• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Portsmouth FORCES RESIGNATION of public employee with lawfully owned handgun.

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
You would believe a vetted 35 year state retired/rehired employee would know, to not talk to HR ‘who sought them out in an off-premises eating establishment;’ or do a dog and pony show with their ‘secured firearm’ in their PRIVATE/PERSONAL vehicle!’

Further, why on earth is the newspeek article delving in the intimate details of who met and where they met during lunch, etc?

But they resigned...legally capitulated w/I’m sure signed documents so it is a ‘he/she’ said discussion.
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
782
Location
Central Ky.

T Dubya

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
914
Location
Richmond, Va, ,

Why on earth did he resign? If the situation is as reported, which is rarely the case, I not only would have let them fire me, I would have begged them to fire me. He certainly would have a much better case if they had fired him.

I don’t disagree.

Here in Virginia there is a law specific to public employees that guarantees their right-to-live in regard to being able to have a firearm secured in a locked vehicle in the parking lot of their public sector jobs win a couple exceptions. That point doesn’t need to be driven home because the employee was parked off premise, but it does speak to the arrogance and incompetence of Portsmouth.

In my experience, Public Sector HR personnel are very rarely competent. People get fast tracked and put in positions that they cannot handle or understand. They think they are the boss and that they can weigh in on things that are not in their scope.
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
782
Location
Central Ky.
I don’t disagree.

Here in Virginia there is a law specific to public employees that guarantees their right-to-live in regard to being able to have a firearm secured in a locked vehicle in the parking lot of their public sector jobs win a couple exceptions. That point doesn’t need to be driven home because the employee was parked off premise, but it does speak to the arrogance and incompetence of Portsmouth.

In my experience, Public Sector HR personnel are very rarely competent. People get fast tracked and put in positions that they cannot handle or understand. They think they are the boss and that they can weigh in on things that are not in their scope.

You have posted the most accurate summary of public employment I have ever seen. Yes, I am sure somebody can name a friend or relative that is a great guy and very competent that has a public job. Those people will tell you that the system is run by the most incompetent that will promote there fellow incompetents and people rise on there own incompetency for years. Noi boidy is ever fired. Nobody is ever punished. Everybody gets an award.
 

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,428
Location
northern wis
For you guys that didn't read the article he already retired after 35 years.

He was rehired for a new job.

Why did he leave.

Betting he did not want the hassle.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
For you guys that didn't read the article he already retired after 35 years.

He was rehired for a new job.

Why did he leave.

Betting he did not want the hassle.

Expand a smidge on what FI pointed out, retired in 2015 and rehired in early 2018 at a different position.
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
782
Location
Central Ky.
For you guys that didn't read the article he already retired after 35 years.

He was rehired for a new job.

Why did he leave.

Betting he did not want the hassle.

Well, OK. If he didn't want the hassle, why did he sue? Is it less hassle to sue after resigning and claiming you were forced out or to sue while you are unemployed due to being improperly terminated?

What damages is he seeking? How do you fix the situation? There is only one solution. The court must order the city to rehire the man and pay all of his back wages. That makes it like it never happened. It appears that the man doesn't mind the hassle of a lawsuit and all that it entails.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
If, and the magic of ‘if’ applies...

1. 57 yo, retired after 35 years in 2015 when he was 55 +/- yo for his unk $$$/medical retirement package. [normal min retirement award is a combination of age & years worked]

2. Rehire at 57 mandated he abrogate his previous retirement package to enhance a new retirement benefit package of increased $$$/monthly. [similar to military members who retire abrogate military retirement as they enter the US gov civil service employment arena, thus enhancing their retirement financial status]

3. Could his ‘resignation’ have caused him to completely lose any and all retirement benefits or delay payment out to the manditory retirement age of 62/65 years of age?

that is what necessitated the lawsuit!
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
Forced out is forced out, when it goes to court, it makes no difference how they label it. If it appears he acquiesced in the decision and waived his rights in doing so, that creates an evidentiary hurdle, but that can be rebutted by other evidence.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
Oh, and by the way - it's illegal for a municipal corporation (e.g., the City of Portsmouth) to take action in retaliation for a citizen-employee's exercise of Constitutionally protected civil rights.
 
Top