Hostile Workplace

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

marka1620

New Member
Hello all

1st time poster here. I work for the Federal government (Dept. of Veterans affairs).

My supervisor about a year ago basically banned me from any contact (unless official) with a female co-worker. The both of us get along great and enjoy taking breaks/lunch so we can chat. Nothing between us besides being just friends.

Any contact that I have with her has to be documented with date/time. His justification for this is "perception" or what people might think. Mind you, we having NEVER done anything besides talk.

Since then our contact has been very limited. Well, she was recently in the hospital (very serious). When she returned, I stopped by to see how she is doing as she is my friend. Well, my supervisor saw us and had me in his office and reiterated that I'm to have no contact. I explained the situation and now I'm facing disciplinary actions.

Was wondering if he has such right to forbid me from having lunch with her while I'm on duty? When I come to work, I fear that if I bump into her and say hi, that many of the eyes in there will report me to my supervisor. His view his, do as I say without question. Is this a basis for an EEO complaint?

Any help would be appriciated.

Thanks,
Mark
 
Last edited:
This has happend to me

The only thing I can think of is that you co-worker filed a sexual harrassment complaint, thats the only reason your sup can legally ask you not to socialize with the co-worker but, they have to inform you of any complaints against you because there has to be an investigation, trust me I've been through this. You have not said if your co-worker has also been forbidden to socialize with you also. Or this be that your sup is a petty tyrant and you need to talk to your union rep, I'm surprised you haven't since all gov't jobs are represented by a union.
 
I would be interested to see a link to the law that says an employer may not legally ask co-workers not to socialize unless there has been a complaint. I would also like to see a link to the law that says they are required to notify the employee about the complaint.
 
No compliant has been filed against me by her or by me against her. She has not been told to "stay away" from me. Because her supervisor doesnt see a problem. But, mine does because....as he puts it. The "perception" that people my have of the two of us talking.

She wants to file a complaint against him. But, I don't her don't bother as the real issue is between him and is employees and is a control issue.

Did go and see my union and will follow the grievance process. I was issued a "letter of admonishment" because I talked to her. But, my union is small (only 10 people) and the reps are new to the whole union thing.
 
I am sure that it might help if you asked your supervisor why he is treating you this way. Also isn't there a larger union besides the one in your building that you can talk to? It sounds borderline harassment .?. Anyone else thing so?
 
marka1620 said:
No compliant has been filed against me by her or by me against her. She has not been told to "stay away" from me. Because her supervisor doesnt see a problem. But, mine does because....as he puts it. The "perception" that people my have of the two of us talking.

She wants to file a complaint against him. But, I don't her don't bother as the real issue is between him and is employees and is a control issue.

Did go and see my union and will follow the grievance process. I was issued a "letter of admonishment" because I talked to her. But, my union is small (only 10 people) and the reps are new to the whole union thing.
Click to expand...

The Federal Governement has a Union?

They do this in the oilfield all the time because women seem to think they need to be in isolated places with 30 men. It's called "fraternizing".

But, it really boils down to harrasment. Do any other men and women talk?

Harassment is defined as " a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such a person and serves no legitimate purpose." in United States Code Anootated at 18 U.S.C.A
 
T tops said:
I am sure that it might help if you asked your supervisor why he is treating you this way. Also isn't there a larger union besides the one in your building that you can talk to? It sounds borderline harassment .?. Anyone else thing so?
Click to expand...

Yep :yes: If anything, it sounds like someone is jealous and want's to keep them apart.
 
There is NOTHING in the law that prohibits an employer from limiting your contact with any given co-worker while you are at work. This is neither illegal harassment nor illegal discrimination.


Anyone who feels otherwise is free to post a link to a law backing up their position.
 
Some states have extended and added to employment discrimination laws per state pertecting sexual orientation and other discriminatory practices.

But, if you are employed by the Federal Government, then you are stuck with their rules.Which seems to be the case here.

If it made work complicated, or you two were being made an example of, perhaps in a civil action you would have something. But, when it comes to how they can treat you, to the best of my knowledge you both could be fired tomarow, and no excuse need be given. "At-will employee". Not sure if this applies to federal employee's or not.

If you have a handbook I would read up on that.
 
I don't have a problem with staying away from her office. Last thing I would want to do is bother her. Ofcouse, she says I'm not bothering her and enjoys the conversation. I do stay away from her when we are both working and she knows why. Less hassle....

But, what really chaps my a@$ is that my boss attempted to forbid me from even having lunch with her (and friends) in the public canteen. That was nothing but a control issue and I did go and talk to the EEO and stated I wanted to file a complaint.

He backed off after EEO got involved....in regards to the lunch issue. My union is FOP and we are not covered under the larger local union that covers the main hospital. There are only 10 of us in this local FOP and not much $$$ to spend on the legal side.

He is fairly new to the goverment way of things. Been here for about 3 years and it's his way or the highway. This is just another pissing match between him and the 10 officers. Manning is tough here and many of us do alot of overtime to maintain the min. shift coverage.

I once got stuck working a 32 hour shift straight over the weekend due to manning (he won't pick up any shifts). His "own" policy is. Any police officer held in excess of 18 hour shift is on "light duty" status. Which means you can sleep, but if you don't respond to emergency calls because you fail to wake up. You face dereliction of duty. Personally, I can't sleep with 25 lbs. of gear on my waist and we can't take our gear/weapon off.
 
Okay, so your boss is a jerk. That happens.

But it is not illegal to be a jerk. It's not even illegal to be a world-class jerk. And nothing you have posted violates any laws.
 
cbg said:
Okay, so your boss is a jerk. That happens.

But it is not illegal to be a jerk. It's not even illegal to be a world-class jerk. And nothing you have posted violates any laws.
Click to expand...

I guess your right. Unfair world out there......
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top