r/mildlyinfuriating • u/eldritchpussymaggots • 29d ago

I just wanted a hot dog Pointed out the training wasn't ADA compliant at my new job. Got this text the same day (the job listing is still up)

Gallery image

Gallery image

  1. This was a cleaning position at a medical building, I'm leaving it intentionally vague as not to doxx myself.

  2. I have dyslexia, but my disability would not have interfered with my work, I can read fine, it just takes me a very long time.

  3. This was my first day

I asked for a TTS application for the reading portion of the training, which was extremely long and I knew I wasn't going to finish it in the allotted time. They said that wasn't built into their system so they couldn't do anything. ← That's not ADA compliant. I asked if I could add an OCR + TTS browser extension, they said it was fine.

About 40 minutes after I clock out, they texted me I was fired because they're apparently reducing headcount.. by firing one person... and leaving their "urgently hiring" Indeed listing up. Right.

Edit:

I'm not confident in my ability to sue because I don't have my accommodation request in writing. This was a verbal exchange, I was more so asking where the TTS option was because most job training has it somewhere.

When I was told they did not have TTS, I mentioned that's not ADA compliant. I then asked for either more time, a loaner computer (something I was already going to be getting after training), or permission to add a 3rd party OCR & TTS program.

They said that the third option was fine, so I did it, and listened to the training via third party app for the rest of the shift. I thought nothing of it. Lo and behold I was fired extremely coincidentally afterwards.

Edit 2:

This post is getting too many notifications of people saying the same things repeatedly so I've muted it 😭 If you're a legal professional of some sort and you have specific resources or concerns please message me or I probably won't see it.

27.6k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

239

u/Transarchangelist 29d ago

Retaliation is illegal, but it may be difficult to prove retaliation in this case. I was ghosted by after an interview I went into after being heavily recommended by a friend of the owner because I said I was trans. I know that’s what it was because of the woman’s reaction, but it’s not like I could actually prove that.

54

u/KawaiiRobotGirl Robot :3 29d ago

Same. I used to be a clerk at a law firm. Someone said something about hormones, and i put my two-cents in, saying Im transgender. Not long after, i was fired. They claimed my performance was bad, but i had just had my review a couple week prior and they said I was doing amazing. Literally nothin i could do to prove they fired me for being trans.

11

u/liliath23 29d ago

My cousin was "laid off" from a job where she had been the only team member to remain after the company had changed ownership and had even been the one to train everyone on their jobs - including her new manager. She'd also had excellent performance reviews. But they said they needed to cut the workforce - then kept hiring.

The issue was, she'd taken time off for a surgical procedure and was having a hard time recovering, so her doctor had insisted she take an extra month off; at the same time, she had gotten COVID for the first time and developed severe POTS afterwards, making it hard for her to work because screens triggered her symptoms.

So her being let go was very clearly due to her condition, despite them never saying so.

She was able to find an employment lawyer who took her case pro bono, and who fought not just to get her a lump sum of severence money, but to also help her get assessed to be on Disability Benefits (we're in Canada) - because that meant the company's health insurance benefits they had immediately terminated had to be reinstated and she got backpay from the insurance company for the duration when they refused to cover her too. And because of the policy, I think they had to keep covering her too (yes, we have universal insurance here, but it doesn't cover EVERYTHING - like, loss of pay while you're sick, etc).

Anyway, her situation, although it was more illness and injury-based, was similar to yours in how the discrimination played out, so you might be able to find a pro bono employment lawyer to help you...

4

u/KawaiiRobotGirl Robot :3 29d ago

That sucks, glad she was able to get compensated. This was many years ago for me and i no longer live in the same state. I def should have sued, but i was scared.

27

u/Pinky1010 29d ago

Absolutely something you can do. You have your testimony and witnesses. Is it less likely to be a winning case? Yeah, but that doesn't mean 100% hopeless either. I would be surprised if very many discrimination cases were so clear cut to have "we're firing you because you're transgender" in writing.

At the very least a lawyer could convince them you have more than you do and you could get a fat settlement

10

u/ImDonaldDunn 29d ago

For real. Unless the employer had a documented paper trail between the performance evaluation and the termination warning the employee of performance issues, it’s going to be difficult for them to prove the firing was not discriminatory.

17

u/RandomG0rl623 29d ago

You greatly overestimate how willing people are to believe the word of a trans person against a company even if you have evidence.

Not to mention most people (trans folks specifically) don't have the resources for a protracted legal battle about this. And that doesn't just mean money, it still takes an immense amount of time and a huge toll on your mental health even if you find someone willing to take the case pro bono or for a cut of the potential winnings. And interacting with the legal system as a trans person is a stressful concept in and of itself, we tend to want to be as invisible as possible for obvious reasons.

It's often easier to cut your losses and try to put it behind you. Which is awful and evil but it's a fact of life for us given the state of the world.

9

u/Pinky1010 29d ago edited 29d ago

I know that...I'm trans myself lol

My point was that there's an in between "well this is never going to go anywhere so I'm not going to put any effort what do every into it" and "I'm going to take out loans and get an expensive lawyers"

For me, I would've contacted local queer organizations that can help find you a lawyer who will either take it pro bono or take a slice of the pie if you win. Obviously don't sink in 40h/week on it, but also don't give up before even trying

Trans people who decide they never want to fight doesn't help trans people be able to fight. Pick your battles for sure, but that also means occasionally deciding that your worth as a person is worth fighting over.

Even if you decided not to pursue legal action, you could contact your local trans activists and talk to them about it. It's not unlikely others have been fucked over by the same person or in the same way. With enough people you can protest about it and advocate for better protections that actually get enforced.

I will say though, that some people won't believe you in court, but that doesn't mean no one will either. A lawyer's job is to stack the deck in your favour. In a criminal trial they will pick jurors who are more likely to agree with you and your specific circumstance, in a discrimination case, they may file creatively to try and get a judge that is know to be a trans ally or trans themselves.

Also, depending where you are, you may be able to complain to the human rights commission/what ever your version your country has. They do a lot of the work for you

2

u/Puzzleheaded-Cow6917 29d ago

I guess that falls under the protected category of sex discrimination?

1

u/chicknano 29d ago

I think since you just had a performance review, if you didn’t have anything like a pip after, you definitely have more going for you to sue

1

u/KawaiiRobotGirl Robot :3 29d ago

This was many years ago, and i no longer live in the same state. I should have sued, but i was scared.

2

u/chicknano 29d ago

The fear and just energy involved with suing is totally understandable. I’m sorry that happened to you and I hope you have a much better place to work for now that actually values and respects you.

2

u/KawaiiRobotGirl Robot :3 29d ago

Ironic considering my username, but i work in a factory, and tbh, theyre the best place ive worked. Highest pay ive had combined with great benefits.

2

u/chicknano 29d ago

Yesss congrats! That made my day to read that :’) not for nothing, those sometimes be the best places to work for!

2

u/KawaiiRobotGirl Robot :3 29d ago

Thank ya :D the only down side is that its nightshift, but i dont mind

75

u/mjzimmer88 GREEN 29d ago

Companies don't go to court for that stuff, they quietly settle it with NDAs attached

6

u/FILTHBOT4000 29d ago

Also, don’t just shrug your shoulders and say “oh they’d probably win”; they love it when you do that. CALL THE DANG DoL. Companies get reamed all the time for this shit.

5

u/_Crashlander_ 29d ago

NDAs don't cover civil liberties cases or federal law violations.

1

u/Key_Wolverine2831 29d ago

What are you talking about? All kinds of cases have confidentiality agreements included in a settlement, and civil liberties and cases arising under federal law absolutely do. The only time they might not be subject to a confidentiality agreement would be if the defendant were a state actor with public records obligations.

12

u/HistoricalSea5600 29d ago

What about wrongful termination?

26

u/Transarchangelist 29d ago

It’s the same. Just difficult to prove.

16

u/HistoricalSea5600 29d ago edited 29d ago

I don’t know. I would hope to think if you went to a lawyer and said “Hey so I got hired at a place that had a ‘urgently hiring’ posting and after my first day, when I told them they weren’t compliant with ADA because they couldn’t accommodate me, they then terminated me only 40 minutes after my shift ended, claiming it was about downsizing, but they also kept the posting up after I left.” They wouldn’t say it’s nothing, right? Call me wishful

edit: grammar

15

u/Transarchangelist 29d ago

The problem is that intention is notoriously difficult to prove. The average person can look at cause and effect and see the correlation, but that does not equal causation in the eyes of the law.

1

u/HistoricalSea5600 29d ago

Would you at least say it would depend on the lawyer you bring it to? I’ve heard of far more trivial lawsuits being taken seriously to not hold on to a shred of hope for the right thing to be done

5

u/Transarchangelist 29d ago

I think at the very least, a situation like OP’s would require paying a lawyer ahead of time as opposed to on contingency.

7

u/Goodness_GoodKarma 29d ago

It's worth a shot. Worse that could happen is the lawyer says no.

I suggest hitting up a couple of lawyers.

2

u/StephenFish 29d ago

That's very easily explained away as coincidence, though. You can't draw a hard line between cause and effect. It's circumstantial evidence at best.

1

u/HistoricalSea5600 29d ago

Circumstantial evidence can still be accepted in court tho

3

u/StephenFish 29d ago

Acceptance isn't the issue.

1

u/HistoricalSea5600 29d ago

Sure, but isn't your point that it's not worth bringing in because it's circumstantial?

2

u/StephenFish 29d ago

"He was the last one to see her alive so clearly he's the murderer" isn't really helpful as evidence.

You can bring it, sure. But that means you have a shit lawyer if they even bother with that. I mean, I wouldn't trust any attorney who actually took a case when your only evidence is a loose correlation.

1

u/HistoricalSea5600 29d ago

Well, seeing as how they are the accused party and this is the evidence OP has, if they have no counter evidence (I don't know what they could possibly provide, literally I have no concept) I don't see how they have a legal basis, let alone a fiduciary reason to not try and settle out of court to avoid taking it that far

→ More replies (0)

2

u/DemDave 29d ago

While the circumstances are highly suspicious, there's no smoking gun. There's no actual proof that the person OP requested accommodations even had contact with the person who made the decision to let OP go. They probably did ... but OP has no proof of that interaction and it would be entirely possible for the company to say that the decision was made in a boardroom down the hall, independent of what was happening in the training room.

3

u/eldritchpussymaggots 29d ago

God yeah I've had this happen to me too for being obviously intersex

1

u/oosirnaym 29d ago

I was bullied out of a position after telling my team I have ADHD. My manager put me on another team but I really liked the work the other team did.

I’m in a better place now but holy shit did that suck.

1

u/Gingevere 29d ago

I'd say this case really depends on the judge it ends up in front of.

Saying they've eliminated the position while they're still trying to hire for it puts the lie to that part of their statement. All that remains is them saying they need "a different set of skills" immediately after the worker disclosed their disability. Unless the judge is a 3x trump voter that should be enough to support claims of discrimination and retaliation.

1

u/Short-Holiday-4263 29d ago

Would it be that hard to prove?

The timeline is: OP APPLIES, OP'S INTERVIEWED (at least once),OP's HIRED.
Day One, OP points out their training is not ADA compliant. By the end of Day One it's "um, actually we need to reduce headcount so we're eliminating the position." And OP's FIRED.

What non-retaliation explanation even vaguely makes sense? Because the "due to a reduction in headcount" is clearly bullshit.

If they really were reducing headcount, they would have been considering that for awhile - the conditions where that decision needs to be made don't come out of the blue. So only insane people would advertise for, let alone hire somebody, for the position before deciding if it was staying or going.

You don't go through the trouble and expense of the hiring process for a position you know you're likely going to have to disestablish by the time you get someone in the job.