Quote:
Originally Posted by Pekkerhead
In my company, if someone needs time away for mental health challenges, the company requires some sort of confirmation from a dr and then no further questions are asked. To suggest that the flames should have drilled down on what his issues would likely not be acceptable to HR policies or the union agreement. The statement the flames released would likely been driven from the notice they received on the subject. Not to mention that there is still no confirmation to my knowledge that Dube is guilty of anything. What if it turns out that he’s not being charged and does have mental health issues?
|
No one is saying they shouldn't have gave him leave. They are just saying they shouldn't have made it sound like it was for a mental health reason to the public.