or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Lawsuit accuses SoHo Apple store of discriminating against employee
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Lawsuit accuses SoHo Apple store of discriminating against employee - Page 2

post #41 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Not that I really give a rat's ass but where did "I" say she was mentally unstable? You can get all pc that you want but if a nervous disorder makes you look mentally unstable then you have to call a spade a spade. After all, we are talking about Apple here... any Android fan will tell you that Apple is all about looks and nothing more...

LOL...well said....I don't think the quack should get 300 grand either. I'm sure decisions were made internally that she was not suitable for public interaction and they paid her to do nothing while they tried to figure something out. It doesn't take a genius for people to notice these things about other people.
post #42 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by See Flat View Post

Some people cant help but to fight windmills using the excuse of moral standards. There life would be simple jst to go get look for a job that they are capable of doing, and that someone is willing to hire them for. I dont even care about discrimination aimed at me. If an employer would do that to me I'd just move on and be happy elsewhere instead of playing victim.

No kidding. It's a RETAIL job. You're not working an ER or an air traffic controller or trying to cure cancer. She thinks that this job would be the highlight of her life and she may be right. If she thinks she's getting that money out of Apple she really is that crazy.

I'm not making fun of mental illness. I'm attacking people who try to make a buck fraudulently by manipulating laws to protect the people who really need it.
post #43 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by HammerofTruth View Post

No kidding. It's a RETAIL job. You're not working an ER or an air traffic controller or trying to cure cancer. She thinks that this job would be the highlight of her life and she may be right. If she thinks she's getting that money out of Apple she really is that crazy.

I'm not making fun of mental illness. I'm attacking people who try to make a buck fraudulently by manipulating laws to protect the people who really need it.

There is no proof either way of fraud at this point. Let it slide.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #44 of 49
All I have to say after reading that article is "wow" ... I mean just "wow." I know we're only receiving one side of the story, but there are a lot of questions I have about this girl's side of the story.

So, she takes four months of medical leave for "psychological" reasons, and comes back and just expects to continue on like before as if nothing happened. It's a retail job ... the store needs to have work done, and if you're going to be gone for four months they have to find some way to get the work you would have been doing done. Coming back after four months I find it perfectly understandable that they might need a little time to find a specific niche for you to fill. They basically put her in the basement doing nothing, but she was still getting paid ... sounds pretty good to me. So, she applies for a Genius position and doesn't get it ... was she even qualified for the position? I know a lot of people that think they should have been hired as Geniuses, but they don't seem to understand they're not qualified, and they're not very good at the skills that position requires. Just because you've been a Mac Specialist for two years, and you're really good at selling products doesn't mean you'd be just as good or qualified to troubleshoot technical problems or fixing computers. I worked with a guy that applied for a supervisory sales position at our company and he didn't get it ... of course he said they had discriminated against him for so-and-so reason ... there was no possible reason (according to him) he should have been passed up. Of course, to all the rest of us who worked with him ... we knew the reason he hadn't been chosen for the position was because he frequently disappeared from the office for half hour blocks doing who knows what, routinely found ways to do as little work as possible (thereby transferring the work he should have been doing to the rest of us), and rather uniformly took two hour lunch breaks even though he was only supposed to be gone for an hour. But, in his mind none of that was true ... HE was being discriminated against. Almost every person I've ever worked with that claims they've been discriminated against falls into some similar category ... they've done something stupid, or feel that they're entitled to something they're not even though they perform substandard, and have professional misconduct issues. Nothing is ever THEIR fault ... it's always someone else's.

Also, why on Earth would you move from New York to Chicago without having an actual job offer in your hand before you move? I'm sorry, but that's totally her bad, and that's part of why I find it hard to believe her other claims ... She moved to Chicago prematurely and now she's trying to blame it on Apple. She seems to think that just because a position is open in Chicago she is entitled to it? Suppose I work for a company in Los Angeles, and they post a position opening in Seattle ... before I've even applied for it I assume they should have to give me the job, so I move to Seattle, apply for the job, and get denied. How exactly is that the company's fault? They didn't tell me to move there ... I did it on my own.

It would be interesting to see what exact her psychiatrist has to say about her ... he/she might have recommended her to return to work, but they're might have been conditions to it (like not interacting with customers for prolonged periods of time). Obviously the doctor can't give the specifics of what was said, or what happened, but he/she can tell the employer conditions of that employee's return to work. If I take a medical leave of absence because of an injury my doctor doesn't have to tell them about the colonoscopy he performed, but he can tell my employer "he shouldn't lift any oversized objects or heavy objects." That is perfectly fine, and I'm willing to bet that's about what happened in this case ... there's nothing illegal about that.

If she had took leave for psychological issues, and the doctor gave Apple pertinent information regarding the condition for her return to work Apple is within it's right to restrict her job functions to conform to those conditions. Suppose she suffered from anxiety attacks ... you really want a Genius helping you that is going to freak out if they get stressed and have a meltdown? Now think of it from Apple's position ... is that the type of person you want interacting with your customer if it can be avoided?

Back when I worked for Apple years ago (when there were only about a dozen stores) I hurt myself off the job playing basketball with my friends. I ended up having to go to the doctor, and used crutches for about three weeks. Guess what happened when I went in to the Apple Store for work the next day with a doctor's note ...? I was relegated to the stock room for three weeks ... pretty much all I did was print price tags, and email requisitions to corporate. Took about two months before I was completely on the sales floor 100% again, because they hired a new batch of Mac Specialists to help fill the void my absence created. During those two months I work in the stock room part of the time, and on the floor part of the time ... I didn't sue anyone for discrimination. Managers have to make decisions on how best to use their assets, and sometimes that doesn't fall in line with what an employee WANTS to do ... As long as my employer doesn't ask me to do anything illegal or unethical I will do it.
post #45 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by seamuskrat View Post

After reading the brief, it seems on the front of it, that Apple did in fact break some employment rules.

Yes, or not.

There's certainly a lot of information missing here. A few things do sound suspicious here that don't help her case.

1) Why didn't the managers simply not hire her back? She was gone for 4 months. The position had been replaced. They were well within their legal right to not bring her back. Instead, they brought her back and placed her in the basement? What exactly was her position and duties when she returned? How much was she paid and how many hours did she work? It sounds like to me that they let her return and paid her for the only position available at the time which was some sort of inventory/stock position that she didn't care for, and that Apple was actually trying to do what was best for her.

2) Where the questions about her mental stability questions based on observations or confidential information that management should never have had access to? It seems rather likely that if this person needed to take 4 months off due to a nervous disorder that there may have been issues with interacting with the customers that the management witnessed or received reports from. This could be the most destructive counter-point. All it would take would be a few reports from co-workers or customers and her claim becomes baseless.

3) How is she claiming Apple did wrong in knowing/guessing/speculating about her condition? In the article it claims she "was given disability leave through an independent company, and was reportedly assured by the third party that the details of her medical condition would not be released to Apple". It it wasn't, isn't it likely that it was obvious, and if so, wouldn't what made it obvious also be something that made it such that she was unable to perform certain jobs that required interaction with customers or co-workers. It should be worth noting that you can discriminate against someone with a disability (or other protected class) if the issue is that they can not perform the duties of their job.

4) The move to Chicago on one hand may show that Apple was unwilling to place her into any position other than "mystery basement" position, but it's also pretty weird that she moved to Chicago before she had the job. Again, the details here are unknown so there's not much to go on.

There are a lot of unanswered questions, and unlike others here, I'm not going to call the plaintiff names or make accusations against her. I feel sorry for what she's gone through, even if the claims are baseless, but there needs to be far more to this than what was presented before I'd be willing to believe Apple did any wrong here.
post #46 of 49
I don't know why this story is being reported, there isn't enough information really to comment on at all. And there is no reason we would need that information. This happens in all industries; is it news because it happened at an Apple Store? Is AI trying to stir up flame bait?
post #47 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by roehlstation View Post

I don't know why this story is being reported, there isn't enough information really to comment on at all. And there is no reason we would need that information. This happens in all industries; is it news because it happened at an Apple Store? Is AI trying to stir up flame bait?

Geiko Insurance announcer: Does Al Roker know what the weather is in your neck of the woods?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #48 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

Ok, this scum bag took a 4 month PAID VACATION for being nervous, then sues because they replaced her? This woman is a drain on society and this case needs to be thrown out. Oh, and she moved to friggin Chicago BEFORE SHE HAD A JOB LINED UP? Who's fault is that, lady?

If I were this woman, I'd be nervous too. Nervous that my stupidity would get me into trouble like living in a whole new city without a damn job!

Interesting that you used the word "stupidity" in your post. Having a "nervous disorder" does not mean you are "being nervous"
post #49 of 49
nevermind
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Lawsuit accuses SoHo Apple store of discriminating against employee