Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Harassment at work for posting at YardLimits

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Excon421
    replied
    Originally posted by FELA FELLA View Post
    ps- I like the name Excon421....why did you pick it if I may ask?

    Former Conrail thus "ex-con" Thanks for your response, and for all the hard work you and your staff do.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tpg573
    replied
    FELA FELLA

    See everyone on NS property is required to attend this workshop they are going to be exposed to the KOOL AID, I can tell them that a claim agent is a $%##@@ &&^%$$$% and most of the time they will believe that, and some of the time NO. When some people don't come to Union Meetings, now don't get me wrong this will not be a problem here because we fill the Hall, however the other locals need more Exposure to the truth the MAIL, Mail out your cards, emails, flyers. brochures with the facts on them this is what I mean.

    They have went mainstream, Law Firms better do the same, I know we still have the upper hand, because people hate the NS and every thing associated with them from Payroll to Human Resources and so on and so on. But if we are not careful, some will slip through the cracks, and it could have been one of those 100% liability cases, and I HATE SO MUCH TO SEE NS GET AWAY.

    TPG

    Leave a comment:


  • FELA FELLA
    replied
    ExCon - I have a bit more information and I withdraw my answer to you and I believe this is actionable.

    TPG573- You are correct that you need to tell the younger more susceptible persons that this clear downright propaganda.

    I would remind everyone that Rome was not built nor destroyed in a day.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tpg573
    replied
    The tape is out there, whether or not there will be action by legal counsel well I DON'T KNOW? There had be some action to the members in the form of mailers, emails, more advertisement. The NS has went direct we at the locals can only get so many people in the doors of the union halls, and only have so many resources, we have to go mainstream and when I SAY WE I MEAN ORGANIZATIONS AND ITS LEGAL COUNSEL, OUR MEMBERSHIP IS AT RISK HERE. The legal action can take backburner as far as I'm concerned we have to get the truth to everyone and NOW.

    TPG

    Leave a comment:


  • Tpg573
    replied
    Wasn't it false and defamation to say that "Railroad Employees are wined and dined, by Union Lawyers, sponsoring Union Luncheons etc..." That was said in the film I happen to know that was said. And not providing information about recorded statements and all the things that put our members FELA claim at risk, and therefore sacrifice there welfare. It is a one sided story, just like always on NS. Letters or some sort of reaction from Legal Counsel needs to be put out to NS, this is going to effect young members. Not so much worried about our local, but take a local with young leadership and there is going to be some raw deals.

    Leave a comment:


  • FELA FELLA
    replied
    Originally posted by Excon421 View Post
    What if the "module" were prepared by the NS legal dept? Would that still constitute barraty, or would this be unethical in the legal sense(i.e. giving unsolicited legal advice/opinion to employees-)?
    No- I do not think that would be Barratry and no I do not think it would be unethical. Unfortunately, the only time it is "unethical" in most states to give "Unrequested"/"Unsolicited" legal advice is if it is done by a personal injury lawyer with the intent to be employed. Generally, the only time it is permitted to directly "solicit" a personal injury case is if it is done by mail and after 30 days after the accident. These rules vary greatly from state to state.

    I use the word "unfortunately" because, for instance in aircraft accidents and accidents like the recent Metro-Link accident, there are Company lawyers swarming the accident scene right after such an event but the contact by a personal injury lawyer to get hired may even amount to a crime in some states. I do believe that persons who are victims in tragedies should have the chance to see lawyers that are generally motivated in protecting their rights than the rights of the companies. But, alas, want in one hand and _ _ _ _ in the other and see which one fills up first seems appropriate here.


    So, in conclusion, though I think the behavior is reprehensible, I do not think it is actionable under the facts you give. I would like to reserve the right to amend this answer if I could get my hands on an actual tape of the "lecture" to see specifically what was said.


    Steve Gordon
    FELA Claim Lawyer | Railroad Employee Injury Attorney | Railroad Worker Injury | Train Accident


    ps- I like the name Excon421....why did you pick it if I may ask?

    Leave a comment:


  • Excon421
    replied
    What if the "module" were prepared by the NS legal dept? Would that still constitute barraty, or would this be unethical in the legal sense(i.e. giving unsolicited legal advice/opinion to employees-)?

    Leave a comment:


  • FELA FELLA
    replied
    Harassment is a very broad term. Do I think it is harassing to "expose" someone that has a lawyer? Yes. What if, for example, the worker has a lawsuit? Well, that is public record and it would be hard to complain about that even though it is bothersome. What if they have a lawyer but there is no lawsuit filed? That is a little different. I do not like using the term "harassment" because, generally, there is no legal cause of action for harassment. There are, of course, legal claims for certain hings like sexual harassment and there are discriminatory legal actions like gender, age, race, etc.

    So, in your example it is harassing but I am looking at it with an eye towards: If we sued them....then what would be the legal cause of action? Harassment? I do not think so. I think it would sound more in "Invasion of Privacy". The elements of a tort of "Invasion of Privacy" are:
    Invasion of Privacy: There are actually four causes of action that comprise the invasion of privacy tort. They are (a) intrusion upon seclusion, (b) appropriation of name or likeness, (c) public disclosure of private facts, and (d) placing plaintiff in a false light.

    For our situation of making the person stand up and leave, I think the two at issue are:
    a. Intrusion upon Seclusion: To state a claim for intrusion upon seclusion, the complaint must allege an (1) intentional intrusion, physical or otherwise, (2) upon the plaintiff's solitude or seclusion or private affairs or concerns, (3) which would be highly offensive to a reasonable person.

    and/or

    c. Public Disclosure of Private Facts: The tort of public disclosure of private facts as follows: (1) the facts disclosed are private facts; (2) the defendant disclosed them to the public generally or to a large number of persons; and (3) the disclosure was in a form of publicity of a highly objectionable kind.

    So, I think there may be a cause of action in either or both of the two above.

    BARRATRY
    Barratry has two types of definitions. The first we all have heard about and those are what is typically called "ambulance chasing". However, the other is where the person renders legal advice without a license to practice law. We see these situations occur in medical clinics where they get the patient in and actually submit a sort of settlement package to the insurance company and in essence negotiate a settlement with the automobile insurance company without a license to practice law. lso, in law offices where they handle small "fender-benders" the secretary negotiates a settlement for the client. If it is not done under the direction of a licensed lawyer it is a crime.

    In our situation, though I do not have the specific facts, it seems that you are saying that they are saying, "Look, you will do better if you do not hire a lawyer bur, instead, deal with our claims agents." I personally think that is legal advice. Now, in most Barratry criminal statutes there has to be a holding out that the person is a lawyer, i.e., a deception. For example, I have selected the Alabama Barratry statute as an example since NS is prevalent there, it states:
    Section 34-3-1 - Unlawful practice of law.

    If any person shall, without having become duly licensed to practice......practice or assume to act or hold himself out to the public as a person qualified to practice or carry on the calling of a lawyer, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not to exceed $500.00, or be imprisoned for a period not to exceed six months, or both.

    (Acts 1923, No. 133, p. 100; Code 1923, 3318; Acts 1931, No. 241, p. 284; Code 1940, T. 46, 31.)

    Hence, I would argue that when they "advise" you like they do, they are, in essence, practicing law. Do I think a prosecutor would take on the NS? No I do not. But do I think this practice needs to stop? Yes

    I hope that clarifies my previous response. If you can find out more particulars, I would like to explore the possibilities of getting this stopped. I have some good friends in Alabama & Georgia (I assume this is some of the locations wherein this is taking place) where something might be able to be done.

    One issue would be that to move for an injunction, G&E might need a client. Not a FELA client but a client that is subjected to this. Otherwise, we might get tossed out for not having someone that has been [or will be] injured from the process.

    Steve
    http://www.gordon-elias.com/CM/FELA/...A-Overview.asp

    Leave a comment:


  • Hornblower
    replied
    Originally posted by FELA FELLA View Post
    Dear Hornblower-

    This one takes the cake! If you can get me the name and the address of the person in charge if this propaganda program, I would like to write them a letter to determine wht they specifically say. In my opinion, they are committing barratry, if they are advising you that you are better off without making a claim.

    No one that is not a lawyer should advise you what your best legal course of action is unless they are a licensed lawyer.

    Steve Gordon
    (a licensed lawyer!)
    FELA Claim Lawyer | Railroad Employee Injury Attorney | Railroad Worker Injury | Train Accident
    Wick Moorman- CEO Norfolk Southern

    This a required class that every T & E employee will be required to attend. It just started here this week. If you've had any dealings with NS, this shouldn't surprise you. Give me a couple of days and I might be able to give you some more specifics. In the meantime I am forwarding this on to my State Director for handling. When an injured employee is REQUIRED to attend a company function and then is ask to leave in front of his co-workers because he chose to hire a lawyer that federal law entitles him to do; isn't that harassment?

    HB

    Leave a comment:


  • TFB
    replied
    Barratry. I like that word as I have never heard it before. Could you explain that Steve?

    Leave a comment:


  • FELA FELLA
    replied
    What Will They Think of Next!

    Dear Hornblower-

    This one takes the cake! If you can get me the name and the address of the person in charge if this propaganda program, I would like to write them a letter to determine wht they specifically say. In my opinion, they are committing barratry, if they are advising you that you are better off without making a claim.

    No one that is not a lawyer should advise you what your best legal course of action is unless they are a licensed lawyer.

    Steve Gordon
    (a licensed lawyer!)
    FELA Claim Lawyer | Railroad Employee Injury Attorney | Railroad Worker Injury | Train Accident

    Leave a comment:


  • jonnyseeandoh
    replied
    As we all (I suppose) use aliases on here, the proof is on the carrier to point at you and accuse you of posting here. Should they do so, say, "nope, that's not me." They dig further at their peril I am sure.

    Leave a comment:


  • jonnyseeandoh
    replied
    Would they even let you be marked up if you had a suit related to injury? And if they require you to do this "class" to stay qualified, then can sending you out of the room make you so you have not finished the "class." The whole thing sounds like a sham to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hornblower
    replied
    Steve,

    I work for Norfolk Southern and have a question.

    They recently started having a "Safety Quality" class that everyone is required to attend. The class is broke down into modules or sections. One of those sections is titled "Injured at Work". When this module begins, there is a notice that comes up on the screen. I can't recall the exact wording but basically it states that if you were injured at work and currently have a lawsuit against Norfolk Southern that you need to leave the room at this time due to the fact that the law doesn't allow for any correspondence between the Carrier (claims agent) and injured employee. That has to take place between the attorney and the Carrier or something similar to that. Again, I cannot remember the exact wording. The module continues to tell you how the claims agents are there for you and they have two supposed injured employees that dealt with the claims agents and was happy with the results. FELA lawyers are bad; claims agents are good kinda stuff. Made you want to stick your finger down your throat type thing. Then they actually brought claims agents into the room to speak to the employees.

    My question is this; how can the Carrier make a person leave the room and expose the fact that this person has a suit against the Carrier to everyone in the room. Is this not a form of harassment and intimidation?

    Your thoughts on this?

    Thanks,

    Hornblower

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by FELA FELLA View Post
    "[B]
    Finally, I apologize if my answer is a bit vague or not exact, however, I would like to know exactly what the harassment has been for posting on Yardlimits??? If it is constant and significant, our firm would like to take a stab at, perhaps in conjunction with a labor lawyer, suing the railroad to, at bare minimums, seek a TRO stopping the behavior.

    Steve Gordon
    FELA Claim Lawyer | Railroad Employee Injury Attorney | Railroad Worker Injury | Train Accident
    Thank you Steve. This is an issue that has arrived from time to time. I suppose if anyone has an issue, my advice would be to document any harassment and anything said by the individual, and more importantly, anything they have said in conjunction with YardLimits and any posts you have made. Steve Gordon has made it very clear that he has a open door policy and can be contacted by phone, PM's and email. I wouldn't hesitate to contact him and talk it over, giving him the specific facts about the harassment you are receiving and it might be beneficial to provide any posts, that you have made, that the individual that is harassing you about, if it's known.
    Railroad managers have been disciplined for harassing employees about posts they have made in the past. This may not always be the case, but it has happened. Remember what you post on here is open for everyone to read. Make sure that your posts are truthful and don't violate the carriers rules on divulging important company business. I'm sure we all know the difference. It will make the job of a attorney representing you for harassment, if it does occur, much easier.

    Northern

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X