The fact that the old employer's first reaction is to sue (when no employment contract exists) tells me all I need to know about why those employees left in the first place.
Odd is that there is even case where one employer can order other one's choices through court. As soon as the people quit first employer, then they had nothing else to do with the first company. At will workers stil have some conditions on working, so there is still contract, but it just has the "at will" clause, but that is also wrong that if it is not suitable for employer, then they just change the conditions, but if it would be unsuitable for employee, then there is nothing to do. With hospitals there is some kind of employment contract still, even for liabiliy sake in case of mistakes done at work, so do not come with the talk that there is no employment contract. The "at will" is just condition in there that should allow employer to fire employee and employee to quit, but on currently that is kind of made void ... Well, not quite, because people quit, so they cannot work at first employer, but now they cannot start working for 2nd one because of that obscure restriction that judge approved. Restriction that basically ordered one company to follow order of another company.
@@zapazap How not so? Management clearly feels entitled to keep the workers otherwise they would have made counteroffers. What other acts of entitled management were these employees subject to?
@@jdgindustries2734 "At will" is a condition of their employment contract. All professionals operate under an employment contract that details the terms of their employment, benefits, etc.
Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it the wrong thing to do in this situation. There's a case here that the judge needs to hear and until the judge is able to hear it they asked that the main cruxt of their lawsuit not take effect until after the lawsuit. That's actually a very good thing, imagine being in a lawsuit with the town you live in because they want to bulldoze your house to build a park and you're trying to sue for that not happening. Without this mechanism you can't stop the town from bulldozing your house until after the lawsuit is settled.
UPDATE: Although the TRO should have never been issued, the Judge lifted the order the next day, and on Jan. 28, Theda Care dropped its entire loser lawsuit.
@@commonsenseisdeadin2024 funny thing.. A NDA is only valid while you are compensated for your silence. (hence most NDA's come with a lump sum payment.) A contract is only valid for your employment period. So no.. There should be no point at which a previous employer should have any control over your future employment. There are a few exceptions to that though. If you know proprietary information and join a competitor company. They can enforce a gag order about the processes and methods you used to use. (basically a NDA). But they can no longer block you working for other companies. (non-compete clauses are no longer valid.)
I honestly don't understand why a competent judge would even consider this injunction, let alone grant it. Injunctions are only intended for situations where there is a risk of irreparable harm if something is not prevented. One might potentially be able to argue there is irreparable harm if they don't continue working for the old company, but the injunction does not actually ensure that, and cannot legally require that, so it should be completely irrelevant. There is quite clearly no _irreparable_ harm inherent in them working for the new company vs, for example, finding some other job (or just staying home, if they can afford to). If the judge granted this injunction on the justification that there is irreparable harm if they don't continue working at the old company, and therefore the purpose of the restraining order is specifically to try to force them to continue working at that company (by denying them any other options), then the judge has effectively deliberately violated their 13th Amendment rights, just via a back-door method.
I wonder what the thought process was. Maybe something like this? … “Hey, let’s enhance our reputation as an employer by suing exiting employees. Yes, thats the kind of press that will help us in the long run …”.
He won't this is Mark McGinnis. He jailed a man for six months for rolling his eyes, and dropped F Bombs and insults from the bench. He's not know for his sense and reason.
Exactly. The judge should have laughed this out of the court and told hospital A that was losing these workers "Simple: Match the pay offered by the other hospital or get used to losing your workers!"
Soooo, basically they are suing for the right to have ownership of their employees. And the judicial system is like, yeah sure, we can do that. Great.😒
This might make sense on the surface, but then you have judges who can simply be forced to do things by people litigation them to death regardless it its warranted. The system is designed like this for a reason
@@mithicash1444 The system is highly corrupted and judges are allowed to legislate from the bench their political ideologies, opinions and whatever bribes they are accepting. This system is eviscerating the constitution, the very law of the land it was designed to protect in the first place. This is completely unacceptable and these tyrannical judges need to be prosecuted for treason.
The old employer should be sued for damages, including lost wages. Maybe even criminal malice. " This is clearly vindictive ". The old hospitals attorney should have told his client " the old employer " there is no grounds for this since they are not under contract. The judge needs a 90 day unpaid suspension for granting a frivolous injunction that is so damaging to many american families. The actions of this judge introduced a dangerous ideology of practice to use the law as a tool to control employees that are pursuing life, liberty, and happiness.
the whole team should move, and sue them for the cost of moving since they couldn't be employed in the state, as the former employer legally blocked future employment opportunities... get the media interested, watch the shit storm.. of how "at-will" means, at your employers will, not your will...
@@AshenTechDotCom Absolutely! At a prior employer we had both contract and full time employees. Often these FT employees were referred to as "permanent" but CA is an at will state and I would remind people that it's not a permanent role, just that it's a General Full Time role, they were still at will and nothing changed other than there was no longer a specific end date to their employment. (Plus bennies, it was a good change of course, but that's tangential to the point at hand). At this employer it was common that if you were at a certain level and might go to a competitor that you were kept on payroll for 3-6 months with no work (signed in contract) before you left the company. To me that's reasonably fair, "we don't want you going to a competitor immediately with recent detailed company knowledge, so we'll pay you off to wait."
Last I heard the lawyers at Ascension have told the workers to just come in and start their new jobs as normal on Monday and they'll handle the legal fallout, essentially calling the judge's bluff. Also there's a gofundme for the workers to give them enough money to outlast the hospital, raised almost 50K last I checked on it.
Sounds like injunction is illegal to me. They have no contract, they can quit and once they've quit they can work for who they like. There's literally no legal basis for the suit, so how the judge can grant an injunction to prevent someone taking up employment at a place of their choosing is beyond me
The only reason a group of employees all up and quit at once and all find work at the same place is if something awful is happening in that work culture. And by making the incredibly short sighted decision to further harm these employees by suing to prevent them from working, the hospital is begging to have its dirty laundry aired.
20 years ago someone in my state won the lottery and decided to divide their winnings up with their 19 co workers. They said that they would still have millions of dollars and that was plenty for anyone to have. So the entire staff of the company except the owner, his wife and son, all quit without notice the next day. This ended up putting the company out of business. The owner then sued the lottery winner and asked for an amount equal the what they gave away to each of their co workers. I was astonished that the judge allowed this to go to trial. It dragged on for about a year. The plaintiff had claimed that the lottery winner was disgruntled and gave the money away only because they wanted to put their former employer out of business not for the altruistic reason of generosity. The defense argued that nobody would give away 95% of their wealth just to get even with an employer they had a disagreement with. The jury found for the defendant, the lottery winner. During that entire year the lottery winner could not spend a cent of their winnings as the court ordered their assets frozen. Since the 19 co workers were not party to the case their assets were not in jeopardy so they were free to spend their money which in part they did by helping their very generous co worker/benefactor. Last I heard the business owner went bankrupt, lost everything they owned including their house. They ended up getting a divorce and he was working as a janitor somewhere. What I can't help but ask is what kind of horrible employer they must have been. I'm guessing that lottery winner would have included them had they been pleasant to work for.
I used to work at a hospital (in the IT department). At one point we were losing something like five developers a month, and the primary reason was that the non-profit hospital was paying much lower wages, and giving the reason, "We're a non-profit, so of course salaries are lower!" But the exodus was so extreme they finally had a new salary survey done, and surprise! We were all grossly underpaid. They did the right thing, and there was a massive salary adjustment. I was a tech writer there, and I got a $10K raise. The developers got something like $20K. (I did leave that job a year later for the software industry, and got an immediate $15K bump; at the hospital we were still on the lower end of the wage spectrum for writers).
Also money. Our competitors are paying up to 30% more for the same work. We have had record profits, but promotion and raise freezes for the past year. We also just hired 3 new executives from outside the company without internal promotion available. Horrible employer is probably paying horribly also.
@@nancykaminski8600 This happened to me last year at my Hospital IT department. We didn't leave all at once, I went 2nd and the rest trickled out after. But after about 10 people left they finally restructured the salary and promotion structure. Bad pay is a bad working condition. I used to be an underground miner. I got paid well and had good benefits because the good pay out ways the shitty working conditions.
The fact this was even entertained by a judge is insane. If I were the employees, I'd sue the original employer for wages lost while the injunction was in place. "Poaching" is only looked down on by employers who know they under pay their employees. It's called a "competitive offer" by everyone else.
I'm not sure they could sue for lost wages, because the option to go back to work is there (I'm assuming). They wouldn't lose wages if they agreed to go back to work. But again, they can't MAKE them, but they can easily say they exercised their choice not to work there. The whole thing seems like a huge violation of civil rights.
I've heard "poach" used non-negatively. If someone claims they poached an employee, they usually mean that they snagged a real prize from a competitor.
Exactly this. The attitude of the first hospital is fucking disgusting and I'm absolutely not surprised 7 people left at once if this is the way they treat their employees.
Health trust "A" should be sued by the state for not ensuring that they have a minimum staff on long term contract to ensure the smooth and safe running of their hospitals. The judge should be sued and disbarred for gross negligence.
This is the same judge that kept a guy in jail for 42 days and tried to fine him $5k for rolling his eyes. He was eventually overruled, but the guy still sat in jail a month and a half.
This judge is clearly violating their civil rights. Every lawyer for the health care workers should contact that bar association and file to have him disbarred.
The Barr can’t do a thing until the final judgment is given. Judges are protected by draconian laws while sitting on their cases. The protection only goes away after the cases are closed or moved.
@David Caudill Steve brought that up, it is not slavery because they are not forced to work, they are just essentially stopped from working at the new location. Theoretically (have to see the actual order from the judge) they could apply elsewhere and keep working until this is settled. That doesn't make it right, but it is not the same level as slavery.
It always bugged me that you're expected to give a 2 week notice when you're about to quit, but a company doesn't have to give you notice when they are going to fire you. One of the reasons why I never bothered giving a 2 week notice when I quit a place because the company doesn't care if they hurt me by firing me, why should I care if the company is hurt by me quitting.
The only reason to give notice is to hopefully still get a good reference for your next job. If you don't need that, 2 weeks notice is only a detriment to yourself.
This is why you NEVER tell your current employer where you are moving to if you are in an at-will state and do not have a contractual obligation, they are no need to know and it only hurts you by telling them.
Hospital administrator and hospital attorneys need to go back and read the definition of 'At-Will'... and that BOTH parties can break the employment at any time, without notice. Sayonara, hospital! Employers think they have all the control.
@@Marinealver so why doesn't such shit happen in "Liberal country's" people might be inspired by?!? I know of companies whose contract includes as much as 6 months "none competition" clauses and keep paying according transitional wages (mostly temp agencies, having a buyout price too).
@@Marinealver this has NOTHING to do with progressives and you are pathetic for dragging shit into it that has nothing to do with it... this is happening because of our health care system being a purely capitalist system that understaffs their facilities to make more money. Every other civil County treats their Healthcare as nessasy infrastructure like roads, bridges, schools... we are a joke! You are pathetic dragging a political group who is so insanely removed from the situation just because that is what you do every time something negative is going on now 🙄 just ridiculous 🙄
@@fionafiona1146 this is what these people do... they project everything they do onto their precived enemies... if we are racist we will use the racist accusation against others and pretend we are the victim, if we are responsible for the continued state of our Healthcare system being a capitalism/ for profit system that is not working for our people and not working for the Healthcare providers because they understaff the hospital and over work them to keep more money in our pockets we blame them for it, if we are not funding schools properly and screwing up our children's education we will turn it around on them, if we are indoctrinating children to our world view then we will accuse them of exactly that for exposing children to facts about history and reality... this is their entire new play... they are bullies who the second get the tiniest push back cry victim! 😢
yep they should all leave and dont say to where Wisconsin is a Right-to-Work States when i leave a job with a 2 week notice and they ask me where i plan on going i tell them none of your business
Those organizations usually have legal reps on retainer so they don't pay as much in fees as you think. At least not more than they do anyway. That is why they are more than happy to start dumb litigation.
I truly believe this case is about bullying. The hospital doesn't want these employees back. They want to make an example out of them. They are sending a message to all the other employees that still work for them, that the hospital has the power to make their life hell if they dare to try and leave. Really the hospital is acting like a psycho boyfriend.
This is a more than terrible precedent. This kind of thing could be used all the time to sanction an employee when they leave. We can't have this and an example has to made of the company executing this action before it spreads!
@@syntaksoftwaredevelopment4438 Yeah, if a competitor is offering better work conditions and 50% pay raise, and you aren't willing to match it? Sounds like tuff luck and dumb management (because clearly the other guy has it figured out if they can afford that and you can't). Only thing would be NDA's and non-compete agreements, but that doesn't mean they can keep you at slave wages or refuse to promote you while cutting off all other sources of income.
I’m a lawyer in Florida, which is also a “right to work” state where all employees are at will. This is an absurd ruling from the judge. In Florida, at a minimum, the hospital would’ve been required to post a bond in the amount of the worker’s salaries for an injunction - a temporary injunction is unconstitutional without one under the Florida state constitution. If I were the workers, I’d be countersuing for damages and arguing that the hospital violated their rights as at-will employees.
I'm late to this one (and understand that the TRO has been pulled), but I thought that part of the decision was based on the probability that the party making the application for the TRO would prevail in the actual lawsuit. Presumably, for that party to show that they could prevail they would have to have some legal argument, even if not completely developed, to present to the judge ruling on the TRO. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't remember hearing what that was. I'm not sure how their "concerns" about patient well-being made for a legal argument regarding at-will employment. Shouldn't the judge who issues the TRO have pressed them on this? Thoughts?
So who was the idiot judge that allowed the clearly unjustifiable, and therefore illegal injuction to block people from working? What penalties have they faced?
The fact that the judge upheld the ruling preventing them from going to their new job is absolutely insane. They can't "poach" employees. They can offer them more $. Capitalism.
@@youtubehatesfreedom1870 Last I head the new employer has told the workers "Look, just come in and start with us on Monday like normal, our legal team will take care of things." Basically calling the judge's bluff, which is great.
They weren’t really “poached” for money - I can all but guarantee it’s the management of the previous employer that has created this situation. “People don’t quit bad Jo’s, they quit bad management “
@@paulghignon4092 Of course it is. This is a case of corporate arrogance. If these employees were that critical, why were they "at will" in the first place? Greed!
God this case boils my blood. If i had a former employer try to slap me with a restraining order to stop me working for someone else, i'd catch a homicide charge the next day for sure.
I'd stand outside on the sidewalk with a bunch of signs explaining the entire situation, the entire time of the suit. Then when it's said and done I'd sue the employer for loss of wages. , damages, and mental damages as well.
And screw two week's notice. "Oh, you didn't give us two weeks notice"...." I literally just saw you walk Ted out the other day, where was his two week's notice?"
@@jemjones5675 damn right! I left two jobs without two weeks notice just recently. I did so because I watched both of of them fire people when they put in their two weeks. Just bam, fired. Gone. Walked out on the spot. I no longer believe in two week notices because 1. They treat you different when they know you are leaving. 2. They sure as hell don't give you a two week notice when they fire you for whatever reason.
This is a perfect example of why judges should not be Immune from all lawsuits. The court clearly overstepped their bounds here. I would not be surprised if the Judge was somehow linked to Thedacare.
1st Hospital: "If you leave it will cost lives b/c we won't get your help at this hospital." Also 1st Hospital: "We aren't gonna let you work b/c you may save lives somewhere else." Me: "I don't think this has to do with saving lives."
This is the result of corporate oligarchy... They literally think they OWN their employees like slaves. And the judge apparently is ok with that. In America. 🤯
If they are “at will” employees then the judge should have dismissed the lawsuit. There is no reasons to go through this. There must be a way to recall such judges.
No that's an intentional part of the judge system, something normal people have no say in so the abuses cannot be addressed except by another judge. No part of this legal system is for your benefit, assuming you're not a successful capitalist or other kind of power broker.
I think there may have been a slight misunderstanding in the beginning of this video-that at-will employees aren’t on contract. At-will employment DOES (and should) carry contracts, indicating such. Frequently, at-will employment comes w/ relatively complex sets of restrictions (not all of which would stand in court, of course). Some at-will employees, for instance, are asked to sign contracts and/or NDAs which may restrict their ability to seek employment with industry competitors. Again, not all of these would stand in court in the end, but employers are so sneaky that they’d throw in these clauses to make it hard for at-will employees to be truly “at will.”
I’m not an attorney but when I am notified of this on Monday morning at the hearing I’m serving the hospital a lawsuit for tortious interference of a contract and asking for damages plus punitive damages in a completely unrelated lawsuit and I’m asking 3 other employees to sign on to make it a class action….they like lawyer fees let’s just make it really expensive
The fact that the hospital filed suit is a core reason not to work there. If I googled an employer and saw they sued their employees, I would be moving on without applying.
Clearly this is ridiculous. I’m an RN and I’d sue. I would also bet money that if on the slim chance this case is successful, other hospitals will follow suit and hold all healthcare professionals hostage. It seems that would be the overall intent on a bigger scale to continue to pay shit pay and continue the abuse for patients and staff. Ps: it’s not the healthcare professionals responsibility to supply staff, it’s the facilities. The hospital is negligent entirely
when i have SEEN people i know leave and get other work because, one place was pushing mandates, the other was not, i can just see if this was an "at-will" state issue how they could have ended up blocked, the thing is... all of these people have worked the whole time, they have been exposed and are better protected then any "vaccine" will offer, according to every study thats come out... hell israels study showed 13x better from prior infection vs the "Vaccines" (immune modifiers to be more realistic about what they do/how they work..) i know a few were being shamed as "Anti-Vax" despite having all their other shots, just not ones that arent even fully approved, that they have seen some pretty nasty side effects from first hand treating the victims... after my reaction to the first 2 doses i refused to get more, my specialist actually agreed after i told him how much worse it made my health, and just as it was starting to get back to normal the 2nd dose..its been months and im still more inflamed then i have been in years... full body inflammation, that was under far far better control prior to the jab... i have always been more worried about the "Stupid Virus" as we started calling the rioting idiocy in portland, then i have been cv19... i have health issues, but they all stem from my immune system being on overdrive all the time, i rarely get ill, and when i do its not colds or flu's its.. food poisoning... as odd as that may sound... at 16 i quit getting the flu shot.. i have had the flu 1 time since, and im 43 as of last nov, and that time... it was like a bad cold... the rest of the family was down for over a week with the stomach flu... i was "ill" for 3 days, the 4th i woke up feeling better then i had in quite a while if a bit more easily fatigued, kept them taken care of till they were on the mend... even then... i just felt like i had a moderate cold at worst.. they were dying... with the number of times i have been exposed to cv19, im pretty sure, i already had the antibodies before i got the jab anyway... quite a few people i was in contact with over the year came down with cv19, if they would cover antibody testing via my insurance i have little doubt im protected by more then a jab... that i doubt did me any good at all...with how horrible it made me feel... oh the other hand.... i know a few people with serious health issues who genuinely needed to get the jab if only to wait for a mild varient like omicon that... funny enough they ALL GOT AROUND THANKSGIVING/XMAS... even the ones who were triple vaxxed and boosted to hell..infact they got sicker then the ones who had no jab at all... one of our friends was so scared by the media, she got 2 of each, M, P and J&J, she ended up in the hosp for a week, the only one who was vaxxed to that degree, the only one to endup in the ER and under ICU monitoring... (even the immunologist told her that was likely why she was hit so hard, these 'vaccines' can knock your immune system down and around, making you more susceptible to infection in general, im also told by my own immunologist that they dont like to give too many traditional vaccines too close togather anymore either, as they have realized it can have the opposite effect intended at times, with these new 'vaccines', we need long term controlled studies before we will know how safe they are long term and how best to use them. i genuinely believe they wouldnt have pushed nearly as hard with lockdowns and mandates if the democrats hadnt lost the power they are entitled to... because they did and they saw no easy way out or upside for themselves to backing down from what they insisted would save us during the last guys admin... oh...and lets not forget that they have come out in strong support of the #GreatReset where we will own nothing, rent everything and be happier then ever before in history...
I agree too, except that the damage is not restricted to healthcare. What stops an employer in another field from using the same tactic? The judge should be censured for this abusive decision.
"If we cant have you no one will" This is malicious and the courts have no right to step in and stop these employees from working. The hospital who filed the suit should be REQUIRED to pay the employees wages.
I would guarantee one thing if I was one of those employees. Whoever is responsible within that hospital for this lawsuit, that lawsuit would be the least of their concerns.
1. Why can't the sidelined workers sue the old employer for interfering in their private contract/marraige and for their monetary and beneficial losses during this time? 2. How does the court assume jurisdiction over "NON EMPLOYEES"?
Litigation sounds like a great plan. BUT its expensive and takes a LONG time. I learned that life lesson a few years back. Even if you are right, its not worth the headache. I have meet a few decent CEO's in healthcare. Others are just complete psychopaths.
The damages were immediate when the judge tainted these employees within a free market. Sue the judge, the state, both hospitals the administrators and every lawyer that touched this case for those hospitals. Every day it takes add 1500 per employee for continued damages against every defendant. Something tells me it would settle out quickly.
Insane. The fact the court allowed the temporary injunction is chilling. Even more so was the judge's thinly veiled threat of indefinite financial harm to the employees if they didn't play ball.
That judge should be removed from the bench for blocking workers from being hired. The case should have been tossed. If you wanted to keep the workers then pay more money.
"Charges" should be filed against the judge immediately then the death penalty to keep other "judges" from doing favors for their lawyer friends like this.
I'm not sure what the basis of the suit is. If it's tortious interference, there may potentially a path to victory. As in the new medical facility interfered with the employment of these employees in a way that violates the law. At least in theory.
One question for Hospital A: How much luck are you expecting to have hiring new workers now that it’s widely known that you’re willing to sue your former workers for quitting?
@@nodak81 Not necessarily, those type of union battles usually happen in low education factory jobs. Doctors tend to have more options and do more research into a potential employer.
Ozzie- America has just got completely out of hand . Courts should completely stay out of individuals liberty to live their own lives and not interfer in competition in the economy. America became a successful nation based on capitalism and free market systems that self correct by supply and demand. Beaurocrates (Judges)interfering will sink the nation.
Thank you for posting this, and putting it human terms, rather than a legalies breakdown. It's videos like this that make it ten times easier to explain thing at union meetings without too much fuss.
Reality is most businesses will straight up get rid of you if a cheaper solution pops up, which is the reason why company loyalty always baffles me. Get it if you work for a place that treats you good, theres people getting screwed over left and right, will still sit there and defend it.
Yep. Hiring someone doesn't mean you own them. You are simply purchasing their labor. They can choose to sell to someone else whenever they want. Anything less is servitude.
@@yeahyeahwowman8099 that used to be my place of work before they became a merger and went corporate. Me and the other 9 guys in the shop are getting jobs lined up so we can leave next month, it was a great place but after going Corp two years ago our manager has gone from someone that you can joke with to a guy that if you make a joke to he threatens to fire you. Can't wait to watch that place fall apart when we leave.
@@codyschmidt510 Remember knowing our department was gonna get laid off when upper management pulled one of the oldest tricks in the book back in 2010. Gone and basically were ignoring us, not really caring what we were up to, then one Friday I see a woman from human resources in our department, I just started laughing.
One of the saddest things in this country is that wealthy people and large businesses have been able to use the legal system as a way to bully others for profit. They always brag that At-Will means they can dump employees for any reason, now the shoe is on the other foot they cry for protection.
Disgusting‼️ This seems to be a way for that hospital to ‘punish’ ‘at-will employees’ that dare to want better: pay, work conditions, and time for families!! Over my hospital nursing career (which started in the early 1970s), this ‘high-handedness’ used by hospital management seems only to get worse each decade. 🤯🙄
It's funny how many of those kinds of tricks have backfired on employers in recent years. Couple of years ago it was SOP to include "Mediation" clauses in contracts and terms of service (still is but those clauses have been rewritten to prevent what follows), then a couple tens of thousands of "employees" (i'm pretty sure they were classified as gig or contract workers) all took up that mediation at the same time, suddenly companies wanted a class action b/c it would actually be cheaper
No, he hasn't. It's a very temporary injunction for status quo to remain until he can hear final arguments. Completely standard procedure at this point.
@@markdoldon8852 Why don't you give us a citation on which law, State or Federal, which allows any judge to take an action such as this, against individuals he does not have jurisdiction over? There are no legal grounds for such an order, even an temp. order, and I am honestly amazed none of the workers have not already kicked this entire case up to the federal court level - this judge is wrong, plain and simple.
Lots of health care workers felt how little they are appreciated in 2020, myself included. They say you're so necessary and vital yet fight back with all their might when you want a raise to just keep up with inflation. Then you got coworkers who work oncall somewhere else and year they got a 1000$ end of the year bonus to thank them for their work. While the hospital you've been at for 3 years give you a 50$ Amazon gift card. Then you try to leave because it's just taking so much out of you and they try to get all legal with you and make it as hard as they're can for you too leave... I am never going back to health care.
Unless the courts decide it's time to set a new precedent, that workers are owned. Somehow it wouldn't surprise me if at least one corporate judge along the way sided with the employer making the suit.
@@gilliganallmighty3 won’t happen, his Republican supporters will protect him and their slave owners. Same area that supports Q’anon Ron even though he transferred jobs from that area to help his buddies in China.
Yes, they should. But honestly, I can think of a few supreme court judges who themselves would like to tinker with the 13th amendment and it feels as if we live in times where they could actually do it. Imagine if at-will employment only applied to the employer.
They should also file a lawsuit for mental and emotional trauma, physical and emotional trauma for stress, anxiety and lack of sleep, punitive damages for violating first amendment civil rights and any other and all punitive damages as a result of this hospital’s actions and/or rhetoric….
By the time this is resolved, the 2nd hospital will have already filled those positions and the at-will employees will be out of work. This is a Class Action lawsuit that needs to happen, and the old hospital AND the Judge needs to be sued for so much money they permanently learn their lessons. The money that Theta-Care is spending to fight this legal battle is FAR MORE than they would have paid to match the offer. That's how insane this is!
If you think those positions will all be filled quickly, you are mistaken. Everyone needs people and people are tired of working for low wages. There is a ton of competition right now.
Just because a harm can be identified does not mean any wrong has been committed. The judge has violated an innocent party's rights to make the other party whole.
Just like how police continue to bully or harass people even when they have been proven innocent, they just can't admit when they were wrong about someone and they continue dropping more resources with the hope that their efforts weren't wasted. It's like gambling except instead of a low chance to win, there's 0 chance to win.
Thanks for this video, as I didn't know about this case until just now (10/14/22). I've looked at the ruling that has since been issued, and I'm going to reference this case to my students in class on Monday since it fits right into what we'll be discussing. I love it when serendipity happens!
So a court really told these people that they could not except another job? What kind of freedom is that? I would never obey such an order, i dont see how a court thinks it has the right to refuse to let people make decisions about where they work.
Given that they were at will employees, the court was WRONG to issue this injunction. At will is all anyone, including the court, needs to know. If an employer wants to secure their staff, they should have them under contract.
Yup, even trying to force someone under contract to stay is stupid. If someone wants to quit, their mindset is of someone who no longer cares about that job. Trying to force someone to stay will only cause them to collect a check and do as little as possible
@@cornfed123567 A contract is a n agreement, and once you sign it, your bound to it just like the other guy is. If these employees had been under contract, I would have sided with the employer. A deal is a deal.
As an RN, I will say, if you treat your employees better, they won't leave en masse. Too bad, so sad. Also, healthcare should NEVER be a for-profit industry. This is what happens.
I live in Appleton WI where this is happening. The two locations are about a 20-25 minute drive apart, without lights and sirens. None of the employees "expertise" is being lost to the community. This is just petty retribution. Looks like I know what local hospital I'm not going to be using
If they're at will employees HOW does this judge have any control over where these people work? This is creating a dangerous precedent that in essence makes workers slaves.
biden democrat slave masters think the employees are their slaves.......no surprise from slave masters. maybe the slaves should do as biden's nazi brownshirts have done and burnt buildings to the ground as when being really being enslaved by democrat filth, the democrat filth needs to understand that such evil is not to be tolerated. sadly democrat slave masters like to DICTATE who can work according to vaccine status or provide "preference" by racist criteria set by racist democrat "quotas"
How does the judge have the “authority” to prevent a free person from freely changing employment? What would happen if they just went to their new employers and clocked in? Would it be a criminal offense?
@@eggpod4567 So if the TRO orders the employees to not work and make money and starve to death and become homeless in the endeffect, they have to follow through and die in a winter night under a bridge.
The judge really has no authority to tell uncontracted worker where they can or can't work. This is yet another example of how broken the courts have become.
@@gbnq2513 The workers are impacted, yes. However, the legal battle is taking place between the two hospitals. The judge did not call the 7 people in the courtroom and legally ban them from anything. The difference is that if the employees show up to work at the new hospital, they will be in violation of NOTHING.... because they were not told they couldn't work. The only party that would be in violation is the new hospital.
@@RK-kn1ud True, but in the meantime, regardless of who the order is directed at, these people can't work at the new hospital. I would only hope the old place pays for this nonsense.
@@ElationProductions From what I've read online, the new hospital told them to come in on Monday anyway. That said, the OP that I replied to has a statement that is factually incorrect despite the end result being the same.
I remember hearing someone giving a talk about money and hyperinflation. The government promising benefits they can't afford, people becoming unwilling to work, people quitting work because work getting harder but no real increase in pay though costs of goods and services explode,, and at some point it becomes illegal to quit jobs. I think the talk was Mike Maloney but can't recall title. It may have been his comparison of USA to fall of Rome. Thus far it has gone exactly as he said.
The fact that it's gone this far and the judge has actually given them the injunction should be seen as a sign that the judge is either being bribed or has some kind of personal connection with someone running the hospital. There's no legal reason, there's no law in play, the judge is basically legislating by bullying.
Where I live, the County Commission (CC) head appoints members of the hospital board. The CC head is also a partner of a law firm that handles legal affairs for the hospital. Any one see a conflict of interest? Welcome to South GA politics...
I was thinking that too. How can they have an at-will work LAW, yet at the same time the first hospital is allowed to prevent them from going to work at the second hospital, thus apparently implying that there is no such thing as an at-will work law??
if i were one of the workers involved in this case, who has had my earnings reduced to zero by this frivilous lawsuit and has been obviously harmed by hospital A, i would make sure i would sue hospital A for damages plus suffering. and these workers were "at-will?" the judge in this case is obviously incompetent or corrupt to have even allowed this case to move forward
My husband loves your show now. We were listening out in the hot tub. He says if you treat your people good they don’t want to go. Have a great night. We’re listening ❤️🇨🇦
I’m a RN and can tell you hospitals have been abusing the nursing staff for years, I worked 60+ a week for 5 years straight without a vacation, I had to quit to get time off, hospitals like to run tight shifts with no extra nurses as backup and not enough to do the job, you can’t even call in sick because there is no one to fill in. People have no idea how bad things are
I’d have to wonder if its due to an actual shortage of not enough people wanting to be nurses? Management refusing to hire more nurses, or a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts. Someone gets into nursing, but because of a shortage, and bad treatment, leaves that field. Maybe a mix of all 3? I’m not sure.
@@XFizzlepop-Berrytwist they refuse to hire any extra coverage in nurses because it affects their bottom line in “for profit” medicine and THEIR BONUSES. And there is the real crux of the matter.
I'm no lawyer, but blocking at-will employees people from working at a new job seems equally unconstitutional. If a judge is bluffing, that certainly seems like official misconduct. I'd like to see EVERY employee to leave that medical group as a result of this and every citizen to boycott them.
I would immediately start a temporary labor service and hire all my ex coworkers and send them to the new hospital as Temps that work for me, not the hospital. Charge them 5% so that they can still get paid, still work, still provide for the community, leaving me stuck outside because I started the agency... (because the judge will likely hold me in contempt).
You're assuming that at-will employment laws were ever intended to be fair or equally applied to employers and employees. Huge assumption. No evidence exists to suggest this was ever intended.
If the employees have to return to work or be forced into poverty, that is pretty harmful to the individual just for trying to find a better job. THEDA could take years to find replacements. They should have thought about that in their long term short term analysis.
@@namor3607 at will employment laws were designed to prevent black workers from unionizing with white workers in Arkansas. So it was never intended to be in the employees favor.
Yes. Why does a Judge have the power to prevent qualified at will applicants from working anywhere they want, anytime they want? This seems like judicial activism of the worst kind.
Imagine that, corporations have zero problems laying off half their staff, even during the holidays. Then when employees leave en mass on their own, that's somehow unacceptable to them. I hope they get absolutely wrecked in court & these folks countersue for lost wages.
@Chris G Loyality checks - so in their reasoning was they were paying a bonus so you were obligated to stay 50 future weeks. Were they also promising to not release you for the next 50 weeks as a show of loyality?
@Chris G to protect you from this bu!!$h!t! I am in the same boat as you! I prefer no contract because my skill set is in high demand and I’m good at it! I’d rather be able to leave at a moment’s notice if I felt it was no longer in my best interest. But my point remains. An employer can force me to accept a contract to continue employment.
The fact that the old employer's first reaction is to sue (when no employment contract exists) tells me all I need to know about why those employees left in the first place.
Exactly! Would you seek care from the them? I wouldn’t!
It doesn.t tell me any such thing. Cheers!
Odd is that there is even case where one employer can order other one's choices through court. As soon as the people quit first employer, then they had nothing else to do with the first company.
At will workers stil have some conditions on working, so there is still contract, but it just has the "at will" clause, but that is also wrong that if it is not suitable for employer, then they just change the conditions, but if it would be unsuitable for employee, then there is nothing to do. With hospitals there is some kind of employment contract still, even for liabiliy sake in case of mistakes done at work, so do not come with the talk that there is no employment contract. The "at will" is just condition in there that should allow employer to fire employee and employee to quit, but on currently that is kind of made void ... Well, not quite, because people quit, so they cannot work at first employer, but now they cannot start working for 2nd one because of that obscure restriction that judge approved. Restriction that basically ordered one company to follow order of another company.
I'd just tell old hospital to get fucked I can wait it out.
@@zapazap How not so? Management clearly feels entitled to keep the workers otherwise they would have made counteroffers. What other acts of entitled management were these employees subject to?
The judge that allowed the temporary injunction should be disciplined for doing so. Absolutely insane.
I'd file civil suit against the Judge for interfering with a employment contract. Then I'd add in the old hospital and add millions in damages.
Agreed never seen a bigger pile of Bull
@@2acritter4life it's at will. No contracts.
@@jdgindustries2734 "At will" is a condition of their employment contract. All professionals operate under an employment contract that details the terms of their employment, benefits, etc.
Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it the wrong thing to do in this situation. There's a case here that the judge needs to hear and until the judge is able to hear it they asked that the main cruxt of their lawsuit not take effect until after the lawsuit. That's actually a very good thing, imagine being in a lawsuit with the town you live in because they want to bulldoze your house to build a park and you're trying to sue for that not happening. Without this mechanism you can't stop the town from bulldozing your house until after the lawsuit is settled.
UPDATE: Although the TRO should have never been issued, the Judge lifted the order the next day, and on Jan. 28, Theda Care dropped its entire loser lawsuit.
Likely only because of the bad PR
The hero we needed
The old hospital need to pay the workers for the days they were not allowed to work.
A former employer should have no control over your future employment, this is outrageous.
IF there's no contract in place!
@@commonsenseisdeadin2024 funny thing.. A NDA is only valid while you are compensated for your silence. (hence most NDA's come with a lump sum payment.)
A contract is only valid for your employment period. So no.. There should be no point at which a previous employer should have any control over your future employment.
There are a few exceptions to that though. If you know proprietary information and join a competitor company. They can enforce a gag order about the processes and methods you used to use. (basically a NDA). But they can no longer block you working for other companies. (non-compete clauses are no longer valid.)
The fact that this judge granted this is an abuse of power, this judge should be investigated.
I honestly don't understand why a competent judge would even consider this injunction, let alone grant it. Injunctions are only intended for situations where there is a risk of irreparable harm if something is not prevented. One might potentially be able to argue there is irreparable harm if they don't continue working for the old company, but the injunction does not actually ensure that, and cannot legally require that, so it should be completely irrelevant. There is quite clearly no _irreparable_ harm inherent in them working for the new company vs, for example, finding some other job (or just staying home, if they can afford to).
If the judge granted this injunction on the justification that there is irreparable harm if they don't continue working at the old company, and therefore the purpose of the restraining order is specifically to try to force them to continue working at that company (by denying them any other options), then the judge has effectively deliberately violated their 13th Amendment rights, just via a back-door method.
@@foogod4237 He removed the injunction during the next hearing, fixing it doesn't remove the constitutional violations granting it caused though.
I'd just reapply under a new name and not show up to the old place.
I wonder what the thought process was. Maybe something like this? … “Hey, let’s enhance our reputation as an employer by suing exiting employees. Yes, thats the kind of press that will help us in the long run …”.
@@foogod4237 it sounds like slavery to me.
The judge should have thrown out this case. Only the lawyers have benefited from the TRO
He won't this is Mark McGinnis. He jailed a man for six months for rolling his eyes, and dropped F Bombs and insults from the bench. He's not know for his sense and reason.
More evidence that 90%+ judges are corrupt.
Check his bank account.
Gov't relationship is involuntary servitude.
ALWAYS- what we do
Exactly. The judge should have laughed this out of the court and told hospital A that was losing these workers "Simple: Match the pay offered by the other hospital or get used to losing your workers!"
Soooo, basically they are suing for the right to have ownership of their employees. And the judicial system is like, yeah sure, we can do that. Great.😒
The courts' record on slavery is less than stellar, so we should not be surprised by this.
And this is another reason why judges should not be immune to lawsuits when they decide to act like dictators.
This might make sense on the surface, but then you have judges who can simply be forced to do things by people litigation them to death regardless it its warranted. The system is designed like this for a reason
@@mithicash1444 The system is highly corrupted and judges are allowed to legislate from the bench their political ideologies, opinions and whatever bribes they are accepting. This system is eviscerating the constitution, the very law of the land it was designed to protect in the first place.
This is completely unacceptable and these tyrannical judges need to be prosecuted for treason.
No one qualified would want to be a judge and nothing would ever get done. Court is for people that can't come to a reasonable compromise.
@@willwaite1447 Wrong, only criminals who have no intention of upholding the constitution would no longer want to be judges.
The old employer should be sued for damages, including lost wages. Maybe even criminal malice. " This is clearly vindictive ". The old hospitals attorney should have told his client " the old employer " there is no grounds for this since they are not under contract. The judge needs a 90 day unpaid suspension for granting a frivolous injunction that is so damaging to many american families. The actions of this judge introduced a dangerous ideology of practice to use the law as a tool to control employees that are pursuing life, liberty, and happiness.
Amen!
These are fear tactics. By doing this they scare other employees from changing jobs
the whole team should move, and sue them for the cost of moving since they couldn't be employed in the state, as the former employer legally blocked future employment opportunities... get the media interested, watch the shit storm.. of how "at-will" means, at your employers will, not your will...
@@AshenTechDotCom Absolutely! At a prior employer we had both contract and full time employees. Often these FT employees were referred to as "permanent" but CA is an at will state and I would remind people that it's not a permanent role, just that it's a General Full Time role, they were still at will and nothing changed other than there was no longer a specific end date to their employment. (Plus bennies, it was a good change of course, but that's tangential to the point at hand). At this employer it was common that if you were at a certain level and might go to a competitor that you were kept on payroll for 3-6 months with no work (signed in contract) before you left the company. To me that's reasonably fair, "we don't want you going to a competitor immediately with recent detailed company knowledge, so we'll pay you off to wait."
Judge should be disbarred and thrown in jail
Last I heard the lawyers at Ascension have told the workers to just come in and start their new jobs as normal on Monday and they'll handle the legal fallout, essentially calling the judge's bluff. Also there's a gofundme for the workers to give them enough money to outlast the hospital, raised almost 50K last I checked on it.
that sounds like some god-like action there.
Good on them, honestly this situation kinda scares me, imagine if more companies did this
Sounds like injunction is illegal to me. They have no contract, they can quit and once they've quit they can work for who they like. There's literally no legal basis for the suit, so how the judge can grant an injunction to prevent someone taking up employment at a place of their choosing is beyond me
@@qwerty_artist Don't provide any type of notice and they won't even know that you've quit
Old Hospital - "You can't work there!"
"I'm not working, I'm _volunteering._ " 😉
The only reason a group of employees all up and quit at once and all find work at the same place is if something awful is happening in that work culture. And by making the incredibly short sighted decision to further harm these employees by suing to prevent them from working, the hospital is begging to have its dirty laundry aired.
20 years ago someone in my state won the lottery and decided to divide their winnings up with their 19 co workers. They said that they would still have millions of dollars and that was plenty for anyone to have. So the entire staff of the company except the owner, his wife and son, all quit without notice the next day. This ended up putting the company out of business. The owner then sued the lottery winner and asked for an amount equal the what they gave away to each of their co workers. I was astonished that the judge allowed this to go to trial. It dragged on for about a year. The plaintiff had claimed that the lottery winner was disgruntled and gave the money away only because they wanted to put their former employer out of business not for the altruistic reason of generosity. The defense argued that nobody would give away 95% of their wealth just to get even with an employer they had a disagreement with. The jury found for the defendant, the lottery winner. During that entire year the lottery winner could not spend a cent of their winnings as the court ordered their assets frozen. Since the 19 co workers were not party to the case their assets were not in jeopardy so they were free to spend their money which in part they did by helping their very generous co worker/benefactor. Last I heard the business owner went bankrupt, lost everything they owned including their house. They ended up getting a divorce and he was working as a janitor somewhere. What I can't help but ask is what kind of horrible employer they must have been. I'm guessing that lottery winner would have included them had they been pleasant to work for.
Cool story
When you have seven people leaving one organization for another, it's not about money. It's about working conditions.
I used to work at a hospital (in the IT department). At one point we were losing something like five developers a month, and the primary reason was that the non-profit hospital was paying much lower wages, and giving the reason, "We're a non-profit, so of course salaries are lower!" But the exodus was so extreme they finally had a new salary survey done, and surprise! We were all grossly underpaid. They did the right thing, and there was a massive salary adjustment. I was a tech writer there, and I got a $10K raise. The developers got something like $20K. (I did leave that job a year later for the software industry, and got an immediate $15K bump; at the hospital we were still on the lower end of the wage spectrum for writers).
And also money.
Also money. Our competitors are paying up to 30% more for the same work. We have had record profits, but promotion and raise freezes for the past year. We also just hired 3 new executives from outside the company without internal promotion available. Horrible employer is probably paying horribly also.
No one is going to apply at that job now😂 They torpedoed their chances of finding new hires.
@@nancykaminski8600 This happened to me last year at my Hospital IT department. We didn't leave all at once, I went 2nd and the rest trickled out after. But after about 10 people left they finally restructured the salary and promotion structure.
Bad pay is a bad working condition. I used to be an underground miner. I got paid well and had good benefits because the good pay out ways the shitty working conditions.
The fact this was even entertained by a judge is insane.
If I were the employees, I'd sue the original employer for wages lost while the injunction was in place.
"Poaching" is only looked down on by employers who know they under pay their employees. It's called a "competitive offer" by everyone else.
I'm not sure they could sue for lost wages, because the option to go back to work is there (I'm assuming). They wouldn't lose wages if they agreed to go back to work. But again, they can't MAKE them, but they can easily say they exercised their choice not to work there. The whole thing seems like a huge violation of civil rights.
I've heard "poach" used non-negatively. If someone claims they poached an employee, they usually mean that they snagged a real prize from a competitor.
@@pixelperfectInteriors They could sue for the difference🌹
America is the most dumbass legal system in the world weirdly only in America
Exactly this. The attitude of the first hospital is fucking disgusting and I'm absolutely not surprised 7 people left at once if this is the way they treat their employees.
Unimaginable that there are laws that can allow a Judge to keep someone from the freedom of choice as to where they want to work!
Health trust "A" should be sued by the state for not ensuring that they have a minimum staff on long term contract to ensure the smooth and safe running of their hospitals. The judge should be sued and disbarred for gross negligence.
The judge is a scumbag for not dismissing this immediately.
Lots of scumbag judges coming to light lately...
But the brown envelope was big!
Probably bought n paid for by hospital mother corporation... follow the behind closed door benefits 🤣😩
@A H He's up for re-election in 2023. It's in the hands of voters in Outagamie.
This is the same judge that kept a guy in jail for 42 days and tried to fine him $5k for rolling his eyes. He was eventually overruled, but the guy still sat in jail a month and a half.
This judge is clearly violating their civil rights. Every lawyer for the health care workers should contact that bar association and file to have him disbarred.
The Barr can’t do a thing until the final judgment is given. Judges are protected by draconian laws while sitting on their cases. The protection only goes away after the cases are closed or moved.
@David Caudill Steve brought that up, it is not slavery because they are not forced to work, they are just essentially stopped from working at the new location. Theoretically (have to see the actual order from the judge) they could apply elsewhere and keep working until this is settled. That doesn't make it right, but it is not the same level as slavery.
The president and CEO of ThedaCare is an MD that doesn't need his license anymore.
Violation of the right to pursue happiness. Total bulls#!t.
It isn't the bar that sanctions judges.
It always bugged me that you're expected to give a 2 week notice when you're about to quit, but a company doesn't have to give you notice when they are going to fire you. One of the reasons why I never bothered giving a 2 week notice when I quit a place because the company doesn't care if they hurt me by firing me, why should I care if the company is hurt by me quitting.
Exactly. I never give notice now. I have not worked in a place that gives any loyalty whatsoever.
I do the same. I just tell them "I quit." And walk out. And NEVER sign any contracts.
The only reason to give notice is to hopefully still get a good reference for your next job. If you don't need that, 2 weeks notice is only a detriment to yourself.
This is why you NEVER tell your current employer where you are moving to if you are in an at-will state and do not have a contractual obligation, they are no need to know and it only hurts you by telling them.
Hospitals: "You are an at-will employee we can fire you for any reason"
Employee: *quits*
Hospitals: "That's illegal"
Must be that NEWLAW that the progressives have been pushing for the past couple of years.
Hospital administrator and hospital attorneys need to go back and read the definition of 'At-Will'... and that BOTH parties can break the employment at any time, without notice. Sayonara, hospital! Employers think they have all the control.
@@Marinealver so why doesn't such shit happen in "Liberal country's" people might be inspired by?!?
I know of companies whose contract includes as much as 6 months "none competition" clauses and keep paying according transitional wages (mostly temp agencies, having a buyout price too).
@@Marinealver this has NOTHING to do with progressives and you are pathetic for dragging shit into it that has nothing to do with it... this is happening because of our health care system being a purely capitalist system that understaffs their facilities to make more money. Every other civil County treats their Healthcare as nessasy infrastructure like roads, bridges, schools... we are a joke! You are pathetic dragging a political group who is so insanely removed from the situation just because that is what you do every time something negative is going on now 🙄 just ridiculous 🙄
@@fionafiona1146 this is what these people do... they project everything they do onto their precived enemies... if we are racist we will use the racist accusation against others and pretend we are the victim, if we are responsible for the continued state of our Healthcare system being a capitalism/ for profit system that is not working for our people and not working for the Healthcare providers because they understaff the hospital and over work them to keep more money in our pockets we blame them for it, if we are not funding schools properly and screwing up our children's education we will turn it around on them, if we are indoctrinating children to our world view then we will accuse them of exactly that for exposing children to facts about history and reality... this is their entire new play... they are bullies who the second get the tiniest push back cry victim! 😢
This isn't about keeping the employees in question. This is about scaring and intimidating other employees that haven't left.
It'd be a real shame if the rest of Thedacare's staff decides to apply to work at other hospitals.
I think you nailed it.
Spot on.
I'm surprised more peopel aren't commenting this; it's actually quite obvious.
yep they should all leave and dont say to where Wisconsin is a Right-to-Work States when i leave a job with a 2 week notice and they ask me where i plan on going i tell them none of your business
This is like a non compete that typically is thrown out because you cannot prevent a person from earning a living.
Corporations would rather pay their attorneys than pay their employees.
Those organizations usually have legal reps on retainer so they don't pay as much in fees as you think. At least not more than they do anyway. That is why they are more than happy to start dumb litigation.
I truly believe this case is about bullying. The hospital doesn't want these employees back. They want to make an example out of them. They are sending a message to all the other employees that still work for them, that the hospital has the power to make their life hell if they dare to try and leave. Really the hospital is acting like a psycho boyfriend.
This is a more than terrible precedent. This kind of thing could be used all the time to sanction an employee when they leave. We can't have this and an example has to made of the company executing this action before it spreads!
@@syntaksoftwaredevelopment4438 Yeah, if a competitor is offering better work conditions and 50% pay raise, and you aren't willing to match it? Sounds like tuff luck and dumb management (because clearly the other guy has it figured out if they can afford that and you can't). Only thing would be NDA's and non-compete agreements, but that doesn't mean they can keep you at slave wages or refuse to promote you while cutting off all other sources of income.
They will lose more doing this
I agree
After hearing this I would never work for that hospital. This will decimate their hiring of prospective employees.
I’m a lawyer in Florida, which is also a “right to work” state where all employees are at will. This is an absurd ruling from the judge. In Florida, at a minimum, the hospital would’ve been required to post a bond in the amount of the worker’s salaries for an injunction - a temporary injunction is unconstitutional without one under the Florida state constitution. If I were the workers, I’d be countersuing for damages and arguing that the hospital violated their rights as at-will employees.
I'm late to this one (and understand that the TRO has been pulled), but I thought that part of the decision was based on the probability that the party making the application for the TRO would prevail in the actual lawsuit. Presumably, for that party to show that they could prevail they would have to have some legal argument, even if not completely developed, to present to the judge ruling on the TRO. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't remember hearing what that was. I'm not sure how their "concerns" about patient well-being made for a legal argument regarding at-will employment. Shouldn't the judge who issues the TRO have pressed them on this?
Thoughts?
But it is Wisconsin. They gave up the constitution years ago.
Oh , they must know they will be counter sued . Some manager mucked up and are now making it worse
@@AresCosmos137 Wisconsin legal system just keeps coming up like it is a complete mess with some really bad actors all across the board.
Exactly!
I'm not a lawyer but this such a dangerous precedent I wouldn't be surprised at the higher courts come in and say no you cannot do this
The fact that judge did not immediately throw out this case is criminal
Imagine applying for a job that just sued its own employees. This will backfire hard.
i really hope more people leave the old job
One can only hope...
Yep, have fun getting contract workers.
Haha I didn't even think about that side of it. Total self own.
Oh I would have fun with this.
The fact that a judge would apply this injunction is sickening. We need a way to remove corrupt, evil judges like this.
They used to feather judges like this one
Execute tyrants Problem solved
It doesn't seem American, what this judge is doing does it???
@@devinazevedo1122 lol l
He made a ruiling that breaks the law!
So who was the idiot judge that allowed the clearly unjustifiable, and therefore illegal injuction to block people from working? What penalties have they faced?
The hospital that won’t let them work should be sued by the former employees for lost wages.
The fact that the judge upheld the ruling preventing them from going to their new job is absolutely insane.
They can't "poach" employees. They can offer them more $. Capitalism.
Maybe the hospital should make coffee at home and cut down on the avocado toast so they can afford to pay their employees more.
I know if the new hospital would let me work I'd good to the new job and work a scumbag mentally ill cross dressing judge doesn't own me I'm free
anyone reckon the court would issue an injunction if a hospital decided to lay off half the staff?
@@youtubehatesfreedom1870 Last I head the new employer has told the workers "Look, just come in and start with us on Monday like normal, our legal team will take care of things." Basically calling the judge's bluff, which is great.
this isn't capitalism. capitalism uplifts. these are pigs perverting capitalism.
They weren’t really “poached” for money - I can all but guarantee it’s the management of the previous employer that has created this situation.
“People don’t quit bad Jo’s, they quit bad management “
Yeah, after pulling this legal crap I can only image what working for them day to day was like.
Especially with the whole group leaving. A couple people maybe the money, but all of them it is work environment then money for sure.
I have to also wonder if this whole thing was an attempt to get the other company to take their offer off the table.
@@paulghignon4092 good point
@@paulghignon4092 Of course it is. This is a case of corporate arrogance. If these employees were that critical, why were they "at will" in the first place?
Greed!
How did this end? I can't believe that an ex employer can block future work for people? That's just insane.
There’s an update linked in the description
God this case boils my blood. If i had a former employer try to slap me with a restraining order to stop me working for someone else, i'd catch a homicide charge the next day for sure.
I'd stand outside on the sidewalk with a bunch of signs explaining the entire situation, the entire time of the suit.
Then when it's said and done I'd sue the employer for loss of wages. , damages, and mental damages as well.
This is why you NEVER tell an employer where you're going when you resign. "I'm resigning. Where I go after is not your concern."
And screw two week's notice. "Oh, you didn't give us two weeks notice"...." I literally just saw you walk Ted out the other day, where was his two week's notice?"
@@jemjones5675 damn right! I left two jobs without two weeks notice just recently. I did so because I watched both of of them fire people when they put in their two weeks. Just bam, fired. Gone. Walked out on the spot.
I no longer believe in two week notices because 1. They treat you different when they know you are leaving. 2. They sure as hell don't give you a two week notice when they fire you for whatever reason.
@@cheshire_skatkat9093 Or it can be 2 weeks for you to terrify the company with things you might do in that time.
Considering it was a mass exodus, It wouldn't be that hard to figure out.
The level of labor regulations demands regular communication with the previous employer. It's impossible to keep secrets from system bureaucrats.
This is a perfect example of why judges should not be Immune from all lawsuits. The court clearly overstepped their bounds here. I would not be surprised if the Judge was somehow linked to Thedacare.
My thoughts as well. He has to be getting something out of this to make a ruiling that conflicts with the laws he is supposed to be ruling by
or a secrete society !
@@johnarnold24 I'm thinking it has to do with organ farming.
1st Hospital: "If you leave it will cost lives b/c we won't get your help at this hospital."
Also 1st Hospital: "We aren't gonna let you work b/c you may save lives somewhere else."
Me: "I don't think this has to do with saving lives."
This is the result of corporate oligarchy... They literally think they OWN their employees like slaves.
And the judge apparently is ok with that. In America. 🤯
I believe that this is a very strong signal to those health care workers that they need to unionize.
file suit against the old hospital AND, seek disciplinary measures against the Judge.
Let's let this judge go, without pay, until the hospital workers can exercise their right to leave one job to another.
EXACTLY!
Until the hospital workers cN work where they want? Let that POS go forever.
If they are “at will” employees then the judge should have dismissed the lawsuit. There is no reasons to go through this. There must be a way to recall such judges.
No that's an intentional part of the judge system, something normal people have no say in so the abuses cannot be addressed except by another judge. No part of this legal system is for your benefit, assuming you're not a successful capitalist or other kind of power broker.
this is called 'extortion' and 'slavery'. The CCP does it all the time so why not here!?
I think there may have been a slight misunderstanding in the beginning of this video-that at-will employees aren’t on contract. At-will employment DOES (and should) carry contracts, indicating such. Frequently, at-will employment comes w/ relatively complex sets of restrictions (not all of which would stand in court, of course). Some at-will employees, for instance, are asked to sign contracts and/or NDAs which may restrict their ability to seek employment with industry competitors. Again, not all of these would stand in court in the end, but employers are so sneaky that they’d throw in these clauses to make it hard for at-will employees to be truly “at will.”
judges can be impeached by an act of congress at state level or federal level depending on if its a federal judge or not.
If "at-will" ceased to mean "at-will" when it involves multiple employees at once, layoffs would be illegal.
I’m not an attorney but when I am notified of this on Monday morning at the hearing I’m serving the hospital a lawsuit for tortious interference of a contract and asking for damages plus punitive damages in a completely unrelated lawsuit and I’m asking 3 other employees to sign on to make it a class action….they like lawyer fees let’s just make it really expensive
The fact that the hospital filed suit is a core reason not to work there. If I googled an employer and saw they sued their employees, I would be moving on without applying.
Clearly this is ridiculous. I’m an RN and I’d sue. I would also bet money that if on the slim chance this case is successful, other hospitals will follow suit and hold all healthcare professionals hostage. It seems that would be the overall intent on a bigger scale to continue to pay shit pay and continue the abuse for patients and staff.
Ps: it’s not the healthcare professionals responsibility to supply staff, it’s the facilities. The hospital is negligent entirely
when i have SEEN people i know leave and get other work because, one place was pushing mandates, the other was not, i can just see if this was an "at-will" state issue how they could have ended up blocked, the thing is... all of these people have worked the whole time, they have been exposed and are better protected then any "vaccine" will offer, according to every study thats come out... hell israels study showed 13x better from prior infection vs the "Vaccines" (immune modifiers to be more realistic about what they do/how they work..)
i know a few were being shamed as "Anti-Vax" despite having all their other shots, just not ones that arent even fully approved, that they have seen some pretty nasty side effects from first hand treating the victims...
after my reaction to the first 2 doses i refused to get more, my specialist actually agreed after i told him how much worse it made my health, and just as it was starting to get back to normal the 2nd dose..its been months and im still more inflamed then i have been in years... full body inflammation, that was under far far better control prior to the jab...
i have always been more worried about the "Stupid Virus" as we started calling the rioting idiocy in portland, then i have been cv19... i have health issues, but they all stem from my immune system being on overdrive all the time, i rarely get ill, and when i do its not colds or flu's its.. food poisoning... as odd as that may sound... at 16 i quit getting the flu shot.. i have had the flu 1 time since, and im 43 as of last nov, and that time... it was like a bad cold... the rest of the family was down for over a week with the stomach flu... i was "ill" for 3 days, the 4th i woke up feeling better then i had in quite a while if a bit more easily fatigued, kept them taken care of till they were on the mend... even then... i just felt like i had a moderate cold at worst.. they were dying...
with the number of times i have been exposed to cv19, im pretty sure, i already had the antibodies before i got the jab anyway... quite a few people i was in contact with over the year came down with cv19, if they would cover antibody testing via my insurance i have little doubt im protected by more then a jab... that i doubt did me any good at all...with how horrible it made me feel...
oh the other hand.... i know a few people with serious health issues who genuinely needed to get the jab if only to wait for a mild varient like omicon that... funny enough they ALL GOT AROUND THANKSGIVING/XMAS... even the ones who were triple vaxxed and boosted to hell..infact they got sicker then the ones who had no jab at all... one of our friends was so scared by the media, she got 2 of each, M, P and J&J, she ended up in the hosp for a week, the only one who was vaxxed to that degree, the only one to endup in the ER and under ICU monitoring...
(even the immunologist told her that was likely why she was hit so hard, these 'vaccines' can knock your immune system down and around, making you more susceptible to infection in general, im also told by my own immunologist that they dont like to give too many traditional vaccines too close togather anymore either, as they have realized it can have the opposite effect intended at times, with these new 'vaccines', we need long term controlled studies before we will know how safe they are long term and how best to use them.
i genuinely believe they wouldnt have pushed nearly as hard with lockdowns and mandates if the democrats hadnt lost the power they are entitled to... because they did and they saw no easy way out or upside for themselves to backing down from what they insisted would save us during the last guys admin... oh...and lets not forget that they have come out in strong support of the #GreatReset where we will own nothing, rent everything and be happier then ever before in history...
Agreed
I agree too, except that the damage is not restricted to healthcare. What stops an employer in another field from using the same tactic? The judge should be censured for this abusive decision.
@@BruceS42 agree wholeheartedly.
Sue them? With what, your saving account of a half a million? Better off leaving them and finding a different employer other than this intended one.
"If we cant have you no one will" This is malicious and the courts have no right to step in and stop these employees from working. The hospital who filed the suit should be REQUIRED to pay the employees wages.
And ALL legal costs. And be warned of more severe consequences if they file another frivolous lawsuit.
At the higher wage of their new jobs.
Kangaroo Court
Unreal
And the employees should hand over a piece of paper with their new daily fee rates.
They filed the lawsuit to intimidate other employees who might want to do the same thing.
I would guarantee one thing if I was one of those employees. Whoever is responsible within that hospital for this lawsuit, that lawsuit would be the least of their concerns.
1. Why can't the sidelined workers sue the old employer for interfering in their private contract/marraige and for their monetary and beneficial losses during this time?
2. How does the court assume jurisdiction over "NON EMPLOYEES"?
They can if this case drags out. Need damage to have a suit...
1. That would be awesome to see. make sure it goes in front of the same judge too.
@@Isador911 that judge needs disbarred.
Litigation sounds like a great plan. BUT its expensive and takes a LONG time. I learned that life lesson a few years back. Even if you are right, its not worth the headache. I have meet a few decent CEO's in healthcare. Others are just complete psychopaths.
The damages were immediate when the judge tainted these employees within a free market. Sue the judge, the state, both hospitals the administrators and every lawyer that touched this case for those hospitals. Every day it takes add 1500 per employee for continued damages against every defendant. Something tells me it would settle out quickly.
Insane. The fact the court allowed the temporary injunction is chilling. Even more so was the judge's thinly veiled threat of indefinite financial harm to the employees if they didn't play ball.
Talk about rogue tyrant of a judge
The judge may have received "medical consulting fees."
And here I thought slavery/ involunatary servatude was banned in the USA.
Work there on a "voluntary basis", then get an extra large "signing bonus" once the court stuff is over? 😉
Welcome to MAGAworld... home of the American Taliban.
That judge should be removed from the bench for blocking workers from being hired. The case should have been tossed. If you wanted to keep the workers then pay more money.
they need to sue the Judge, as he is preventing them changing their place of work. Freedom of movement, which is a Constitutional right.
The judge is crazy to allow the charges. Should have been dismissed immediately.
'Charges'?
pretty sure this isn't a criminal case.
"Charges" should be filed against the judge immediately then the death penalty to keep other "judges" from doing favors for their lawyer friends like this.
@A H ⁷
List the 'charges' or stfu
I'm not sure what the basis of the suit is. If it's tortious interference, there may potentially a path to victory. As in the new medical facility interfered with the employment of these employees in a way that violates the law. At least in theory.
One question for Hospital A:
How much luck are you expecting to have hiring new workers now that it’s widely known that you’re willing to sue your former workers for quitting?
If companies can manage to hire scabs during union strikes, then these guys will have no problem finding idiots willing to work for them.
And isn't everyone surprised that the employees left to go to another place?
@@nodak81 Not necessarily, those type of union battles usually happen in low education factory jobs. Doctors tend to have more options and do more research into a potential employer.
@@nodak81 No they will just apply to work for Hospital B after hearing that they get better wages and benefits there !
@@elmateo77 doctors are rarely staff aka employees. Staff tends to be cna, orderlies, nurses etc.
Ozzie- America has just got completely out of hand . Courts should completely stay out of individuals liberty to live their own lives and not interfer in competition in the economy.
America became a successful nation based on capitalism and free market systems that self correct by supply and demand. Beaurocrates (Judges)interfering will sink the nation.
Thank you for posting this, and putting it human terms, rather than a legalies breakdown. It's videos like this that make it ten times easier to explain thing at union meetings without too much fuss.
I love how a business can say "well it's not personal, it's just business" and then turn around and be shocked that their employees are not loyal.
Reality is most businesses will straight up get rid of you if a cheaper solution pops up, which is the reason why company loyalty always baffles me. Get it if you work for a place that treats you good, theres people getting screwed over left and right, will still sit there and defend it.
Yep. Hiring someone doesn't mean you own them. You are simply purchasing their labor. They can choose to sell to someone else whenever they want. Anything less is servitude.
@@yeahyeahwowman8099 that used to be my place of work before they became a merger and went corporate. Me and the other 9 guys in the shop are getting jobs lined up so we can leave next month, it was a great place but after going Corp two years ago our manager has gone from someone that you can joke with to a guy that if you make a joke to he threatens to fire you. Can't wait to watch that place fall apart when we leave.
@@codyschmidt510 Remember knowing our department was gonna get laid off when upper management pulled one of the oldest tricks in the book back in 2010. Gone and basically were ignoring us, not really caring what we were up to, then one Friday I see a woman from human resources in our department, I just started laughing.
One of the saddest things in this country is that wealthy people and large businesses have been able to use the legal system as a way to bully others for profit. They always brag that At-Will means they can dump employees for any reason, now the shoe is on the other foot they cry for protection.
Yes! At-will was designed to benefit the employer, but as soon as that backfires, it no longer applies? No way.
Disgusting‼️ This seems to be a way for that hospital to ‘punish’ ‘at-will employees’ that dare to want better: pay, work conditions, and time for families!! Over my hospital nursing career (which started in the early 1970s), this ‘high-handedness’ used by hospital management seems only to get worse each decade. 🤯🙄
It's funny how many of those kinds of tricks have backfired on employers in recent years. Couple of years ago it was SOP to include "Mediation" clauses in contracts and terms of service (still is but those clauses have been rewritten to prevent what follows), then a couple tens of thousands of "employees" (i'm pretty sure they were classified as gig or contract workers) all took up that mediation at the same time, suddenly companies wanted a class action b/c it would actually be cheaper
COUNTER-SUE THAT TYRANNICAL HOSPITAL FOR ALL PERSONAL DAMAGES FOR THIS BLATANT VIOLATION OF AT-WILL WORKERS' RIGHTS!
Can you imagine a Hospital suing their employees? Who would work for a company like that?
This judge has exceeded his authority by violating the workers constitutional rights.
No, he hasn't. It's a very temporary injunction for status quo to remain until he can hear final arguments. Completely standard procedure at this point.
No argument, prevents the pursuit of happiness. Judge violates rights with this
.
@@markdoldon8852 " It's a very temporary injunction " - Which by definition violates the protected rights of the workers in question.
@@markdoldon8852 Why don't you give us a citation on which law, State or Federal, which allows any judge to take an action such as this, against individuals he does not have jurisdiction over? There are no legal grounds for such an order, even an temp. order, and I am honestly amazed none of the workers have not already kicked this entire case up to the federal court level - this judge is wrong, plain and simple.
The judge need to make it right by forcing the old hospital to pay for the days the workers were not allowed to work.
I am in shock that a judge can keep a free American from working anywhere they want! This has got to be illegal.
Heh, "free", that's good 😂
wonder if they could all go against the judge once this is over
We'll probably get more info by Tuesday.
Those so-called 'free Americans' were slaves trying to leave the plantation.
The laws look good on paper but are open to interpretation
It baffles me how is that possible that a judge can force people to not work when they haven't broken any contracts. They are people not property.
Lots of health care workers felt how little they are appreciated in 2020, myself included.
They say you're so necessary and vital yet fight back with all their might when you want a raise to just keep up with inflation. Then you got coworkers who work oncall somewhere else and year they got a 1000$ end of the year bonus to thank them for their work. While the hospital you've been at for 3 years give you a 50$ Amazon gift card.
Then you try to leave because it's just taking so much out of you and they try to get all legal with you and make it as hard as they're can for you too leave... I am never going back to health care.
Honestly, the ex-employers should need to pay millions for filing this baseless suit, if they are employed at-will, they can leave whenever they want
Unless the courts decide it's time to set a new precedent, that workers are owned. Somehow it wouldn't surprise me if at least one corporate judge along the way sided with the employer making the suit.
The judge should be kicked off the bench for making such a ruling preventing the employees from changing jobs.
@@gilliganallmighty3 won’t happen, his Republican supporters will protect him and their slave owners. Same area that supports Q’anon Ron even though he transferred jobs from that area to help his buddies in China.
Honestly, I hope the employees sue the pants off them.
Yes, they should. But honestly, I can think of a few supreme court judges who themselves would like to tinker with the 13th amendment and it feels as if we live in times where they could actually do it. Imagine if at-will employment only applied to the employer.
Employees need to file a lawsuit immediately for lost wages against their former employer.
They should also file a lawsuit for mental and emotional trauma, physical and emotional trauma for stress, anxiety and lack of sleep, punitive damages for violating first amendment civil rights and any other and all punitive damages as a result of this hospital’s actions and/or rhetoric….
Directly sue the judge for not letting them work.
@@otherbob23 Unfortunately this would fall under judicial immunity.
In addition to punitive damages
@@otherbob23 they can’t sue the judge but they can sue the county/city he works for
Tyranny and bullying
Hthe "judge" SHOULD NOT be able to stop the employees from working at the other hospital! Liberalism is such a curse to society!
The employer cannot impose a single freaking thing. I’d go after them for lost wages after the fact. That’s ridiculous.
covid is the new communism.
They need to sue that Hospital until it goes bankrupt.
I would sue for much more than that. There has to be a nice lawsuit here somewhere.
The judge is the one to blame. The company can cry and try all they want, the judge should've laughed them out of the court.
@@mikelisteral7863 I didn't realize that covid lead us to a stateless classless society.
By the time this is resolved, the 2nd hospital will have already filled those positions and the at-will employees will be out of work. This is a Class Action lawsuit that needs to happen, and the old hospital AND the Judge needs to be sued for so much money they permanently learn their lessons. The money that Theta-Care is spending to fight this legal battle is FAR MORE than they would have paid to match the offer. That's how insane this is!
If you think those positions will all be filled quickly, you are mistaken. Everyone needs people and people are tired of working for low wages. There is a ton of competition right now.
Sin of pride. It’s a pure case of ‘I want what I want because I want it’ and will self destruct if necessary.
No not the hospital! The management of the hospital...
Just because a harm can be identified does not mean any wrong has been committed. The judge has violated an innocent party's rights to make the other party whole.
Just like how police continue to bully or harass people even when they have been proven innocent, they just can't admit when they were wrong about someone and they continue dropping more resources with the hope that their efforts weren't wasted. It's like gambling except instead of a low chance to win, there's 0 chance to win.
Thanks for this video, as I didn't know about this case until just now (10/14/22). I've looked at the ruling that has since been issued, and I'm going to reference this case to my students in class on Monday since it fits right into what we'll be discussing. I love it when serendipity happens!
So a court really told these people that they could not except another job? What kind of freedom is that? I would never obey such an order, i dont see how a court thinks it has the right to refuse to let people make decisions about where they work.
Given that they were at will employees, the court was WRONG to issue this injunction. At will is all anyone, including the court, needs to know. If an employer wants to secure their staff, they should have them under contract.
Exactly!
Yup, even trying to force someone under contract to stay is stupid. If someone wants to quit, their mindset is of someone who no longer cares about that job. Trying to force someone to stay will only cause them to collect a check and do as little as possible
Or, the old Hospital could have compensated and treated them better.
Why does Lehto not address the 'at will' issue immediately? That's the only thing we all are wondering about.
@@cornfed123567 A contract is a n agreement, and once you sign it, your bound to it just like the other guy is. If these employees had been under contract, I would have sided with the employer. A deal is a deal.
If the employees are that important to the hospital, the hospital should never have employed them on an at-will basis in the first place.
As an RN, I will say, if you treat your employees better, they won't leave en masse. Too bad, so sad. Also, healthcare should NEVER be a for-profit industry. This is what happens.
How can a judge block at-will employees from working at another company? How is that legal?
I live in Appleton WI where this is happening. The two locations are about a 20-25 minute drive apart, without lights and sirens. None of the employees "expertise" is being lost to the community. This is just petty retribution. Looks like I know what local hospital I'm not going to be using
Ain't that the truth. An hour northwest of you, theda has had a "colorful" history.
I’m local to this too. Not to mention, Green Bay is around 25 minutes away also with 4 hospitals and more than 1 trauma center.
If they're at will employees HOW does this judge have any control over where these people work? This is creating a dangerous precedent that in essence makes workers slaves.
i read that the employees went to work anyway because the judge can't really enforce anything. still this idiot needs to never be a judge again.
@@smurfx They might do that, but this all happened on the 21st, and they're due to start work on the 24th.
It sounds to me like one of those build back better ideas!
@@JayHarrisGuitarLessons kindly administer self-copulation.
biden democrat slave masters think the employees are their slaves.......no surprise from slave masters. maybe the slaves should do as biden's nazi brownshirts have done and burnt buildings to the ground as when being really being enslaved by democrat filth, the democrat filth needs to understand that such evil is not to be tolerated. sadly democrat slave masters like to DICTATE who can work according to vaccine status or provide "preference" by racist criteria set by racist democrat "quotas"
Right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
this is insane how can a court prevent people from working where they want.
How does the judge have the “authority” to prevent a free person from freely changing employment? What would happen if they just went to their new employers and clocked in? Would it be a criminal offense?
I believe the new employer would be held responsible for allowing the TRO to be violated. Having said that, the TRO is BS anyway.
@@jacobrzeszewski6527 Nope. They wouldn't be held accountable, considering the order from the judge is illegal to begin with.
@@eggpod4567 it's not illegal until a very expensive legal proceeding says it is.
@@ShaferHart Laywer up and sue the hell out of the judge and the employer. What they're doing is illegal as fuck.
@@eggpod4567 So if the TRO orders the employees to not work and make money and starve to death and become homeless in the endeffect, they have to follow through and die in a winter night under a bridge.
The judge really has no authority to tell uncontracted worker where they can or can't work. This is yet another example of how broken the courts have become.
Did you watch the whole video? The judge didn't say anything to the impacted workers.
@@RK-kn1ud ??? Excuse me? The Judge issued a temporary restraining order STOPPING these workers from starting their new jobs at the other hospital.
@@gbnq2513 The workers are impacted, yes. However, the legal battle is taking place between the two hospitals. The judge did not call the 7 people in the courtroom and legally ban them from anything.
The difference is that if the employees show up to work at the new hospital, they will be in violation of NOTHING.... because they were not told they couldn't work. The only party that would be in violation is the new hospital.
@@RK-kn1ud True, but in the meantime, regardless of who the order is directed at, these people can't work at the new hospital. I would only hope the old place pays for this nonsense.
@@ElationProductions From what I've read online, the new hospital told them to come in on Monday anyway.
That said, the OP that I replied to has a statement that is factually incorrect despite the end result being the same.
Instead of spending money on lawyers… use that money for a raise??
What jerk faces 🙄
That judge should never work again. Absolutely Inept
This is insane
Employers can fire someone “at will” … but you can’t leave?
Have we lost our collective minds now?
“have we lost our collective minds now?” - it seems to be the case.
That is called being a hostage at that point
No. Just that hospital's ridiculous lawyer and judge that doesn't want to deal with this crap on a Friday afternoon.
@@CobaltLobster if he didn't want to deal with it he could have just kicked the case out of court with prejudice for no standing.
I remember hearing someone giving a talk about money and hyperinflation. The government promising benefits they can't afford, people becoming unwilling to work, people quitting work because work getting harder but no real increase in pay though costs of goods and services explode,, and at some point it becomes illegal to quit jobs. I think the talk was Mike Maloney but can't recall title. It may have been his comparison of USA to fall of Rome. Thus far it has gone exactly as he said.
The fact that it's gone this far and the judge has actually given them the injunction should be seen as a sign that the judge is either being bribed or has some kind of personal connection with someone running the hospital. There's no legal reason, there's no law in play, the judge is basically legislating by bullying.
Or is a mindless marxist.
@@talisikid1618 you dont know what that word means lol, I’m a actual socialist and no one on my side supports this.
@@talisikid1618 wtf are you talking about. This is peek capitalism my dude.
Where I live, the County Commission (CC) head appoints members of the hospital board. The CC head is also a partner of a law firm that handles legal affairs for the hospital. Any one see a conflict of interest? Welcome to South GA politics...
@@christiansmith804 what happens when u run out of other peoples money? Oh, yeah, we print more & ruin the dollar......
All you have to do is put in a appeal to a higher court and apply for a job at a third different hospital outside the injunction judge's jurisdiction!
Hospital administrators are out of control. Compare admin salaries vs doctors and nurses. It's laughable
How does the court even have a reason to be involved? The court has no business holding these employees back from their new job?
I was thinking that too. How can they have an at-will work LAW, yet at the same time the first hospital is allowed to prevent them from going to work at the second hospital, thus apparently implying that there is no such thing as an at-will work law??
@@SirReptitious no they aren't allowed to stop them
@@strawberrylotlizard did you not pay attention to anything that was said in the video and his comment...OR... am I just confused at what you said.
Thought For The Day: If the Hospital will sue their employees, imagine what the Hospital will do to their patients!
Run Away, Patients!
I think those patients are traumatically injured and probably don't care who saves their life.
if i were one of the workers involved in this case, who has had my earnings reduced to zero by this frivilous lawsuit and has been obviously harmed by hospital A, i would make sure i would sue hospital A for damages plus suffering. and these workers were "at-will?" the judge in this case is obviously incompetent or corrupt to have even allowed this case to move forward
My husband loves your show now. We were listening out in the hot tub. He says if you treat your people good they don’t want to go. Have a great night. We’re listening ❤️🇨🇦
I’m a RN and can tell you hospitals have been abusing the nursing staff for years, I worked 60+ a week for 5 years straight without a vacation, I had to quit to get time off, hospitals like to run tight shifts with no extra nurses as backup and not enough to do the job, you can’t even call in sick because there is no one to fill in. People have no idea how bad things are
I’d have to wonder if its due to an actual shortage of not enough people wanting to be nurses? Management refusing to hire more nurses, or a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts.
Someone gets into nursing, but because of a shortage, and bad treatment, leaves that field.
Maybe a mix of all 3? I’m not sure.
Come work in, a Canadian Hospital, & take, yearly vacation time.
Enjoy our lock-down society too 🥲
@@XFizzlepop-Berrytwist they refuse to hire any extra coverage in nurses because it affects their bottom line in “for profit” medicine and THEIR BONUSES. And there is the real crux of the matter.
@@calicocritterscrafts886 so true. Their staffing algorithms say 'x' nurses can accomplish the task and they get a fat bonus next quarter.
My brother is a GP-he has been short staffed since day 1 two years ago after his practice got bought out.
Seems like they should be allowed to sue the offending hospital for lost wages due to the suit.
Problem is that any money they get from that will be in the future, their bills have to be paid now. This is just insane.
Always interesting, thank you.
All they had to do was pay them more.
I'm no lawyer, but blocking at-will employees people from working at a new job seems equally unconstitutional. If a judge is bluffing, that certainly seems like official misconduct. I'd like to see EVERY employee to leave that medical group as a result of this and every citizen to boycott them.
I would immediately start a temporary labor service and hire all my ex coworkers and send them to the new hospital as Temps that work for me, not the hospital. Charge them 5% so that they can still get paid, still work, still provide for the community, leaving me stuck outside because I started the agency... (because the judge will likely hold me in contempt).
You're assuming that at-will employment laws were ever intended to be fair or equally applied to employers and employees. Huge assumption. No evidence exists to suggest this was ever intended.
If the employees have to return to work or be forced into poverty, that is pretty harmful to the individual just for trying to find a better job. THEDA could take years to find replacements. They should have thought about that in their long term short term analysis.
Kinda hard to choose which hospital you go to in an emergency
@@namor3607 at will employment laws were designed to prevent black workers from unionizing with white workers in Arkansas. So it was never intended to be in the employees favor.
This is a SLAPP lawsuit. The judge had no legal authority to prevent the "at-will" employees from taking a job at any place they choose.
Yes. Why does a Judge have the power to prevent qualified at will applicants from working anywhere they want, anytime they want? This seems like judicial activism of the worst kind.
@@pierrechildress8875 I agree with you, right wing judicial activism: protect business at all costs.
@@Dave.O he's a Democrat. Choke on those apples.
@@Dave.O The guy is a *demoKKKrat.*
@@teamtinyturtle9103 be orrriginal
I love the way you explain your train of thought! Nothing like common sense & logic!
Imagine that, corporations have zero problems laying off half their staff, even during the holidays. Then when employees leave en mass on their own, that's somehow unacceptable to them. I hope they get absolutely wrecked in court & these folks countersue for lost wages.
@Chris G there is an easy fix for that. Offer a damn contract!
@Chris G Loyality checks - so in their reasoning was they were paying a bonus so you were obligated to stay 50 future weeks. Were they also promising to not release you for the next 50 weeks as a show of loyality?
@Chris G to protect you from this bu!!$h!t! I am in the same boat as you! I prefer no contract because my skill set is in high demand and I’m good at it! I’d rather be able to leave at a moment’s notice if I felt it was no longer in my best interest. But my point remains. An employer can force me to accept a contract to continue employment.
I'm betting that the hospital that was attempting to hire these employees also has a legitimate case to sue the other hospital and the judge.
@@donaldphillips9403 I'd bet so as well. They're prevent willing applicants from filling roles they need to run their business.