be "substantially greater than those presented by normally existing conditions" to justify stopping work - a heavy burden indeed.

Caution.

Caution is the watchword for refusing unsafe work. It could take a long time for you to win your rights. Success is not guaranteed. OCAW recommends that employees punished or fined for refusing an unsafe job file a grievance, as well as complaints, with both OSHA and the NLRB.
Source: OCAW Reporter, July-August, 1987; and TNS, Inc. and OCAW, 309 NLRB.

Hazardous Materials Workbook, OCAW/ Labor Institute
New York, Apex Press, 1996, pp.379-80.
 
Interesting info, thanks 05!

OSHA around here?? :laugh: Do you know how many times I've witnessed building and grounds make their rounds to "fix" things because OSHA's stopping by? I thought they were supposed to make surprise visits, but for gov't, it's never a surprise it seems. I worked in a building for years that had plexiglass bolted over every window, so if there was ever a fire, we couldn't get out through the windows. Didn't matter anyway, since the windows were painted shut from decades of paint. The bldg was so old, any complaints were met with the usual "Well, this particular building is grandfathered in, so it doesn't have to meet the same requirements as other buildings"...nice. Just yesterday, one of the "new" buildings was mentioned to building and grounds; they've had 2 fires in that building this year, and 3 windows will not open...no one cares to fix it. I really think if you're working for the gov't, they do not adhere to the same rules as other businesses are forced to adhere to, but we probably already knew that :laugh:
 
I live in Alaska and my employer stated the same thing. It started from some really bad rain storms with 100 mph winds that down power lines and generally just made it unsafe to be outside. We lost power to about 50 percent of our infrastructure so business came to a halt. After everything cleared up and business was back to normal it was found out that the network engineer couldn't come in to help with the "disaster" and could possibly be fired for this. It turned out that he had a big tree come down across his driveway and another come down on his garage so he was dealing with his own disaster. In the meeting I attended with my VP of Tech and everyone in the IT department the VP said, and I kid you not, "you should have just driven over the tree in your driveway and came into work. That's what I would have done." She was serious also. It didn't matter that he couldn't turn the power back on and that computers/networking equipment won't work without power.

That's also when the VP told us that whenever there is a weather warning that the non-reps have to come into the office so they can be close by in case something bad does happen. Well that means me since I don't belong to the union here and on top of that, in case you missed it, I live in Alaska where we have weekly weather warnings. Alaska is also a fire at will state so they can fire me or any other non-rep for no reason at all. I still won't be coming into the office until it is safe to do so and my home is secured. They can just fire me. :poke:

Good luck to you and I know what you are going through.
 
I live in Alaska and my employer stated the same thing. It started from some really bad rain storms with 100 mph winds that down power lines and generally just made it unsafe to be outside. We lost power to about 50 percent of our infrastructure so business came to a halt. After everything cleared up and business was back to normal it was found out that the network engineer couldn't come in to help with the "disaster" and could possibly be fired for this. It turned out that he had a big tree come down across his driveway and another come down on his garage so he was dealing with his own disaster. In the meeting I attended with my VP of Tech and everyone in the IT department the VP said, and I kid you not, "you should have just driven over the tree in your driveway and came into work. That's what I would have done." She was serious also. It didn't matter that he couldn't turn the power back on and that computers/networking equipment won't work without power.

That's also when the VP told us that whenever there is a weather warning that the non-reps have to come into the office so they can be close by in case something bad does happen. Well that means me since I don't belong to the union here and on top of that, in case you missed it, I live in Alaska where we have weekly weather warnings. Alaska is also a fire at will state so they can fire me or any other non-rep for no reason at all. I still won't be coming into the office until it is safe to do so and my home is secured. They can just fire me. :poke:

Good luck to you and I know what you are going through.

Unreal :banghead: And the VP sounds very familiar :banghead:

My kids LOVE AK...they've been there twice, Fairbanks area...I can't imagine the mess you guys face during storms! I'd want to do nothing but make sure the fire's hot :laugh:
 
I think employers have wide latitude to adopt work requirements, I believe the issue here is really liability at many different levels. Requiring employees to travel when prudent, reasonble thinking would indicate otherwise would create liabilty. Required to report to an unsafe worksite. Etc. etc.

One lawsuit (wrongful death) could cost a company or municipality big money. As written - I don't think your employer could reasonably require you to work. But, work requriments can change over night. That is usually the balance sought for non-emergency workers. Liability vs. Productivity
 
Talk to the labor board. I think its also worth asking for some clarification… Are they asking you do to jobs you are not trained for, like the call center you mentioned or are they telling you that you are on call to come in and do the job you were trained for. They cannot call you in and ask you to do something you are not trained for then fire you for not doing it. I think it it’s safe to assume that they have every right to call you in to do your normal duties under emergency circumstances. The labor board (if you are non-union) is the 1st place I would check.
 
Talk to the labor board. I think its also worth asking for some clarification… Are they asking you do to jobs you are not trained for, like the call center you mentioned or are they telling you that you are on call to come in and do the job you were trained for. They cannot call you in and ask you to do something you are not trained for then fire you for not doing it. I think it it’s safe to assume that they have every right to call you in to do your normal duties under emergency circumstances. The labor board (if you are non-union) is the 1st place I would check.

That is what we're waiting to find out...we don't know any details, just that we'll all be on call and if we refuse to help, we'll be written up. Pretty crappy way to go about presenting something "for the greater good" wouldn't you say? :laugh:

I'm hoping this fizzles out...time will tell and I'll be sure to keep you posted with my continual whining :p

And we can't unionize...we all say constantly we wish we just had a voice, but we don't... :banghead:
 
They didn't ask who'd volunteer first because they knew nobody would.
Sounds to me as if you don't want to work. Just wanna stay in your little cubicle doing nothing milking taxpayers for money without actually having to do any real work.
Quitcherbeechin....





:hide:
 
Back
Top