Man assaulted by police officers is then fired by Children's Hospital

[Panacea]

We've had a lot of threads about outrageous police conduct, cops beating people or shooting people for no good reason.

Well, someone at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia decided that just wasn't enough and had to add fuel to the fire.

Najee Rivera ran a stop sign on a motor scooter and ran from the police in Philadelphia.

The cops, instead of cutting him off, ran him off the fucking road!!

But it gets better. The cops then throw him against a wall, hitting him with their batons, and then throw him to the ground to hit him some more. They fracture his right orbit and he gets multiple stitches.

But wait. There's more.

The cops then claim Rivera resisted arrest and assaulted the officers with his "elbows."

The whole sordid story came to light when his girlfriend, not believing the cops story, went to the neighborhood where this happened, and found a surveillance video showing what really happened. It has audio. You can hear him screaming the whole time. At no time does he resist the officers. It's chilling to watch.

The Philadelphia PD, to their credit, arrest the two officers when the video comes to light.

Mr. Rivera worked at Children's Hospital when this happened. He'd just started his job. They fire him for missing 3 days of work because of his injuries: 3 months after the whole thing happened.

He started a Change.org petition to get his job back. You can find it here: https://www.change.org/p/children-s-...e-najee-rivera

[Andara Bledin]

Um... Isn't firing someone for being injured a violation of the FMLA?

And, yay for the cops being brought up on charges for unwarranted assault.

Although I find it interesting that one of the officers was cleared of the same thing a couple of years back, despite the suspect in that case not only being cleared of all charges but getting a settlement of over $100,000.

[TheHuckster]

Um... Isn't firing someone for being injured a violation of the FMLA?

Possibly not if you are in a probationary period. The details of who is covered and who is not (e.g. if he had 12 months of Federal service prior) gets a little hairy, but it's not a slam dunk if he's on probation.

This feels like one of those cases where the employer doesn't want him for whatever reason (likely unjustified) and is simply using this as an easy excuse. If this is all there is to the story, I hope he gets his job back.

[Greenday]

Um... Isn't firing someone for being injured a violation of the FMLA?

No. I actually just discussed this with my sister the other day as she does HR work. Most places actually can fire you at will within a short time frame of being hired. It's messed up, but it makes sense. He just didn't get fired for the reasons this rule is in place.

You'd think CHOP of all places would be more compassionate about this kind of thing.

[Kheldarson]

This feels like one of those cases where the employer doesn't want him for whatever reason (likely unjustified) and is simply using this as an easy excuse. If this is all there is to the story, I hope he gets his job back.

Probably don't want him for all the attention the incident brought. Only now it's brought more.

[KabeRinnaul]

Probably don't want him for all the attention the incident brought. Only now it's brought more.

One day, companies will understand the Streisand Effect. One day.

[s_stabeler]

I'm HOPING this was an overzealous manager that, on seeing that a newly-started employee already had 3 sick days, decided it meant the employee was unreliable. ( since that still sucks, but it's at leats just the employer being a bit sucky over attendance- nand quite a few eployers will look closer at sick leave when someoe's juts started) because if he was fired from his job for getting beaten up by the police, then whoever took the decision to fire him- or, if it's an actual policy, whoever drew up the policy TOO- needs to be fired.

[drunkenwildmage]

I'm thinking it's a technicality, the reason he got fired. If he's in probational period, then they might have something that says 'you can only call of 2 days while on probation', and regardless if they wanted to or, not, they fired him after the 3rd day because it was written policy. You could say that, that someone in the hospital has the authority to over right the policy and I'm guessing at some point in the ladder, someone does, *but* that can open up another can of warms. In regarding all the people who do get let go because of it. They could leave hospital open to lawsuits from the fire people saying that their termination was unjustified because they don't follow policy 100% of the time, and this guy didn't loose his job after the 3rd call off, so "I shouldn't have' either.

[Panacea]

Um... Isn't firing someone for being injured a violation of the FMLA?

He wasn't on FMLA. He went to work the day after the assault and was sent home and told to stay home by his employer. FMLA doesn't apply.

Then he came back, got to the end of his 90 days and THEN they fire him . . . for the three days THEY told him to stay home for.

That's the part that is so unjustified about this. At will doesn't require a reason for firing, but they gave him a bogus one, so they exposed themselves to litigation because the reason is so obviously false and unjustified.

I'm HOPING this was an overzealous manager that, on seeing that a newly-started employee already had 3 sick days, decided it meant the employee was unreliable. ( since that still sucks, but it's at leats just the employer being a bit sucky over attendance- nand quite a few eployers will look closer at sick leave when someoe's juts started) because if he was fired from his job for getting beaten up by the police, then whoever took the decision to fire him- or, if it's an actual policy, whoever drew up the policy TOO- needs to be fired.

Well, the employee tried to go back to work and they wouldn't allow him to work, so I can't see how they can claim he's unreliable.

[HYHYBT]

I could almost see their firing him for poor judgment in coming to work all beat up and *having* to be sent home, rather than calling out in the first place. Almost.

[Panacea]

I could almost see their firing him for poor judgment in coming to work all beat up and *having* to be sent home, rather than calling out in the first place. Almost.

Well, I can see CHOP's not wanting to put someone so badly beaten in front of kids and their families. That does make sense.

However, the solution is not to send the man home, but to find him other work to do until he heals up enough.

[Peppergirl]

Then again, some places put the fear of god into their newly-hired employees with regard to calling in during the probationary period. He was really in a no-win situation. And had reason to be wary, clearly.