We have an employee in our department who is considered “protected” because he/she filed an official complaint against management. The complaint was investigated and found to be without merit, though I don’t necessarily have confidence in that process. Having said that, this “protected employee” is very difficult to work with, complains about everything and everyone, stirs up a lot of trouble p, is very temperamental, and has backstabbed pretty much everyone in the department. His/her work is as good as anyone else’s, but this employee has a terrible attitude and is not a team player. Not exaggerating at all, could go on and on - this person is the bad apple who is ruining the whole bunch.
Everyone else would be considered generally good employees with strengths and weaknesses, but overall nothing bad stands out about them. I would consider them to be 3s or higher. This past week, several good employees were let go and the “protected employee” remains employed. This same employee has survived the last 2 rounds of layoffs as well.
IMO - the laid-off employees should take legal action because WFC unfairly protects those who complain. I get the opposite side, which is that WFC got in trouble for firing whistleblowers. But why should good employees have no protection when other employees appear to have blanket protection simply because they filed a complaint.
If it were me, I would look in to getting a lawyer.