• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Little Tipsy at work

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

commentator

Senior Member
And filing an unemployment claim, while refusing to cooperate with the initial unemployment fact finding process and screwing around waiting for the appeals hearing after a denial is about the worst piece of advice I could possibly come up with for anyone who ever happened to ask.

If this guy goes to this meeting with his employers and tells the truth, and this is a first event, and he is a valued employee, there is a dandy chance they'll let him go with a warning. Never do it again, okay? If he refuses to say anything, doesn't tell the truth, doesn't show contrition, acts like a legal expert smart **&^, it means he is 100%guaranteed going to get fired.

And then he files for unemployment, having lost a full time long term job for the remote possibility that out somewhere in the far off future, there is a miniscule chance he'll get approved for much smaller weekly benefit for no more than 6 months. Wow.

And I very strongly suspect that if he refuses to answer the unemployment office's questions about whether he was drunk or not, which they will ask him immediately after they contact his employer, the employer WILL fight it, or that even if they don't, with him refusing to provide any helpful information to the unemployment office do you really think there's anybody in the system who's going to give him the benefit of the doubt or find him believable (though he has said nothing to believe!) and approve an unemployment claim?

Besides the fact that he was tipsy, and there is no way he can get around that except directly lying. "Taking the fifth amendment" doesn't really work well here. We hope this will stay between the OP and his employer, and can be overcome and worked out.
 


Chyvan

Member
Discussing unemployment is a wee bit premature.

It's never premature to discuss unemployment when there is a real possibility of a discharge. People need to know this stuff BEFORE because sometimes when they find out after the fact, it's too late. The damage is already done.
 

LeeHarveyBlotto

Senior Member
I personally, would say nothing.


If he says nothing, he'll still probably get fired, but the employer will have a proof problem with UI, and Leo has a much better shot.

In no state in which I've lived (which includes CA) would not answering such a question not be considered insubordination. Goodbye, unemployment.

Hat in hand and total honesty is the OP's best bet, IMO.
 
Last edited:

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Isn't always misconduct. Imagine if you were a secretary and were asked to start cleaning the toilets so they could save on the janitorial staff. You'll get UI when you tell the employer to pound sand and get fired for it.

Absolutely, positively irrelevant. That's not what happened for THIS OP.
 

quincy

Senior Member
Out of pure curiosity, does Tribal law come into play here at all?

Proserpina's question was not addressed but maybe it should have been, as leo9498 stated he worked for a Native American casino.

Native American tribes often are not subject to US employment laws. The reservations are on sovereign soil (although sovereign immunity can be waived).

Michigan is one state that has negotiated with tribes giving the State jurisdiction over some matters involving casino employees but I have not researched California.

There is a bill in Congress that passed the House in mid-November over North American Casino labor law exemptions. I could post with a link later if anyone is interested.
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
Isn't always misconduct. Imagine if you were a secretary and were asked to start cleaning the toilets so they could save on the janitorial staff. You'll get UI when you tell the employer to pound sand and get fired for it.

Which is relevant to this OP how?

HINT: It isn't.

Look, chyvan, WE know you overlooked that the OP hadn't been fired (or hasn't told us if he has); YOU know you overlooked it, and pretending that you didn't overlook it is only making you look like an ass. Quiet down while you still have a hope of maintaining some dignity.

From an HR perspective, it is not by any stretch certain that the OP would be fired outright; depending on the exact facts it's entirely possible that suspension or last chance warning could be used instead. Unless, of course, he followed your advice would, which would ensure that he was fired even if they were originally going to give him another chance. So that's one more reason for the OP to disregard you.
 

quincy

Senior Member
Under CA rules, a suspension without pay and without a definite date to return to work is a separation. He was already fired.

Chyvan, leo9498 said he had a meeting with HR this morning. He said he was suspended on December 24th but he did not say he was suspended without pay and he did not say that he was fired.

Perhaps he will return to say how his meeting went.

Here, by the way, is the link I mentioned earlier, to the bill before Congress (The Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act of 2015). It is an interesting read:
https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/114th-congress/house-report/260/1

And here is another link, to Indian Gaming, The National Information Site of the American Indian Gaming Industry, with an overview of the federal employment laws that currently apply to tribal employers:
http://www.indiangaming.com/regulatory/view/?id=84
 
Last edited:

Chyvan

Member
had a meeting with HR this morning.

Right, and the post was from yesterday at 5:26 pm, his last activity was yesterday at 5:30 pm, the first response was at 6:23 pm and this entire discussion was a waste of time because he never saw it.
 

quincy

Senior Member
Right, and the post was from yesterday at 5:26 pm, his last activity was yesterday at 5:30 pm, the first response was at 6:23 pm and this entire discussion was a waste of time because he never saw it.

Posters often return to read the responses to their threads even if they do not acknowledge the postings with a reply.

Therefore, the posts advising leo9498 to answer honestly the questions asked of him were not necessarily a waste of time. He may have seen them and learned from them what he could. With luck, the casino will view the holiday "tipsiness" as a one-time excusable event and will keep leo9498 in their employ.

In addition, very few threads are a waste of time if other visitors to this site can read them and learn something from them.
 

Proserpina

Senior Member
Right, and the post was from yesterday at 5:26 pm, his last activity was yesterday at 5:30 pm, the first response was at 6:23 pm and this entire discussion was a waste of time because he never saw it.

I suppose that's one way to admit you were wrong.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
Top