On The Job: When Being Dependable and Honest Isn't Good Enough

Making the Case for the Applicane Protection Agreement

Here is what you are covered for with a protection agreement that you aren't covered for with your manufacturer's warranty.

1. $250.00/year for foold loss if your refrigerator or freezer fails.
2. Free service calls. ~$75.00 minium without PA
3. Power surges-if electronics get burned out, manufacter's generally do not cover.
4. Annual maintenence check free-of-charge, ~$140.00 without PA.
5. Continuation of PA on a new appliance,if covered appliance is replaced under PA agreement, through the end of the contract term.
6. Rental reimbursement if your appliance can't be repaired in a reasonable time.

If You Have Read Some of My Previous Work-Related Hubs on HubPages...........

Many of my readers who have read my previous Hubs on work-related issues are aware that I have spent the past, about 8, years working part-time for a major US retailer in their appliance department. It was a good job, and for the most part I enjoyed it and most of my co-workers there.

Last night (Dec 2, 2013) one half hour after I punched in, I was called into the main office and told that I was being terminated due to poor sales performance. I do not deny, that I have not meet the criteria required by this retailer for 10% of my total sales to be protection agreements. For me, it has always been a challenge to meet this goal. There are other issues at hand though, that make me wonder whether I should pursue legal action.

It is a well-known and established fact that certain former co-workers of mine come and go as they please, thus artificially inflating their sales-per-hour and their per-hour contribution. These people come in when it's busy, stay while it's busy, and leave when the business dies down. Since I have always come to work when I was supposed to, left I was supposed, taken meals when I was supposed to, and always did my best to provide good and knowlegeable customer service, in certain ways, I feel that I have been discriminated against.

In addition to the protection agreement requirement, sales people in the appliance area of this particular retailer are expected to have a certain percentage of their sales as installations, and to have a 50% attachment rate every month. (this means with 50% of appliances, an acessory needs to be sold along with it, such as a water inlet line for a dishwasher).

There is no doubt that a protection agreement is a good value for the money. See right-panel. But, when a protection agreement for 5 years sometimes is half the cost of the covered appliance, it makes it difficult to justify the expense to the customer.

Is This a Case of Justifiable Termination?

In my nearly 8 years of employment with this retailer, I have never not showed up for work when I was scheduled and on those occassions when I have called out sick, I have provided a doctor's excuse. I have never stolen from the company, never lied to my employer or to a customer. I have never yelled at a customer, nor told a customer they were wrong (although, I have felt like it at times.)

I feel that I have been wronged, not only because of my former co-workers who come and go as they please, but also because other emplyees who have not met the high-ticket performance criteria that this retailer has extablihed, instead of being terminated, were offered jobs in other departments throughout the store.

Pennsylvania Employment Law

Generally, an employer ‘may discharge an employee with or without cause, at pleasure, unless restrained by some contract.’ (Pennsylvania courts have recognized for over a century that an employer may terminate an employee for any reason absent contractual provision to the contrary). In this jurisdiction, “the law has taken for granted the power of either party to terminate an employment relationship for any or no reason.” Courts are reluctant to allow exclusions to the employment-at-will doctrine; exceptions are recognized only in narrowly-confined circumstances where a clear public policy is implicated. Source: http://www.wolfbaldwin.com/Articles/Wrongful-Discharge.shtml

Although, it would seem that I don't have much recourse from a legal standpoint, other than on the possible grounds of discrimnation, I would like to hear the opinions of my readers. Please submit your comments and tell me what your thoughs are on this? Fortunately, for me, having a part-time job is not a matter of necessity any more, but still havng the extra cash to help with expenses was nice, because I didn't have to ask my wife to contribute any of her money to our monthly expenses.

"Abercrombie CEO Mike Jeffries said the company hires good-looking people to attract good-looking customers."

Source: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/france/130725/france-abercrombie-fitch-investigated-employment-discrimination

Even though, I believe my situation is borderline discrimination, here is what I believe is a case of blatant discrimination. The practice of hiring good looking people in order to attract good looking customers, because an employer doesn't want less-than-desirable people wearing their clothes is just plain absurdity. I certainly believe this case, as well as discrimation based on race, gender preference, religion, or nationality, warrants some legal action to set Mr. Jeffries down a path of true "equal opportunity employment."

Visit http://dumbassgazette.com (for mature audiences over 18) for more on this.

On Contacting Legal Representation

I decied today that it would be in my best interest to contact a legal representative to determine if there is any basis for a discrimination case. As of this writing, I have not yet heard back from them as to whether or not the feel I have any case.

If they say I do, then hopefully, a quick e-mail to the management in power letting them know of my intention to take legal action, may, I hope, result in a quick resolution, and the ability, at least to return to my part-time job in a different capacity. If, they say that I don't have a case, then hopefully, I can find some interesting part-time employment that will be equally as well as my previous part-time employment did.

My PA sales performance was admittedly below the company's minimum standard guidelines; however, other employees in the same situation were offered other jobs within the same store. The question is, does this constitute some type of employment discrimination that can be upheld by our nation's employment discrimination laws?

Because Pennsylvania is an "employment at will" state, making any case for employment discrimination is difficult, unless it is one which is blatantly obvious, such as race discrimination. When all is said and done, I guess "The Answer My Friend is Blowin' in the Wind." Source: Peter, Paul, and Mary