I manage a large c-store chain. It is privately owned and the boss has several family members working in the office. Today I had to terminate an employee because it was discovered that he is related to another employee. The company stated that it’s policy is to avoid having family members work together. However the owner has 2 sons, a nephew, and a brother-in-law that all work at his location. The sons, nephew, and brother-in-law are not co-owners, they have job titles (buying assistant, maint. assistant, real esate assistant). Can this company be held liable for creating a company policy in which they enforce everywhere but at the top level?
DAVE
Comments
can you live on unemployment benefits? Privately owned companies can do as they wish. That is why they prefer to be a privately owned company.
depends if he is a franchise operator. the rules are different for franchisees. they have a little more flexibility.
Also, check if your company has a H.N.I.C. clause…(its basically, do as i say not as i do)
I worked for a company that had different attendance policies for different sets of employees. A super strict one for the factory workers (doctors excuses didnt even count).
Anyone else didnt have to follow any form of attendance policy at all, they could come and go as they pleased. Wasnt fair but what are you gonna do? Bring a lawsuit and sue? Meanwhile you get fired and lose everything you own………
Your boss may not always be right, but he’s always the boss. You can’t fight the system, and they were probably looking for a reason to get rid of that employee…nepotism was probably just an excuse. Now said employee might have a case for a law suit.
That would be the “Golden Rule”. They own the gold, so they make the rule!
Not in the US, They merely have a set of rules for the owners and a set of rules for the employees,
That is just busienss, get used to it or get out of management
