 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Moreno v. County of San Joaquin2/4/2002
instead shows Moreno alone was responsible for his unacceptable behavior. There is some evidence Moreno's alcoholism might have been implicated in one or more of these incidents. Other evidence suggests the impending death of his stepfather and work stress provoked these incidents. Whatever the reason, Moreno cannot blame the County because he failed to maintain control of his drinking, his emotions, and his personal circumstances.
The County responded appropriately to each incident of misconduct. Moreno's conduct on all three occasions prompted, even required, the County's response. Each incident was well documented. After every occurrence, the correct procedural steps were followed to address the situation according to Juvenile Hall policy. There is no sign of a cover-up by the County or an attempt to overstate Moreno's misconduct. Moreno, therefore, fails to provide substantial evidence that the County's reasons for his termination were pretextual.
(2) The County's pretextual motives for Moreno's termination are evident from the County's failure to deny the fact his prior supervisors told him to "pull some weeds" and called him a "mother fucker" in front of minors.
The statements made by Moreno's prior supervisors were isolated remarks. Stray remarks, when unrelated to the decisional process, are insufficient to demonstrate an employer relied on illegitimate criteria. (Smith v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co. (7th Cir. 1989) 875 F.2d 1325, 1330.) These isolated comments, furthermore, do not change the fact Moreno engaged in three instances of misconduct. For the reasons stated above, Moreno fails to prove the County's reasons for his termination, specifically, the three instances of misconduct, were unreasonable or incredible, even if his former supervisors made a few stray comments.
(3) The incidents of misconduct relied on by the County to terminate Moreno were trivial and therefore demonstrate the County's animus toward him. The two incidents of insubordination only lasted a short time and, in all three situations, Moreno ultimately performed the task requested by his supervisor, such as moving his truck, assisting in processing the minors, and attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings.
The record shows each incident was not trivial. During the phone call incident, Moreno failed to return from lunch and instead called his supervisor, Neubaum, and complained about his frustration with work. The police responded to Neubaum's concerned phone call and confiscated a gun from Moreno's home. Neubaum acted as any reasonable supervisor would, facing a phone call from a very frustrated employee who had a gun. Even if Neubaum overreacted to Moreno's frustration, the content of the phone conversations was not trivial.
It is also not trivial when an employee fails to return to work after a break. Such unplanned absences place a heavy burden on employers. Here, the County had no prior notice Moreno would not return from lunch. This required someone to cover the rest of Moreno's shift. He has never asserted otherwise. Such shift rearrangement is not trivial because it takes up management time and puts a strain on the other employees' work schedules.
We also do not find the other two incidents of misconduct trivial. During the parking lot incident, Moreno swore at his supervisor when asked to move his car. Moreno later apologized for his behavior, suggesting even he did not believe the matter was trivial. During the intake incident, Moreno again used profanity in response to his supervisor's request. Such examples of overt hostility and insubordination are not trivial.
Moreno tries to argue the length of time of each incident
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 California Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|