I need a lawyer

Your flipping back and forth between sock puppet accounts isn't fooling anybody, hotrod.

TacoMac said:

he tested positive for an impairing drug.

Click to expand...

According to what is he impaired? People go to work all the fucking time on pharmas...aren't they impaired as well? Here, the pharmacy puts a little sticker on the bottle saying operate machinery with care.... Full stop my ass....

And a second thought....with our impending legalization if this is how things are going to go there are going to be a lot of positions open....lots of folks be losing their jobs...then all the things that go with having that stable income...ahhhh economic stability....

We advised him to get an attorney after he received the letter...it’s not rocket science dude.

TheRealDman said:

We advised him to get an attorney after he received the letter...it’s not rocket science dude.

Click to expand...

And others advised him to ignore it dude...it's not rocket science...dude.

TacoMac said:

I teach criminal justice. I think I'm more than a bit aware of what can happen. I quite literally see it several times per month.

Click to expand...

This is Canada. We have a constitution built on our Charter of Rights. If an employer refuses to let an employee seek medical relief they get a $10,000 fine. I know this first hand as I reported one of my employers and they were fined.
I does not take a genius to figure out how litigation is so different in the US with all those blood thirsty lawyers trying to make a name for themselves, along with the money of course. Maybe you should go spread your FUD in the US forum, please and thanks.

what is it they say about the ones who teach.....

gb123 said:

what is it they say about the ones who teach.....

Click to expand...

Thoses that can’t do, teach .

TacoMac said:

Your "opinion"?

I'm talking about FACT, pal.

His claim goes to shit if a judge hears they tried to give him relief and he flat out ignored it. That is litigation 101. They would at that point ask the judge to use arbitration and settle it that way, which he/she in all likelihood would. That, of course, would remove any input any lawyer of his after the fact would have on the case at all. It would be based on the offer made that was ignored.

Guess who is going to win in that scenario.

But keep on giving bad advice. When he gets completely screwed over, he'll have you to thank for it.

THEY know what they're doing.
I know what they're doing. I've seen it before.
YOU are completely clueless.

Click to expand...

You don't know the 'FACTS', pal. What in the fuck are you talking about? "Tried to give him relief" - after they fired him, lied on his record of employment, ruined his reputation and deprived him of an income. It don't work that way. You do not absolve yourself of litigation by pretending it didn't happen. He is not required to communicate with them ever - he has the human rights commission and employment standards branch to do that for him.
I have been advising Gquebed since this incident occurred in October, I've read the original docs., and he is doing everything right. I've also sued for wrongful dismissal against a large American company - and won.
Before you take a swipe at me and my 'opinion', you might want to do your research so you don't sound like a complete asshole.

TacoMac said:

And others advised him to ignore it dude...

Click to expand...

Along with getting a lawyer and forwarding it to the human rights. This ain't the fucking United States - we don't kiss an employers ass up here. They fuck up - we make them pay. You don't violate my constitutional rights and then get to force me to respond to you.
You claim to be an expert and teach law, yet you haven't figured out that different jurisdictions (and countries) may have different laws? Bizarre.
"those that can, do.Those that can't, teach."

TacoMac said:

I teach criminal justice. I think I'm more than a bit aware of what can happen. I quite literally see it several times per month.

Click to expand...

In Canada? Because if not then you haven't a god damn clue how it works. It varies from province to province, much like it does state to state. But please oh mighty wiseass law professor who can't differentiate that laws are different in other countries, tell us how the law works in our country. Community college huh?

VIANARCHRIS said:

I have been advising Gquebed since this incident occurred in October

Click to expand...

To clarify - we shared ideas, Gquebed had it figured out for himself - he didn't really need my help.

So I'm looking for a lawyer, but that's almost impossible during the holidays. Still hoping John Conroy will provide the assistance he mentioned a while back.

In the mean time, here's the questions that my employer wants my doctor to answer. What are the legalities of that request? What are your opinions of the questions? Any potential traps? Your thoughts in general... please and thanks.

Gquebed said:

So I'm looking for a lawyer, but that's almost impossible during the holidays. Still hoping John Conroy will provide the assistance he mentioned a while back.

In the mean time, here's the questions that my employer wants my doctor to answer. What are the legalities of that request? What are your opinions of the questions? Any potential traps? Your thoughts in general... please and thanks.

Click to expand...

I’m no lawyer but if I were in your position and had a verifiable medical condition:

I would not bring that to my doctor.
I would immediately cut all communications with the former employer
I would get the best labour lawyer I can find (and afford) on retainer immediately
Instruct my new lawyer to act in my behalf with not only my employer but the ministry of labour.
Sue for lost wages, damages, lawyers fees, their first born...

IMO They are clearly trying to trap you either overtly (last question) or by obtaining evidence to use against you (I.e. does he “need” to use medical marijunana).

I don’t envy your position at all.

it seems a little repetitive. Get in touch with Conroy and if he can't ask him to refer you. Has the HRC seen this?

Gquebed said:

So I'm looking for a lawyer, but that's almost impossible during the holidays. Still hoping John Conroy will provide the assistance he mentioned a while back.

In the mean time, here's the questions that my employer wants my doctor to answer. What are the legalities of that request? What are your opinions of the questions? Any potential traps? Your thoughts in general... please and thanks.

Click to expand...

That information is for them to cover their ass by trying to 'accommodate' your disability. You are not asking for accommodation as you do not medicate before or during work, and you have proven your physical ability to do the job. They have no need to know your personal medical information if it doesn't affect your job. They have hired a consultant or lawyer who is advising them of their responsibilities, but they are not relevant in this situation. Good luck with the lawyer search...you are under no rush to respond, you'll find someone after the holidays.
If it were me (cause I'm an asshole!), I'd knock on the bosses door Christmas morning and give him a letter stating that he is not to send anyone to your house and to please refer any requests to my lawyer. See how he likes having his personal space violated.

You have as long as it took them to respond to find a lawyer and respond through him/her. No hurry and definitely don't respond directly, that's exactly what their lawyer wants.

I would also concur to cease communication with former employer,don't bring that to your doctor and get a lawyer asap.In fact if in any way you can afford it get Kirk Tousaw.

WHATFG said:

it seems a little repetitive. Get in touch with Conroy and if he can't ask him to refer you. Has the HRC seen this?

Click to expand...

Not yet....

And i called John and left a couple messages. He took a week or so last time to get back to me so... will see...

Meanwhile i have a half dozen other calls out too...

I would strongly suggest that these questions go to HRC and make sure you tell them they were hand delivered....that's the oddest thing...trying to intimidate you...well folks, I think this is the next big hurdle in the war on prohibition...well that and impaired driving and unfortunately someone has to be the Guinea pig.

What get`s me about some of the question is how speculative they are. They can`t be that naive.... so must be a trap of some kind... if you answer them then they could claim the doctor is an idiot and if the doc doesn`t answer then they could claim lack of cooperation. There`s close to half a dozen that I would simply answer *I can`t predict the future.*

But the trap seems pretty flimsy.