I was fired for refusing to work with Typhoid, do I have any recourse?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I was fired for not showing up to work as ordered. This is after explaining to my boss over the phone that I have Typhoid, and working with food would endanger the guests to the restaurant/arcade at which I work.
Do I have any recourse at all in this situation? As it stands, I should've just went to work anyway. This is a followup to this question: May I legally work in a restaurant with typhoid if the employer knows?
united-states employment texas
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I was fired for not showing up to work as ordered. This is after explaining to my boss over the phone that I have Typhoid, and working with food would endanger the guests to the restaurant/arcade at which I work.
Do I have any recourse at all in this situation? As it stands, I should've just went to work anyway. This is a followup to this question: May I legally work in a restaurant with typhoid if the employer knows?
united-states employment texas
12
I notice that this question is now in HNQ. Before anyone becomes emotionally invested in it, please note that the asker has previously claimed to be a surgeon and a retired cellular biologist.
â David Richerby
yesterday
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I was fired for not showing up to work as ordered. This is after explaining to my boss over the phone that I have Typhoid, and working with food would endanger the guests to the restaurant/arcade at which I work.
Do I have any recourse at all in this situation? As it stands, I should've just went to work anyway. This is a followup to this question: May I legally work in a restaurant with typhoid if the employer knows?
united-states employment texas
I was fired for not showing up to work as ordered. This is after explaining to my boss over the phone that I have Typhoid, and working with food would endanger the guests to the restaurant/arcade at which I work.
Do I have any recourse at all in this situation? As it stands, I should've just went to work anyway. This is a followup to this question: May I legally work in a restaurant with typhoid if the employer knows?
united-states employment texas
united-states employment texas
edited yesterday
Basil Bourque
1335
1335
asked 2 days ago
anonymous
344129
344129
12
I notice that this question is now in HNQ. Before anyone becomes emotionally invested in it, please note that the asker has previously claimed to be a surgeon and a retired cellular biologist.
â David Richerby
yesterday
add a comment |Â
12
I notice that this question is now in HNQ. Before anyone becomes emotionally invested in it, please note that the asker has previously claimed to be a surgeon and a retired cellular biologist.
â David Richerby
yesterday
12
12
I notice that this question is now in HNQ. Before anyone becomes emotionally invested in it, please note that the asker has previously claimed to be a surgeon and a retired cellular biologist.
â David Richerby
yesterday
I notice that this question is now in HNQ. Before anyone becomes emotionally invested in it, please note that the asker has previously claimed to be a surgeon and a retired cellular biologist.
â David Richerby
yesterday
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
13
down vote
Read the answers to your previous question. You should not have gone to work anyway. That would have been stupid and irresponsible. You would have endangered the public and would have been liable for being sued and being financially destroyed for the rest of your life.
You need to get treatment; find a community clinic or go to the local ER. Failure to do so will result in you possibly being criminally liable for infecting others in addition to being civilly liable.
The hospital or clinic will inform the city/county health department and they inspect the business that fired you; and if you were at the restaurant at all, inform the public as to the dangers.
After you have started treatment and are not contagious, Google for free legal aid in your area and talk to a lawyer. They will explain if you have a case against the business - this can depend on jurisdiction - to at least get unemployment.
9
It's OK. The asker was working as a surgeon in May this year so they know where to go to get medical treatment.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
4
@DavidRicherby Do you really believe everything you read on the internet? Especially from posters who go by "anonymous" and have a history of asking sketchy questions?
â BlueDogRanch
2 days ago
11
Of course I don't believe a word of it: the surgeon part or the fired fast-food worker part.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
10
@DavidRicherby Another post by the same person asks a hypothetical question as research for a novel, which would explain a lot. It'd be nice if they were honest about this
â Graham
yesterday
5
@Graham Agreed -- there's nothing wrong with hypothetical questions, and I'm not sure they even need to be labelled as such. But I think this pair of questions crosses the line into trolling by setting up a fake, emotionalized situation.
â David Richerby
yesterday
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
5
down vote
Texas is an "at will" employment state; the question is whether there is an exception in case the employer tells you to do something illegal. These guys (trying to drum up business) indicate why it may not be legal to fire you for obeying the law, based on Sabine Pilot Services, Inc. v. Hauck, 687 S.W.2d 733, where the Texas Supreme Court ruled that an employer cannot force an employee to choose between violating the law and keeping his job. You could then file a wrongful discharge suit, seeking lost and future wages and benefits, court costs, and punitive damages. The outcome you see is not a foregone conclusion. This blog reports a case that depended on Sabine Pilot, namely Peine v. HIT Services L.P., 479 S.W.3d 445. The complication here is that the employee breached a confidentiality agreement, and he remained fired because although he may have been told to break the law, that wasn't the only reason he was fired. From the Sabine ruling:
That narrow exception covers only the discharge of an employee for the
sole reason that the employee refused to perform and illegal act. We
further hold that in the trial of such a case it is the plaintiff's
burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his discharge
was for no reason other than his refusal to perform an illegal act.
Your attorney will tell you what your prospects are for suing the guy: given the alleged action, reinstatement would not be unexpected.
At a minimum, the termination of employment would be without good cause so one would be entitled to unemployment benefits. The relevant statute may also have a non-retaliation clause which makes firing someone for obeying the statute a wrongful termination.
â ohwilleke
8 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
This is one of the rare circumstances in which a non-union, non-government employee might even have a right to be reinstated in his job, in addition to potentially having a monetary remedy for wrongful termination.
There is a legal duty to reinstate a food employee once that employee overcomes the illness pursuant to Texas Food Establishment Rules ç228.37. Failure to do so could result in the revocation of the employer's license to operate his business, or in a violation that could count towards doing so together with other violations, and would also be a matter of public record.
The employee could also filed a complaint under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act:
If the evidence supports an employeeâÂÂs claim of retaliation, OSHA will
issue an order requiring the employer to, as appropriate, put the
employee back to work, pay lost wages, restore benefits, and other
possible relief. The exact requirements will depend on the facts of
the case. If the evidence does not support the employeeâÂÂs claim, OSHA
will dismiss the complaint.
After OSHA issues a decision, the employer and/or the employee may
request a full hearing before an administrative law judge of the
Department of Labor. The administrative law judgeâÂÂs decision may be
appealed to the Labor DepartmentâÂÂs Administrative Review Board.
The employee may also file a complaint in federal court if the U.S. Department of Labor does not issue a final decision within certain time limits. Details on this provision can be found in OSHAâÂÂs regulations, at 29 CFR 1987.114.
@user6726 Also notes that under the common law of Texas, terminating someone solely for refusing to violate the law gives rise to an action for wrongful termination, citing Sabine Pilot Services, Inc. v. Hauck, 687 S.W.2d 733 (Tex. 1985) and a subsequent case.
A termination of employment for this reason would also constitute a termination that is not for good cause, so the employee would be entitled to unemployment benefits.
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
13
down vote
Read the answers to your previous question. You should not have gone to work anyway. That would have been stupid and irresponsible. You would have endangered the public and would have been liable for being sued and being financially destroyed for the rest of your life.
You need to get treatment; find a community clinic or go to the local ER. Failure to do so will result in you possibly being criminally liable for infecting others in addition to being civilly liable.
The hospital or clinic will inform the city/county health department and they inspect the business that fired you; and if you were at the restaurant at all, inform the public as to the dangers.
After you have started treatment and are not contagious, Google for free legal aid in your area and talk to a lawyer. They will explain if you have a case against the business - this can depend on jurisdiction - to at least get unemployment.
9
It's OK. The asker was working as a surgeon in May this year so they know where to go to get medical treatment.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
4
@DavidRicherby Do you really believe everything you read on the internet? Especially from posters who go by "anonymous" and have a history of asking sketchy questions?
â BlueDogRanch
2 days ago
11
Of course I don't believe a word of it: the surgeon part or the fired fast-food worker part.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
10
@DavidRicherby Another post by the same person asks a hypothetical question as research for a novel, which would explain a lot. It'd be nice if they were honest about this
â Graham
yesterday
5
@Graham Agreed -- there's nothing wrong with hypothetical questions, and I'm not sure they even need to be labelled as such. But I think this pair of questions crosses the line into trolling by setting up a fake, emotionalized situation.
â David Richerby
yesterday
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
13
down vote
Read the answers to your previous question. You should not have gone to work anyway. That would have been stupid and irresponsible. You would have endangered the public and would have been liable for being sued and being financially destroyed for the rest of your life.
You need to get treatment; find a community clinic or go to the local ER. Failure to do so will result in you possibly being criminally liable for infecting others in addition to being civilly liable.
The hospital or clinic will inform the city/county health department and they inspect the business that fired you; and if you were at the restaurant at all, inform the public as to the dangers.
After you have started treatment and are not contagious, Google for free legal aid in your area and talk to a lawyer. They will explain if you have a case against the business - this can depend on jurisdiction - to at least get unemployment.
9
It's OK. The asker was working as a surgeon in May this year so they know where to go to get medical treatment.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
4
@DavidRicherby Do you really believe everything you read on the internet? Especially from posters who go by "anonymous" and have a history of asking sketchy questions?
â BlueDogRanch
2 days ago
11
Of course I don't believe a word of it: the surgeon part or the fired fast-food worker part.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
10
@DavidRicherby Another post by the same person asks a hypothetical question as research for a novel, which would explain a lot. It'd be nice if they were honest about this
â Graham
yesterday
5
@Graham Agreed -- there's nothing wrong with hypothetical questions, and I'm not sure they even need to be labelled as such. But I think this pair of questions crosses the line into trolling by setting up a fake, emotionalized situation.
â David Richerby
yesterday
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
13
down vote
up vote
13
down vote
Read the answers to your previous question. You should not have gone to work anyway. That would have been stupid and irresponsible. You would have endangered the public and would have been liable for being sued and being financially destroyed for the rest of your life.
You need to get treatment; find a community clinic or go to the local ER. Failure to do so will result in you possibly being criminally liable for infecting others in addition to being civilly liable.
The hospital or clinic will inform the city/county health department and they inspect the business that fired you; and if you were at the restaurant at all, inform the public as to the dangers.
After you have started treatment and are not contagious, Google for free legal aid in your area and talk to a lawyer. They will explain if you have a case against the business - this can depend on jurisdiction - to at least get unemployment.
Read the answers to your previous question. You should not have gone to work anyway. That would have been stupid and irresponsible. You would have endangered the public and would have been liable for being sued and being financially destroyed for the rest of your life.
You need to get treatment; find a community clinic or go to the local ER. Failure to do so will result in you possibly being criminally liable for infecting others in addition to being civilly liable.
The hospital or clinic will inform the city/county health department and they inspect the business that fired you; and if you were at the restaurant at all, inform the public as to the dangers.
After you have started treatment and are not contagious, Google for free legal aid in your area and talk to a lawyer. They will explain if you have a case against the business - this can depend on jurisdiction - to at least get unemployment.
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
BlueDogRanch
7,73021233
7,73021233
9
It's OK. The asker was working as a surgeon in May this year so they know where to go to get medical treatment.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
4
@DavidRicherby Do you really believe everything you read on the internet? Especially from posters who go by "anonymous" and have a history of asking sketchy questions?
â BlueDogRanch
2 days ago
11
Of course I don't believe a word of it: the surgeon part or the fired fast-food worker part.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
10
@DavidRicherby Another post by the same person asks a hypothetical question as research for a novel, which would explain a lot. It'd be nice if they were honest about this
â Graham
yesterday
5
@Graham Agreed -- there's nothing wrong with hypothetical questions, and I'm not sure they even need to be labelled as such. But I think this pair of questions crosses the line into trolling by setting up a fake, emotionalized situation.
â David Richerby
yesterday
 |Â
show 1 more comment
9
It's OK. The asker was working as a surgeon in May this year so they know where to go to get medical treatment.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
4
@DavidRicherby Do you really believe everything you read on the internet? Especially from posters who go by "anonymous" and have a history of asking sketchy questions?
â BlueDogRanch
2 days ago
11
Of course I don't believe a word of it: the surgeon part or the fired fast-food worker part.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
10
@DavidRicherby Another post by the same person asks a hypothetical question as research for a novel, which would explain a lot. It'd be nice if they were honest about this
â Graham
yesterday
5
@Graham Agreed -- there's nothing wrong with hypothetical questions, and I'm not sure they even need to be labelled as such. But I think this pair of questions crosses the line into trolling by setting up a fake, emotionalized situation.
â David Richerby
yesterday
9
9
It's OK. The asker was working as a surgeon in May this year so they know where to go to get medical treatment.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
It's OK. The asker was working as a surgeon in May this year so they know where to go to get medical treatment.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
4
4
@DavidRicherby Do you really believe everything you read on the internet? Especially from posters who go by "anonymous" and have a history of asking sketchy questions?
â BlueDogRanch
2 days ago
@DavidRicherby Do you really believe everything you read on the internet? Especially from posters who go by "anonymous" and have a history of asking sketchy questions?
â BlueDogRanch
2 days ago
11
11
Of course I don't believe a word of it: the surgeon part or the fired fast-food worker part.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
Of course I don't believe a word of it: the surgeon part or the fired fast-food worker part.
â David Richerby
2 days ago
10
10
@DavidRicherby Another post by the same person asks a hypothetical question as research for a novel, which would explain a lot. It'd be nice if they were honest about this
â Graham
yesterday
@DavidRicherby Another post by the same person asks a hypothetical question as research for a novel, which would explain a lot. It'd be nice if they were honest about this
â Graham
yesterday
5
5
@Graham Agreed -- there's nothing wrong with hypothetical questions, and I'm not sure they even need to be labelled as such. But I think this pair of questions crosses the line into trolling by setting up a fake, emotionalized situation.
â David Richerby
yesterday
@Graham Agreed -- there's nothing wrong with hypothetical questions, and I'm not sure they even need to be labelled as such. But I think this pair of questions crosses the line into trolling by setting up a fake, emotionalized situation.
â David Richerby
yesterday
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
5
down vote
Texas is an "at will" employment state; the question is whether there is an exception in case the employer tells you to do something illegal. These guys (trying to drum up business) indicate why it may not be legal to fire you for obeying the law, based on Sabine Pilot Services, Inc. v. Hauck, 687 S.W.2d 733, where the Texas Supreme Court ruled that an employer cannot force an employee to choose between violating the law and keeping his job. You could then file a wrongful discharge suit, seeking lost and future wages and benefits, court costs, and punitive damages. The outcome you see is not a foregone conclusion. This blog reports a case that depended on Sabine Pilot, namely Peine v. HIT Services L.P., 479 S.W.3d 445. The complication here is that the employee breached a confidentiality agreement, and he remained fired because although he may have been told to break the law, that wasn't the only reason he was fired. From the Sabine ruling:
That narrow exception covers only the discharge of an employee for the
sole reason that the employee refused to perform and illegal act. We
further hold that in the trial of such a case it is the plaintiff's
burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his discharge
was for no reason other than his refusal to perform an illegal act.
Your attorney will tell you what your prospects are for suing the guy: given the alleged action, reinstatement would not be unexpected.
At a minimum, the termination of employment would be without good cause so one would be entitled to unemployment benefits. The relevant statute may also have a non-retaliation clause which makes firing someone for obeying the statute a wrongful termination.
â ohwilleke
8 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
Texas is an "at will" employment state; the question is whether there is an exception in case the employer tells you to do something illegal. These guys (trying to drum up business) indicate why it may not be legal to fire you for obeying the law, based on Sabine Pilot Services, Inc. v. Hauck, 687 S.W.2d 733, where the Texas Supreme Court ruled that an employer cannot force an employee to choose between violating the law and keeping his job. You could then file a wrongful discharge suit, seeking lost and future wages and benefits, court costs, and punitive damages. The outcome you see is not a foregone conclusion. This blog reports a case that depended on Sabine Pilot, namely Peine v. HIT Services L.P., 479 S.W.3d 445. The complication here is that the employee breached a confidentiality agreement, and he remained fired because although he may have been told to break the law, that wasn't the only reason he was fired. From the Sabine ruling:
That narrow exception covers only the discharge of an employee for the
sole reason that the employee refused to perform and illegal act. We
further hold that in the trial of such a case it is the plaintiff's
burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his discharge
was for no reason other than his refusal to perform an illegal act.
Your attorney will tell you what your prospects are for suing the guy: given the alleged action, reinstatement would not be unexpected.
At a minimum, the termination of employment would be without good cause so one would be entitled to unemployment benefits. The relevant statute may also have a non-retaliation clause which makes firing someone for obeying the statute a wrongful termination.
â ohwilleke
8 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
up vote
5
down vote
Texas is an "at will" employment state; the question is whether there is an exception in case the employer tells you to do something illegal. These guys (trying to drum up business) indicate why it may not be legal to fire you for obeying the law, based on Sabine Pilot Services, Inc. v. Hauck, 687 S.W.2d 733, where the Texas Supreme Court ruled that an employer cannot force an employee to choose between violating the law and keeping his job. You could then file a wrongful discharge suit, seeking lost and future wages and benefits, court costs, and punitive damages. The outcome you see is not a foregone conclusion. This blog reports a case that depended on Sabine Pilot, namely Peine v. HIT Services L.P., 479 S.W.3d 445. The complication here is that the employee breached a confidentiality agreement, and he remained fired because although he may have been told to break the law, that wasn't the only reason he was fired. From the Sabine ruling:
That narrow exception covers only the discharge of an employee for the
sole reason that the employee refused to perform and illegal act. We
further hold that in the trial of such a case it is the plaintiff's
burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his discharge
was for no reason other than his refusal to perform an illegal act.
Your attorney will tell you what your prospects are for suing the guy: given the alleged action, reinstatement would not be unexpected.
Texas is an "at will" employment state; the question is whether there is an exception in case the employer tells you to do something illegal. These guys (trying to drum up business) indicate why it may not be legal to fire you for obeying the law, based on Sabine Pilot Services, Inc. v. Hauck, 687 S.W.2d 733, where the Texas Supreme Court ruled that an employer cannot force an employee to choose between violating the law and keeping his job. You could then file a wrongful discharge suit, seeking lost and future wages and benefits, court costs, and punitive damages. The outcome you see is not a foregone conclusion. This blog reports a case that depended on Sabine Pilot, namely Peine v. HIT Services L.P., 479 S.W.3d 445. The complication here is that the employee breached a confidentiality agreement, and he remained fired because although he may have been told to break the law, that wasn't the only reason he was fired. From the Sabine ruling:
That narrow exception covers only the discharge of an employee for the
sole reason that the employee refused to perform and illegal act. We
further hold that in the trial of such a case it is the plaintiff's
burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his discharge
was for no reason other than his refusal to perform an illegal act.
Your attorney will tell you what your prospects are for suing the guy: given the alleged action, reinstatement would not be unexpected.
answered 2 days ago
user6726
50.7k24386
50.7k24386
At a minimum, the termination of employment would be without good cause so one would be entitled to unemployment benefits. The relevant statute may also have a non-retaliation clause which makes firing someone for obeying the statute a wrongful termination.
â ohwilleke
8 hours ago
add a comment |Â
At a minimum, the termination of employment would be without good cause so one would be entitled to unemployment benefits. The relevant statute may also have a non-retaliation clause which makes firing someone for obeying the statute a wrongful termination.
â ohwilleke
8 hours ago
At a minimum, the termination of employment would be without good cause so one would be entitled to unemployment benefits. The relevant statute may also have a non-retaliation clause which makes firing someone for obeying the statute a wrongful termination.
â ohwilleke
8 hours ago
At a minimum, the termination of employment would be without good cause so one would be entitled to unemployment benefits. The relevant statute may also have a non-retaliation clause which makes firing someone for obeying the statute a wrongful termination.
â ohwilleke
8 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
This is one of the rare circumstances in which a non-union, non-government employee might even have a right to be reinstated in his job, in addition to potentially having a monetary remedy for wrongful termination.
There is a legal duty to reinstate a food employee once that employee overcomes the illness pursuant to Texas Food Establishment Rules ç228.37. Failure to do so could result in the revocation of the employer's license to operate his business, or in a violation that could count towards doing so together with other violations, and would also be a matter of public record.
The employee could also filed a complaint under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act:
If the evidence supports an employeeâÂÂs claim of retaliation, OSHA will
issue an order requiring the employer to, as appropriate, put the
employee back to work, pay lost wages, restore benefits, and other
possible relief. The exact requirements will depend on the facts of
the case. If the evidence does not support the employeeâÂÂs claim, OSHA
will dismiss the complaint.
After OSHA issues a decision, the employer and/or the employee may
request a full hearing before an administrative law judge of the
Department of Labor. The administrative law judgeâÂÂs decision may be
appealed to the Labor DepartmentâÂÂs Administrative Review Board.
The employee may also file a complaint in federal court if the U.S. Department of Labor does not issue a final decision within certain time limits. Details on this provision can be found in OSHAâÂÂs regulations, at 29 CFR 1987.114.
@user6726 Also notes that under the common law of Texas, terminating someone solely for refusing to violate the law gives rise to an action for wrongful termination, citing Sabine Pilot Services, Inc. v. Hauck, 687 S.W.2d 733 (Tex. 1985) and a subsequent case.
A termination of employment for this reason would also constitute a termination that is not for good cause, so the employee would be entitled to unemployment benefits.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
This is one of the rare circumstances in which a non-union, non-government employee might even have a right to be reinstated in his job, in addition to potentially having a monetary remedy for wrongful termination.
There is a legal duty to reinstate a food employee once that employee overcomes the illness pursuant to Texas Food Establishment Rules ç228.37. Failure to do so could result in the revocation of the employer's license to operate his business, or in a violation that could count towards doing so together with other violations, and would also be a matter of public record.
The employee could also filed a complaint under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act:
If the evidence supports an employeeâÂÂs claim of retaliation, OSHA will
issue an order requiring the employer to, as appropriate, put the
employee back to work, pay lost wages, restore benefits, and other
possible relief. The exact requirements will depend on the facts of
the case. If the evidence does not support the employeeâÂÂs claim, OSHA
will dismiss the complaint.
After OSHA issues a decision, the employer and/or the employee may
request a full hearing before an administrative law judge of the
Department of Labor. The administrative law judgeâÂÂs decision may be
appealed to the Labor DepartmentâÂÂs Administrative Review Board.
The employee may also file a complaint in federal court if the U.S. Department of Labor does not issue a final decision within certain time limits. Details on this provision can be found in OSHAâÂÂs regulations, at 29 CFR 1987.114.
@user6726 Also notes that under the common law of Texas, terminating someone solely for refusing to violate the law gives rise to an action for wrongful termination, citing Sabine Pilot Services, Inc. v. Hauck, 687 S.W.2d 733 (Tex. 1985) and a subsequent case.
A termination of employment for this reason would also constitute a termination that is not for good cause, so the employee would be entitled to unemployment benefits.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
This is one of the rare circumstances in which a non-union, non-government employee might even have a right to be reinstated in his job, in addition to potentially having a monetary remedy for wrongful termination.
There is a legal duty to reinstate a food employee once that employee overcomes the illness pursuant to Texas Food Establishment Rules ç228.37. Failure to do so could result in the revocation of the employer's license to operate his business, or in a violation that could count towards doing so together with other violations, and would also be a matter of public record.
The employee could also filed a complaint under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act:
If the evidence supports an employeeâÂÂs claim of retaliation, OSHA will
issue an order requiring the employer to, as appropriate, put the
employee back to work, pay lost wages, restore benefits, and other
possible relief. The exact requirements will depend on the facts of
the case. If the evidence does not support the employeeâÂÂs claim, OSHA
will dismiss the complaint.
After OSHA issues a decision, the employer and/or the employee may
request a full hearing before an administrative law judge of the
Department of Labor. The administrative law judgeâÂÂs decision may be
appealed to the Labor DepartmentâÂÂs Administrative Review Board.
The employee may also file a complaint in federal court if the U.S. Department of Labor does not issue a final decision within certain time limits. Details on this provision can be found in OSHAâÂÂs regulations, at 29 CFR 1987.114.
@user6726 Also notes that under the common law of Texas, terminating someone solely for refusing to violate the law gives rise to an action for wrongful termination, citing Sabine Pilot Services, Inc. v. Hauck, 687 S.W.2d 733 (Tex. 1985) and a subsequent case.
A termination of employment for this reason would also constitute a termination that is not for good cause, so the employee would be entitled to unemployment benefits.
This is one of the rare circumstances in which a non-union, non-government employee might even have a right to be reinstated in his job, in addition to potentially having a monetary remedy for wrongful termination.
There is a legal duty to reinstate a food employee once that employee overcomes the illness pursuant to Texas Food Establishment Rules ç228.37. Failure to do so could result in the revocation of the employer's license to operate his business, or in a violation that could count towards doing so together with other violations, and would also be a matter of public record.
The employee could also filed a complaint under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act:
If the evidence supports an employeeâÂÂs claim of retaliation, OSHA will
issue an order requiring the employer to, as appropriate, put the
employee back to work, pay lost wages, restore benefits, and other
possible relief. The exact requirements will depend on the facts of
the case. If the evidence does not support the employeeâÂÂs claim, OSHA
will dismiss the complaint.
After OSHA issues a decision, the employer and/or the employee may
request a full hearing before an administrative law judge of the
Department of Labor. The administrative law judgeâÂÂs decision may be
appealed to the Labor DepartmentâÂÂs Administrative Review Board.
The employee may also file a complaint in federal court if the U.S. Department of Labor does not issue a final decision within certain time limits. Details on this provision can be found in OSHAâÂÂs regulations, at 29 CFR 1987.114.
@user6726 Also notes that under the common law of Texas, terminating someone solely for refusing to violate the law gives rise to an action for wrongful termination, citing Sabine Pilot Services, Inc. v. Hauck, 687 S.W.2d 733 (Tex. 1985) and a subsequent case.
A termination of employment for this reason would also constitute a termination that is not for good cause, so the employee would be entitled to unemployment benefits.
edited 7 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
ohwilleke
44.3k251112
44.3k251112
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f32344%2fi-was-fired-for-refusing-to-work-with-typhoid-do-i-have-any-recourse%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
12
I notice that this question is now in HNQ. Before anyone becomes emotionally invested in it, please note that the asker has previously claimed to be a surgeon and a retired cellular biologist.
â David Richerby
yesterday