my son-in-law works for a well known blood bank in the distribution department. Cameras were placed in the area to observe the safety
of a radiator machine per Fed regulations. Management wanted to check to see what employee had moved some blood and starting going through tapes. In doing so, they observed that my soninlaw and another employee had skipped one step in a procedure, reverting to a former action. Both admitted that they had not followed this step in the procedure. The other employee was given a one day suspension, while they placed my soninlaw on admin. leave, saying they needed further investigation. the other employee is in his early 20s and has worked there for about 3 years, whereas my soninlaw is 60 and worked there 25 years and has only been written up once before. Will add that this was the only employee work area where there are cameras and employees were never informed that the cameras were there to monitor their work. The staff is down 4 people so a lot of pressure is placed on those filling in. In fact, these two employees have not only been working their regular 5 day shift but going to another site to work an extra day as that site is also down in employees. A week as gone by and no word. As the other employee was given a one day suspension and already back to work, this appears like harassment and possible age discrimination
since we assume that they are trying to figure out a way to terminate him.
JA: Because employment law
varies from place to place, can you tell me what state this is in?
JA: Have you talked to a lawyer yet?
Customer: no, i'm trying to find a good one in the bay area for him
JA: Anything else you think the lawyer should know?
Customer: his title is Lead Distribution Tech. He is sometimes contacted at home to resolve a problem, but as far as he can determine, is not paid for this. Management is saying he should be a good role model. He has never been asked to supervise other employees by his supervisor and therefore just goes about his work. Re his previous writeup, management assumed that he should have known how to handle it because of his time there. It had to do with making corrections after a paper jam so was out of the ordinary. In his written response to the writeup, he asked what the procedure should have been and never received an answer.