Termination lawful or not

[kozara]

Hello to all
I am posting this issuee for my mother in law. Let me start with little background first. She started her employment with small electronics company 8 years ago. She was their first hire. Since then they grew and now they have over 50 workes. All these years my mother in law was outstanding worker and was recognized for her work ethics and efforts. Few months back, she was diagnosed with Carpal Tunnel and she had surgery on her left arm. She was off for a 6 weeks,and then she started to work half days, then 5 hours/day, then 6 hours/day. Just yesterday, she and other few employees have been called to meeting where they were informed that company lost project and that they have to lay them off. Nothing was mentioned about possiblity of returning to work. My mother in law is 61 and half year old. and she is still in need of medical care, since her hand is not completely healed.Finding another employment with set of medical benefits is very unlikely.
My question is does she has any legal grounds to sue company since she did not do anything wrong but fell sick for the first time after years of tireless service for company good.

Your hellp is deeply appreciated.

kozara

[vickinat]

Hello and welcome to the forum. If you could please put the state into your profile, it will help us provide more accurate answers. Each state has differant rules,laws and statues.

More info is also needed, such as did your mother-in-law report this as a W/C injury? Was a claim filed, and if so was it accepted or denied? Is W/C paying her medical bills and wage loss?

There are many knowlegable and understanding people on this forum, I'm sure someone will be along with better answers soon. Please give us the above info to help you better.

Take care
Vickie

[Bad Boy Bad Boy]

Not illegal at all. This is a Lay-off, and they didn't single just her out. Her work comp claim is still active during the lay-off time.

[kozara]

Bad Boy Bad Boy Wrote:Not illegal at all. This is a Lay-off, and they didn't single just her out. Her work comp claim is still active during the lay-off time.

Thank you for timely response. Does she needs than to apply for unemployment benefits or workers compensation will cover it.

Thanks again,

kozara

[kozara]

vickinat Wrote:Hello and welcome to the forum. If you could please put the state into your profile, it will help us provide more accurate answers. Each state has differant rules,laws and statues.

More info is also needed, such as did your mother-in-law report this as a W/C injury? Was a claim filed, and if so was it accepted or denied? Is W/C paying her medical bills and wage loss?

There are many knowlegable and understanding people on this forum, I'm sure someone will be along with better answers soon. Please give us the above info to help you better.

Take care
Vickie

Thank you kindly for prompt response.
My mother in law lives in Vermont. Yes, this was W/C injury and W/C was paying her medical bill and wage loss.

Thanks again,

kozara

[Bad Boy Bad Boy]

I would say apply for Unemploment, do to the fact she was working.

[stiffnecked]

Maybe. If she was only working part-time due to the injury she may still be eligible for some wage-loss benefits.

[vickinat]

If her W/C case hasn't been closed yet, they should continue paying her medical bills, even if she is layed off.
Keep us posted.
Vickie

[sparkey]

You would think that they would of known she was so close to retirement that they would let her finish it out and lay off someone else. I am so sorry to hear she was singled out in the dismisal of some employees. Maybe she can do what why father in law does. He delivers for Meals on wheels and goes to peoples homes to deliver food that cannot get out an about. He loves it. Just a thought, cause even walmart hires people and she could work till retirement.

[JerryC]

Some things we learned from our attorney when Jerry was fired/"laid off" (although it was only him not a general lay off) Depending on your state laws it is generally considered legal especially since this was a loss of funding lay off.

We are in AZ, so it may be slightly different, unemployment is taxabl income, WC isn't so going with the WC as a first option is probably better, it is still based on active job searching so that isn't different, ust the taxable part.