Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, you're taking it because you're "in a rage" or because you truly cannot work in office?

You sound like a complete brat and I would want you gone even if you're hard to replace, based on your post.

This. We aren’t a socialist company. You basically “went out sick” because you are too precious to RTO.

Anonymous wrote:Please explain exactly how you cannot work in an office.

Anonymous wrote:Grinder did RTO mandatory and 50 percent quit.

CEO said well the new lean business model should increase the bottom line.

No severance, no unemployment paid out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, you're taking it because you're "in a rage" or because you truly cannot work in office?

You sound like a complete brat and I would want you gone even if you're hard to replace, based on your post.

Ditto. We had one of these when we RTO last year and we managed her out. In addition to not wanting to RTO she also had performance issues. She tried the FMLA angle as well but that’s never a long term solution. Had no problem filling her job after we got her out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You either:
1) have a medical condition that means you CAN'T work, at least a regular schedule, which entitles you to FMLA; or
2) have a medical condition that means you CAN work with an accommodation such as WFH

You played the game and you lost, overplayed your hand.

Can you articulate how your history of sepsis means that you can work, if remotely? Clearly, your medical providers could not.

You are mistaken. People who can’t work a regular schedule are often accommodated via schedule and location adjustments—thru ADA. If an employer refuses those accommodations and doesn’t engage on what could be done instead, taking leave protected by FMLA is an appropriate choice—and a right of the employee.

The condition may change, the employer’s sense of what is “reasonable” may change, and in all of our lifetimes underlying working conditions have abruptly shifted once so far.

I am not mistaken. Both of my numbered statements are correct.

Anonymous wrote:Wait, you're taking it because you're "in a rage" or because you truly cannot work in office?

You sound like a complete brat and I would want you gone even if you're hard to replace, based on your post.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you be more specific about your illness? The people I've known who've had sepsis recovered pretty quickly once treated.

lol what?! Sepsis famously has a high mortality rate…

No. My dad had sepsis from UTIs twice this year alone. His hospital stay were 5 days each time (with 3x cancer and over 80).

Your father is fortunate. The fatality rate is 30%. The diagnosis is often missed in younger people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You either:
1) have a medical condition that means you CAN'T work, at least a regular schedule, which entitles you to FMLA; or
2) have a medical condition that means you CAN work with an accommodation such as WFH

You played the game and you lost, overplayed your hand.

Can you articulate how your history of sepsis means that you can work, if remotely? Clearly, your medical providers could not.

Not OP, but doctors famously expect employers to be reasonable.

If OP now has a history of sepsis, why would it be good for OP to go back into a Covid riddled workplace, where no one but them would be wearing a mask? It's not 2019 anymore.

I would use that anger to look for another telecommute position OP, and let your employer have 4 openings they can't fill, instead of 3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You either:
1) have a medical condition that means you CAN'T work, at least a regular schedule, which entitles you to FMLA; or
2) have a medical condition that means you CAN work with an accommodation such as WFH

You played the game and you lost, overplayed your hand.

Can you articulate how your history of sepsis means that you can work, if remotely? Clearly, your medical providers could not.

You are mistaken. People who can’t work a regular schedule are often accommodated via schedule and location adjustments—thru ADA. If an employer refuses those accommodations and doesn’t engage on what could be done instead, taking leave protected by FMLA is an appropriate choice—and a right of the employee.

The condition may change, the employer’s sense of what is “reasonable” may change, and in all of our lifetimes underlying working conditions have abruptly shifted once so far.

Anonymous wrote:You either:
1) have a medical condition that means you CAN'T work, at least a regular schedule, which entitles you to FMLA; or
2) have a medical condition that means you CAN work with an accommodation such as WFH

You played the game and you lost, overplayed your hand.

Can you articulate how your history of sepsis means that you can work, if remotely? Clearly, your medical providers could not.

Anonymous wrote:Can you be more specific about your illness? The people I've known who've had sepsis recovered pretty quickly once treated.