Employment Law Questions? Ask an Employment Lawyer.
Thank you for using JustAnswer. I am researching your issue and will respond shortly.
I'm sorry to hear about your situation. Unfortunately, there is no law either Federal or in Florida that govern regulations regarding maximum hours or time off between shifts for nurses. If there's no employment contract in place, I'm afraid to say that you're an at will employee, and your employer can require you to go to training and be at work with very minimal sleep.
I know this is probably not what you wanted to hear, but it is the law. I hope that clears things up anyway. If you have any other questions, please let me know. If not, and you have not yet, please rate my answer AND press the "submit" button, if applicable. Please note that I don't get any credit for my answer unless and until you rate it a 3, 4, 5 (good or better). Thank you, XXXXX XXXXX luck to you!
Thank You. My next question would be if the other people on night shift did not have to stay and I did is that discrimination?
Yes, but the main question is discrimination based on what factor... Discrimination, generally speaking, is not illegal. Only illegal discrimination is. That is, only discrimination based on race, age, religion, gender, or disability, or in retaliation for taking protected medical leave (under FMLA) is actionable. Discrimination based on some other factor, such as friendship, education level, seniority, etc... is not actionable.
So if you could show that the reason for the disparate treatment was illegally discriminatory (based on race, age, religion, gender or disability) then you could potentially have a claim with the EEOC.
But if it's based on any other factor, even if it's an illogical factor, then I'm sorry to say that the employer would have that discretion, as unethical and immoral as it may be.
Boss in my case c/o I feel age. Will not let me work overtime sts she is concerned but younger 25-40 (i am 62) are allowed OT of course unless she is desperate and then I am ASSIGNED.
Since you're 62, in your case, you are covered by Title VII and the ADEA (Age Discrimination in Employment Act), meaning that you could, potentially, have a case and complaint against your employer. That being said, age discrimination cases are VERY difficult to win. In order to show a prima facie case for age discrimination, you are going to have to show: (i) your were in a protected age class (check), (ii) you suffered an adverse employment decision (i.e. Having to work worse hours / shifts than younger individuals), (iii) you were performing your job at a level that met your employer's legitimate expectations (likely), and (iv) persons of your qualifications were retained in the same position or there was some other evidence that the employer did not treat age neutrally in this situation (more difficult).In ADEA ("age discrimination") cases, the plaintiff must present evidence demonstrating a "reasonable probability" and not merely a "possibility" of age discrimination. First, a plaintiff can offer direct and circumstantial evidence that he would not have been discharged but for his age; the evidence must be of sufficient probative force to support an inference of discrimination. Second, a plaintiff may use the "McDonnell Douglas" scheme of shifting burdens applied in Title VII cases. Under this scheme, once the plaintiff has established a prima facie case of age discrimination, the burden shifts to the employer to articulate a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for its employment decision. If the employer meets this burden, the plaintiff must then show that the employer's proffered reason was mere pretext and that age was the more likely reason for his dismissal.The Supreme Court has expressly held that an employer does not violate the ADEA "by acting on the basis of a factor, such as an employee's pension status or seniority [or salary], that is empirically correlated with age." Even though age is often related to factors such as salary, it is "analytically distinct" from them. For this reason, "an employer can take account of one while ignoring the other." Moreover, "[w]hen the employer's decision is wholly motivated by factors other than age, ... [e]ven if the motivating factor is correlated with age," that decision is not contrary to the ADEA. Accordingly, even if the company reduced the salary to reduce its costs (or even fired The employee simply to reduce its salary costs) this is not evidence of age discrimination.
Now if the only reason is age, and other individuals of your age are treated similarly, then it's possible that you could have a claim. But any other explanation could negate your claim (which is why age discrimination claims are pretty hard to win: If the employer can come up with any other reason for the actions, the claim will fail).
LOL, I am the only "elder" in the department other than the Boss, as she is only hiring the new grads. That is because of the low salary paid. BUT I am still here because of experience and she cannot have the newbees do Detox Treatment. they are making errors and she is not filling out incidents. Prob best if I just give up and move on.
Thank You for info. I felt it might be a shot in the dark but had to ask.
I am sorry to hear that, and I wish that I could have given you better news regarding your situation, but unfortunately the law is the law.
My pleasure.If you have any other questions, please let me know. If not, and you have not yet, please rate my answer AND press the "submit" button, if applicable. Please note that I don't get any credit for my answer unless and until you rate it a 3, 4, 5 (good or better). Thank you, XXXXX XXXXX good luck to you!