Wrongful termination?

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-28-03 AT 05:21PM (CST)[/font][p]An employee of a nursing home has a great record; certification as LPN, good attendance, great relationship with all the residents, no displinary problems and no prior "incidences" etc. One day there is an unfortunately accident of an elderly resident slipping and hurting his head slightly as the employee was helping him. In that same day as the employee is bathing a different resident, the resident's gums start bleeding (apparently at no fault of the employee, this patient simply had very poor gum health). The employee dries the resident off then goes for help.

Following protocol, the nursing home then suspends the employee pending an investigation. A few days later, the nursing home releases the employee, stating that because two incidents happened in one day, they fear backlash from OSHA or any other inspection agency. They told the employee with regards to the patient with the bleeding gums, the employee didn't get help fast enough. Now, why would the employee leave the man standing in the tub, dripping wet so that he could possibly slip and injury himself further?

Two other factors I believe should be taken into consideration are as follows: This particular employee was hurt on the job and required stitches in his head, resulting in a Worker's Comp claim a few months prior to his termination. He had another worker's comp claim about a year ago when a bed fell on his foot. He was also attacked outside of the nursing home after his shift one night, beaten badly in a robbery attempt. The local newspaper interviewed him and put a front page article in the paper that mentioned his place of work and the fact that this crime took place right outside of the facility. This resulted in calls from several relatives of the nursing home residents, expressing concern for the safety of their loved ones. The nursing home staff expressed anger towards the employee for mentioning the facility in the newspaper, giving it bad publicity.

Does this sound like someone looking for a reason to get rid of a "problem" employee? Is there some more information I should be looking for here to get deeper into the situation?

Any advice is much appreciated.

Comments

  • 7 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • From what you posted it does sound very fishy to me. The thing that stands out the most is that from what you wrote the employee didn't seem like he was a "problem" employee, he just had a few too many unfortunate accidents happen to him. I wouldn't be surprised if the terminated employee retaliates.
  • If I were advising the employer, I would tell them to contact a lawyer. On the other hand, if I were advising the ex-employee, I would tell her to contact a lawyer. One could use sound advise about terminations, workers' comp retaliation, and credentialing concerns for the facility. The other could use some sound advice about retribution.
  • As you can tell from many of my posts, I don't have a problem with the termination of those who deserve it. I can't see that this guy deserved to be terminated for offenses that do no clearly indicate negligence on his part. Sounds like a retaliatory discharge to me. Also the next time they talk about the incidents and OSHA remind them that OSHA only covers employee safety and have nothing to do with patient care.
    My $0.02 worth.
    DJ The Balloonman
  • This guy has a work related injury that needed stitches in his head, a bed falls on his foot, then he is beaten and robbed outside the facility. None of these sounds as if he intentionally caused them to happen.

    In doing his job and elderly resident slips and hits his head. The same day another resident's gums start to bleed. He is suspended and then terminated.

    Wow! Talk about a walk in the park for ANY lawyer this guy hires. Thanks to your company, he may not have to work another day in his life. See, good things happen to those that wait.
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-29-03 AT 08:53AM (CST)[/font][p]Thanks so much to you and the other posters for your helpful input! I appreciate any additional comments from others.

    THANKS!
  • I can see the Management point of view with wanting to move this guy on, but they may have put the company at more risk by doing so, since it certainly sounds like retaliation. The assault was obviously not his fault, but the interview was a real bonehead move. I'm curious. If he was already discharged, why are you NOW looking into it?
  • I am actually outside of the situation. I am just gathering information and advice. Thanks!
Sign In or Register to comment.