Yes Burbank is a few miles less than LAX but Ontario is about 35 miles more than LAX. I guess I used LAX as an example because there are so many long-term parking lots and private long-term lots that a car could be there for months without LE being notified.
Just a quick update, with little new info. Wooner's contract was terminated "for cause," and the city of McFarland currently has no timeline for his replacement.
onlineI hope it only for breach of contract since the other items on the list are so egregious. It also may be the only legal way to be able to hire another city manager."Termination for cause" -- doesn't that usually mean something pretty serious? This is what I found when I looked it up:
"Termination for cause is serious business. Employers and employees have many reasons for parting ways, but employment termination for cause is not a desirable outcome—for either the employer or the employee. Termination for cause generally occurs when an employee makes a severe error in actions or judgment.
Termination for cause occurs when an employee's actions in the workplace, interactions with their coworkers, interaction with their manager, or ways in which they treat a customer or vendor are so egregious that they require employment termination—sometimes immediately.
termination letter.
Termination for cause can occur for any actions that an employer considers being grave misconduct. Examples of such situations include these:
- Violation of the company code of conduct or ethics policy
- Failure to follow company policy
- Breach of contract
- Violence or threatened violence
- Threats or threatening behavior
- Stealing company money or property
- Lying
- Falsifying records
- Extreme insubordination
- Harassment
- Failing an alcohol or drug test
- A conviction for some crimes
- Watching
These are not the only reasons why an employer might fire an employee for cause. Every time employers think they've seen every possible reason to terminate an employee for cause, an employee proves them wrong. So, an exhaustive list is impossible."
(Source: For What Reasons Will an Employer FiIt re an Employee?)
They've already stated he wasn't in trouble for financial misconduct. Could the cause be abandoning his position (I guess this would be breach of contract)? Would they really terminate him if they thought he was missing not by his own volition? For some reason, I've become very curious about this case.
I’m sure he was terminated due to abandoning position. The city can not afford to pay his salary plus hire another person to do his job. There is no need to look further than the abandonment of his job. They are not LE. They make no statements as to whether his abandonment is voluntary or involuntary."Termination for cause" -- doesn't that usually mean something pretty serious? This is what I found when I looked it up:
"Termination for cause is serious business. Employers and employees have many reasons for parting ways, but employment termination for cause is not a desirable outcome—for either the employer or the employee. Termination for cause generally occurs when an employee makes a severe error in actions or judgment.
Termination for cause occurs when an employee's actions in the workplace, interactions with their coworkers, interaction with their manager, or ways in which they treat a customer or vendor are so egregious that they require employment termination—sometimes immediately.
termination letter.
Termination for cause can occur for any actions that an employer considers being grave misconduct. Examples of such situations include these:
- Violation of the company code of conduct or ethics policy
- Failure to follow company policy
- Breach of contract
- Violence or threatened violence
- Threats or threatening behavior
- Stealing company money or property
- Lying
- Falsifying records
- Extreme insubordination
- Harassment
- Failing an alcohol or drug test
- A conviction for some crimes
- Watching
These are not the only reasons why an employer might fire an employee for cause. Every time employers think they've seen every possible reason to terminate an employee for cause, an employee proves them wrong. So, an exhaustive list is impossible."
(Source: For What Reasons Will an Employer Fire an Employee?)
They've already stated he wasn't in trouble for financial misconduct. Could the cause be abandoning his position (I guess this would be breach of contract)? Would they really terminate him if they thought he was missing not by his own volition? For some reason, I've become very curious about this case.
Somewhere it stated he was estranged from his father.
The man interviewed keeps using the word "was". "Was" a great guy, etc., referring to him in the past tense. : (
I will leave it to you, an employment law professional* to determine what is standard practice. However, what happens to his family? Their medical coverage? This seems very hard hearted for the family of a missing person.
The family is likely eligible for Cobra benefits, the same as anyone leaving a position.
The release automatically triggers COBRA notifications. Most public employees also have life insurance but I’m not sure how or when the spouse could tap into that, or any retirement/401k benefits.
