Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

Layoffs overwhelmingly affect medical/family leave?

We've had a few people in our group go on medical, maternity, or paternity leave and almost all of them were laid off before they got back, even when the rest of our group was not affected by that round of layoffs. Is this random chance or targeted based on other people being able to fill in?

by
| 1511 views | | 9 replies (last April 27, 2024) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1sdLQCwO

9 replies (most recent on top)

@1ynp+1sdLQCwO

Literal proof that FMLA and employment attorneys are pure banes on society.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2zmu+1sdLQCwO

Prove it as retaliation if you're already on your way out. Find an employment attorney and see what they provide. If you're able to prove retaliation you can get unemployment or severance with the help of an employment attorney. Just run it by them while you're on leave. Make it painful.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ynp+1sdLQCwO

All Wells has to do in the current situation is show that they are performing mass right sizing. Just like letting a 60 yro and a 23 yro disproves ageism, let go one on leave and 2 not disproves bias there. And remember, there is tons of redundancy in the bank so handful of regular staff being let go from sister teams covers cutting those out on a status. Toss in any performance reviews that weren’t outstanding and bobs your uncle.

FMLA really only protects us in a calm, standard working environment.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rqu+1sdLQCwO

This is not supposed to happen. If you are on medical or maternity/paternity leave, you are supposed to be protected. In theory, the only way you can lose your job while on leave is if you would have lost it even if you weren't on leave. It's pretty cut and dry if the company goes out of business or if the location closes. If there are layoffs, it becomes a little hairier because maybe you would have been selected for displacement, and maybe not. It's hard to tell. But I think many companies will not lay off people who are on leave (or recently returned) for fear of lawsuits. I would lawyer up if it were me. Especially if the group as a whole was not affected by layoffs.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1tcm+1sdLQCwO

let me guess, they should sue.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1xhv+1sdLQCwO

If true, this is a good thing. So sick of people gaming the system.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @etb+1sdLQCwO

Charlie is a saint and loves each and every one of us. He would never act in a dishonorable way. Nope. /s

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dtm+1sdLQCwO

Of course they were targeted. THis company is a cesspool and they only care about their people not the regular people. If there is a way they WILL get rid of you - trust me.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ccz+1sdLQCwO

I doubt it's directly targeted, but it's possible they were deemed non-critical by your managers in layoff conversations once they went on leave

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @eay+1sdLQCwO

Post a reply

: