What is reasonable duty to notify employee before destroying his belongings?

[Jody L]

Jurisdiction

US Federal Law

As an employee of a federal government hospital, I requested a locker in the men's locker room. When it was given to me, the man responsible for locker maintenance took my name and hospital department name, so he knew whose locker it was and where he could find me. Over a year later, this man put signs in the locker room stating that 'fumigation' would take place such that valuable items should be removed. I removed all items that I was concerned would be damaged by fumes, but I left some items behind that I thought would be OK despite fumigation. The signs did not say that people needed to remove their personal locks from the lockers or that he would be opening up lockers or taking people's belongings or throwing away their belongings, but he did all of the above without making any attempt to notify me of any of these actions. The hospital attorney states that the man acted within his scope of work and that I was given reasonable notice to remove my belongings. I don't see how this is ethically or legally justifiable, because the man did not actually post any signs saying that he would destroy people's property if it was not removed and he made no attempt to notify me once he had taken my belongings. How can I prove/argue my point?

 

[army judge]

You tried to prove your case and the lawyer shooed you away.
Apparently you have no point.
Chalk this up as another lesson in the life long college of live and learn.

 

[hrforme]

You both made assumptions:
Him - that you Didn't think the stuff you left was valuable
You- that they would know you still wanted it

When fumigating they needed full access into the locker and hence the need to remove the lock.

Maybe it could've been worded a little more clearly but in my opinion it was enough for you to know that they were going to access and deal with the lockers

 

[mightymoose]

I suspect the sign said something to the effect of "Remove all valuables from lockers by July 1".

To you "valuables" many certain items of significant worth.
To them "valuables" meant to get all your crap out of the locker.

If it was a misinterpretation or misunderstanding there really is nobody at fault. You already got the important items out so your loss should have been minimal. They might have been more sympathetic if the same happened to many people.

Rather than get on my employer's bad side I would just suck up the loss and move on.

 

[ElleMD]

I'm not sure how you thought they were going to fumigate your locker with the lock still on it? Nor why you would leave anything behind to be doused in chemicals? There would be no point to fumigating a room full of lockers if the lockers themselves were left full of stuff. If the process was unclear, you should have clarified it beforehand. I'm honestly not sure what you thought your employer should have done differently other than maybe be more blunt in telling you to take your stuff home.