My wife is a Director of Nursing for a very large hospital in Louisville. She was being kind of singled out by her CNO for what she believes to be no reason. She filed a complaint and it was investigated, the investigating HR individual came up with a 40 page report outlining several items that were not favorable to the CNO. When a final decision came down they called my wife in and said she would have to either apply for a position within the company (at another location and different CNO or take a 3 month severance package) that they would make sure she was hired and not loose her Director privilege's even though it wasn't a Director position. They also moved the HR individual to another location for fear of retaliation.
My wife meet with the CNO of the new location and she accepted the position, the CNO told her to ask for more money and to get in writing that her privileges' would stay the same, she has been reaching out to the head of HR of the entire corporation (the same individual who gave her the 2 options) with her request and now he is "ghosting" her. She went to the HR department of the new location and ask what was in her file as she was still unsure why she was the one who had to make the change as nothing came about for the CNO of her first place. The HR person told her there was absolutely nothing it was clean with zero write up or conversations documented.
The HR individual also handed her a piece of paper with an attorney's name on it and said she should call and tell them her situation. We are not the suing type she just wants what is fair, but we feel like we are being pushing into this by the actions of the company. Any suggestions or advice would be appreciated. The protection of the CNO she complained about is crazy and no one can explain to her why she was singled out when there was nothing documented against her. There were several that spoke out against her when interviewed but later said they felt like they had to as they had to pick a side and it was clear what side was being pushed.
First, 3 months severance for what sounds like a top professional management position is low ball around here. 6 months to a year was pretty common if it prevented litigation. More will probably require a lawsuit. Hope you don’t need to negotiate it up, but even if it all blows up, DO. But if they have employment claim insurance (EPLI), once any cost exceeds the deductible, the insurer will play a large role in valuing the claim. (They never settle medical malpractice cases, but 95% of employment claims will settle eventually.)
Sorry she is having troubles. None of this has easy choices.
It will be hard for any employment lawyer to evaluate this without FIRST knowing what your wife’s complaints were about, and THEN making VERY informed and VERY careful decisions about if and how and when to act, and if and how and when to get the records she thinks exist. Many lawyers will want to just shoot first. Don’t let them. Get ADVICE before authorizing ACTION, even just a representation letter. Many employee lawyers like to just use a blowtorch in those letters, when a cup of coffee can sometimes be more effective. But all that is impacted by personalities and past history and internal favoritism and weather and which judge you might draw and … you get it. Many things that are hard to predict.
But once a lawyer writes a notice letter or a demand letter or even just an inquiry, human nature kicks in, and everybody gets suspicious and weird and hurt and angry and quiet and every motive gets questioned, from “saying good morning” to saying “let the lawyers talk - we shouldn’t” to “I need to potty.” Everybody starts to assume the worst intent about everything, even over the most innocent word. It is just very hard for even the most professional colleagues to keep “just working together normally” once asserted legal rights and legal defenses are open and on the table. Decide accordingly.
If there is time, baby steps and much thought is needed.
No insults intended here, just showing you the spectrum on both ends:
Retaliating against an employee for “exercising statutory rights” to report/complain about even “arguable illegal conduct by management” is a big legal deal, while an employee being a pain in the ass by complaining about unpopular but clearly legal management decisions keeps the ultimate legal “strength” with management (but does NOT guarantee management a legal victory - good judge/bad judge, good defense lawyer/bad defense lawyer, etc. can make even a weak a case a nightmare for management to deal with, and judges LOOOVE to force settlement discussion of ALL cases, good or bad.)
If your wife’s complaints were about alleged illegal practices (sex discrimination, illegal billings to insurers or patients, whatever) they could easily be “protected conduct” for which your wife could not be “retaliated against” and the “retaliation” would likely violate the statute at issue, or the public policy it represents. Typically, the courts consider being moved to a less desirable job position to be retaliatory, and frown “legally” on moving the whistleblower to protect the bad actor.
If it was just complaints about “bad manager/mean/exhibits morale-killing favoritism,” but nothing close to “illegal” then it’s most likely viewed as a personality dispute and the employer is more flexible in how to legally respond, and usually digs its legal heels in quicker and deeper.
There are a lot of bad and lazy plaintiff employer lawyers who tell their clients they have good cases, when they really have nuisance value cases. Really good employment lawyers won’t take those cases, but would like a good case against a deep pocket health care organization.
Other things to think about:
Good HR has policies that encourage employees to take their complaints to HR first so they get a shot to fix/prevent legal disputes, and if they are an empowered, experienced, corporate HR, with good employer legal advice, they will NOT WANT anyone to be negatively affected by ANY retaliation for bringing issues to HR. Even if the employee is wrong, good empowered HR folks want them to feel comfortable keeping it “in house” first. Companies are much better off when internal reporting/grievance procedures fix stuff, rather than cause lawsuits. But hard feelings and relationships sometimes produce defensive, angry managers who sometimes tell HR to STFU and toe a company line. That may be why HR said “call a lawyer.”
Also sounds like the “application” for a new job elsewhere may mean the movement is across formal corporate lines, not just another building, and her “old” company cannot or does not want to completely just tell the new one what to do - “honoring the corporate form.” They would see it as wise, not illegal.
Keeping old company problems out of new company personnel files might be part of that too. AND, they may have actually given discipline to the old boss, and nobody knows it because they don’t air one employee’s dirty laundry to other employee’s, and vice-versa.
If you have names of lawyers, send me a private message above, and if I know them I’ll tell what I think. IMO - if your wife wants to stay in this new job - that should impact your lawyer choice too. No flamethrower. If she wants a flamethrower anyway, I know a few.
