Posted on Feb 3, 2023
Would you to vote for a person, especially a veteran, if they disrespected-discriminated against a soldier/veteran or allowed such?
2K
5
3
1
1
0
Back in 2019, Marion County Board Of County Commissioners (FL) knowingly allowed their Human Resources to "Medically Terminate" a Service-Connected Veteran for receiving a VA-Issued oxygen therapy Rx. The Commissioners, the County Administrator, The Deputy County Administrator knew of it and did nothing to stop it. The EEOC (Miami) Chief Investigator (a Vet) couldn't exonerate the County, who did little to find a real accommodation to retain the Veteran.
One of those Commissioners is a a naval veteran, as is the Governor, who has seemingly done squat to intercede.
I don't know how any Veteran could NOT aid a Wounded Warrior and would love their explanation.
Wouldn't you?
Would you expect a College to retain the person that started that "medical-termination" witch hunt, like the University of Central Florida has done with that running-scared Engineer from Marion County?
One of those Commissioners is a a naval veteran, as is the Governor, who has seemingly done squat to intercede.
I don't know how any Veteran could NOT aid a Wounded Warrior and would love their explanation.
Wouldn't you?
Would you expect a College to retain the person that started that "medical-termination" witch hunt, like the University of Central Florida has done with that running-scared Engineer from Marion County?
Honor
Official
University of Central Florida
Ocala
Discrimination
Posted 2 y ago
Responses: 2
2
2
0
I apologize, but there is sone information seemingly lacking. If the policy associated with the WWarrior Veteran would have otherwise called for the separation of any other employee then there is no issue. It may be sad and seemingly evil, but there are no exceptions to sone policies, even for Vets.
Is there something with the Vets duties that would be hampered by the utilization of the oxygen tank? If so, the burden is on the Vet. However, it would seem that the Office for which he works should/could be able to offer him a different position. Again, if not then the Vet has retraining options through the VA. He can also apply for Social Security Disability.
Again, without all the facts, these point may assist when considering next steps. It would be a bold move for State level agencies to unlawfully terminate a Wounded Warrior without just cause.
Is there something with the Vets duties that would be hampered by the utilization of the oxygen tank? If so, the burden is on the Vet. However, it would seem that the Office for which he works should/could be able to offer him a different position. Again, if not then the Vet has retraining options through the VA. He can also apply for Social Security Disability.
Again, without all the facts, these point may assist when considering next steps. It would be a bold move for State level agencies to unlawfully terminate a Wounded Warrior without just cause.
(2)
(0)
PFC Edgar Mosier
Respectfully, did you miss that I shared that the EEOC could NOT exonerate the employer?
Are you missing the various accommodations that http://www.askjan.org puts forth in honoring the Laws of the ADA / ADAA?
Even of more importance, fact-wise, the Veteran was a IMSA-Certified Sign Technician.
They terminated him, because they attempted to claim a non-stated "essential" function of, as they put it, "Machine Operator - Wielder". Now, if you know about Federal Highway Authority, you know that NO sign can be wielded on per the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (the MUTCD, Traffic Engineers' Bible), because that would make the sign unsafe, aka a tort-liability.
This Disabled soul was not the County's only Sign Technician, so in light of ASKJAN, others could have been assigned, even if one COULD wield on a traffic sign.
Lastly, the individual, who is quite otherwise able and multi-skilled, even as a MOS'ed 64C10 (Heavy Truck Driver), as well as having been a Librarian's Aide and a logistician, has still more skills and trades that the County had open.
My final understanding is that when the EEOC was actually a new Agency, then known as the EOA, this soldier was in the CETA Program and his mother was employed by the EOA, constantly reviewing various cases with her son.
But, as you stated, you didn't, and still don't have all of the facts; however, the main fact stands screaming - The EEOC could NOT exonerate the employer.
Sweet thing of it all that you don't know is that our hero lives in Florida, which will pay his tuition to a state college (UF is likely) and he's considering a second career in Human Resources to prevent such dishonoring acts.
Wanna bet he gets hired by those wingnuts and still holds that 100% rating? Seems he scored high on his AFEES tests and on his un-prepared-for GED test. He has been offered, twice, membership into Mensa. This fella has always been quick-witted, thinking out-of-the-box, and sufficient.
Near-renaissance individuals scare hell out of "by-the-book" types...
Are you missing the various accommodations that http://www.askjan.org puts forth in honoring the Laws of the ADA / ADAA?
Even of more importance, fact-wise, the Veteran was a IMSA-Certified Sign Technician.
They terminated him, because they attempted to claim a non-stated "essential" function of, as they put it, "Machine Operator - Wielder". Now, if you know about Federal Highway Authority, you know that NO sign can be wielded on per the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (the MUTCD, Traffic Engineers' Bible), because that would make the sign unsafe, aka a tort-liability.
This Disabled soul was not the County's only Sign Technician, so in light of ASKJAN, others could have been assigned, even if one COULD wield on a traffic sign.
Lastly, the individual, who is quite otherwise able and multi-skilled, even as a MOS'ed 64C10 (Heavy Truck Driver), as well as having been a Librarian's Aide and a logistician, has still more skills and trades that the County had open.
My final understanding is that when the EEOC was actually a new Agency, then known as the EOA, this soldier was in the CETA Program and his mother was employed by the EOA, constantly reviewing various cases with her son.
But, as you stated, you didn't, and still don't have all of the facts; however, the main fact stands screaming - The EEOC could NOT exonerate the employer.
Sweet thing of it all that you don't know is that our hero lives in Florida, which will pay his tuition to a state college (UF is likely) and he's considering a second career in Human Resources to prevent such dishonoring acts.
Wanna bet he gets hired by those wingnuts and still holds that 100% rating? Seems he scored high on his AFEES tests and on his un-prepared-for GED test. He has been offered, twice, membership into Mensa. This fella has always been quick-witted, thinking out-of-the-box, and sufficient.
Near-renaissance individuals scare hell out of "by-the-book" types...
JAN - Job Accommodation Network
JAN Home Page
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
PFC Edgar Mosier Based on what is posted about this and the disrespect of a fellow Veteran, hell no, I wouldn't vote for them. I suspect the consensus of our Rally Point members would be the same.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google