posted on October 23, 2001 04:10:25 PM new
I know it's just a technicality, but if it was the entire mailroom staff, wonder why they weren't "laid off"?
posted on October 23, 2001 04:56:07 PM new
Why on earth would they be lying? Unless it was *their* staff that has been sending anthrax-letters hither and yon, which is extremely unlikely.
BTW "laying off" is just a prettier, PC way of saying "fired."
posted on October 23, 2001 05:47:43 PM new
They were lying because they didn't want to publicly announce that the lay offs were done to prevent any further liability from mailroom problems like anthrax.
Time Inc. will bear no liability for harm that comes to an employee of a contracted mailroom service.
posted on October 23, 2001 06:24:33 PM newTime Inc. will bear no liability for harm that comes to an employee of a contracted mailroom service. On the Nosey!!!
bunnicula BTW "laying off" is just a prettier, PC way of saying "fired." I always thought that there was a difference. Laid off = able to collect unemployment benefits, no fault of the employee VS Fired = unable to collect unemployment, employee at fault.
posted on October 23, 2001 06:48:10 PM newThey were lying because they didn't want to publicly announce that the lay offs were done to prevent any further liability from mailroom problems like anthrax.
Can employees sue an employer where the mail room becomes contamimated with anthrax when it unknowningly comes into an office? I could see suits being filed if an employer knew about it and didn't warn/protect the employees. But I'd be surprised if a jury would hold the employer liable if they had no knowledge of same.
On the subject of layoffs/firings all companies who feel they can make any cost cutting measures will do so. Outsourcing is one of them. My husbands company outsourced many of the functions that a smaller company would handle themselves.
It could be they are doing so looking at the additional costs of trying to protect the employees (or feeling they can't protect them) and the cost of decontaminating the offices if it should become necessary. But it could also be that their profits are down and this is one way to cut costs.
posted on October 23, 2001 07:08:24 PM new
This is just an attempt to shift blame that any good lawyer will walk right around. In fact if anything it opens them up to increased liability because they have abdicated the control of the mail just as it becomes a critical concern. You can't evade responsibility for your airplanes being airworthy by hiring out the maintenance. And you can't be free to design unsafe cars by subcontracting out subassembly design. You still end up being responsible for overseeing your hirelings to provide safety for your customers and workers.
They are fooling themselves to think any different. This just increases the legal costs for the whole system. - Just what we need!
posted on October 23, 2001 07:53:09 PM new
Time Inc. would have no liability for contracted mailroom employees.
Time Inc. now has liability for any medical disability or missed work claims by the former mailroom employees. Any and all medical claims arising out of the mailroom anthrax contamination, including psychological harm, is on Time Inc's dime.
A company can greatly decrease liability exposure by contracting tasks out. By law, the contracting company has no direct control over contracted employees, that is part of the definition of how you determine if a worker is a contractor or an employee.
Shifting responsibility for Boo Boo's to sub contractors happens in court rooms every day. Look at the Ford tire case. Had Ford made the tires themselves rather than contracting them out, they would have had to pay all the damages or settlement. Depending on the specific facts, for instance reckless or intentional acts, liability can be completely shifted to contractors.
posted on October 23, 2001 07:55:41 PM newrancher24 - that is exactly what I thought. It seems to be with an entire crew being outright "fired" with no prior warning would leave TIME open to a slew of wrongful discharge lawsuits.
On the other hand, "laying off" the entire mailroom staff would seem more acceptable if they were, indeed, outsourcing.
posted on October 23, 2001 08:40:36 PM new
Reamond - I appreciate the answer.
I, too, hope these workers were layed off, so they will be eligible for benefits. (I mean, rather than being fired). I read that over 190,000 people in the US were laid off last month alone. Hope this trend reverses itself....somehow. Now with all the issue of the WTC, Pentagon and anthrax, the war/conflict, etc. the money is flying out the window and there seems no end in sight. I'm beginning to understand some of the issues our parents had to deal with during WW11.
posted on October 23, 2001 08:46:40 PM new
Shifting blame really isn't an option anymore. Someone suing over an anthrax incident could/would sue not only the contracted mail dispersal company, but also Time, Inc., the manufacturer of the envelopes and the company that made the trucks that delivered the mail. And have a good chance of winning...
posted on October 23, 2001 08:57:00 PM newRancher24: There is "laying off" due to lack of work, and there is "firing". In the case of being "fired" you can still claim unemployment benefits as long as you weren't fired for "work-related misconduct."
Edited to say: in Time, Inc.'s case, the mail room employees are really being "fired" and not "layed off" because it certainly isn't due to lack of work that they're being let go.
[ edited by bunnicula on Oct 23, 2001 08:58 PM ]
posted on October 23, 2001 09:03:21 PM new
Actually, WWII was a little better economically in that jobs became plentiful.
However, the economic costs for the terrorist attacks are far from over.
More capital costs and lost productivity are still in the pipe line.
As example, the U.S. Postal Service. The costs for gloves and face masks for over 1/2 a million or more employees will be huge, then factor in the lost productivity in having employees mask and glove to do their jobs, handling and maintaining inventory of masks and gloves and disposing of them, the costs and lost man hours are very large for these tasks. This doesn't include shut downs from "powder" being found in the work place.
Add to these costs the possibility that the equipment and/or buildings may have to be condemned because they can not be decontaminated to any degree of certainty, and you have the beginnings of a financial disaster.
Added to all of this is the real possibility that more anthrax letters will be mailed, contaminating more buildings and people.
This is just for the anthrax. Other security measures airports and other targets must be added in too. I read that the company that makes artificial sweetner now has armed guards posted at its packaging facility and no longer mails free samples.
The economic ripples we see now will soon enough turn into economic waves felt around the world.
