More than likely, a loose screw. They have been sitting out in the sun for too long.

Not good advertising for the law firm to be sure. If you have an opinion send it here: info@erwlaw.com

I did, it's called the first amendment.

Jonathan Swift would have loved this!!!

LONG LIVE LILLIPUT!!

Good thing this was not Hooters

I wonder if this is in any way related to the fact that Saturday was St. Patrick's day and orange was the color of the Protestant opposition to the green of the Irish Catholics. Either that, or just a strange coincidence in the timing.

Why don't sharks eat lawyers? Professional courtesy.

And to think I always thought that was a joke.

Do you know what lawyers use as birth control?

Their personalities.

This is why unions are necessary.

To prevent egregious employer abuses such as this.

There is no way that a fashion color impacts a persons ability to do their job.

.

This story makes no sense at all. There must be additional information not being released that would shed light on what is really going on.

Lawyers are not that stupid.......well, maybe.

What personalities, JCH?

every action will cause a reaction .

JS in SD is correct - it was a protest against St Patrick's Day. They should be protected under religious freedom, right to protest, etc.

They should all get some good compensation out of this.

Makes me glad I'm a telecommuter. I can sit in my housecoat and bunny slippers with a cigarette dangling from my mouth.

But I do have one word for the remaining employees of this asinine law firm: UNION

mb-757763,

Don't know where you got that info, but it is completely false. You can be fired at-will in most middle-Eastern and African countries. And let's not forget China. Just spent 6 years in Egypt, and workers can definitely be fired there for no reason.

Thanks for the email, Eric. I sent them a short, mild letter mocking them for firing all those orange wearing lawyers. Ah, it feels good.

What's the difference between God and a lawyer? God doesn't think he's a lawyer.

This is why "right to work" really means "right to be fired for whatever stupid reason your boss makes up".

Leave it to the conservatives to make up a title that sounds like they're doing something for working people when in fact they're stabbing them in the back. "It's all about the sound-bites, ya'll!"

Elizabeth R. Wellborn, PA focuses on the representation of mortgage lenders, servicers and private investors since its inception.

Well, there you have it. Jackals working for vultures.

There is a lot more to this story than was reported in this article.

Anyone that tries to work without a union is like going to court without a lawyer,you take what you are given.

From Elizabeth R. Wellborn's website:

We are proud to represent institutional and private lenders in the reclamation of titled assets. We maintain attorneys who are well versed in replevin, attachment and foreclosure. In fact, the foreclosure department represents the lender in the reacquisition of real estate assets, resale of those assets in it's "REO" department and pursues deficiency judgments in effort to make our clients whole.

Our Post-Sale and Eviction Departments manage the steps necessary to move a foreclosed property, occupied or not, out onto the market. Judgments prepared by our firm contain a provision directing the Clerk of Court to issue a writ of possession upon application of Plaintiff and without subsequent order of the court. In order to expedite the process, judgments prepared by other counsel, if need be, are corrected by our firm to reflect same. Our firm immediately notifies the servicer of the scheduled eviction and lockout date for all matters. Most notably, our Eviction Department has established key relationships with a network of attorneys that, collectively, expedite processes and keep costs as low as possible.

Do the employees of this firm really want to work there anyway?

Although I think getting rid of all of them was wrong, employers have rights too. They have the right to like or dislike what their employees say, think, and what they do on the job.. and yes... they don't have to like everyone wearing orange.

Eric, what does the 1st amendment have to do with this? Did the government tell the law firm they could fire these people? The 1st amendment only addresses the government infringing on one's rights, not a private employer.

Not good advertising for the law firm to be sure.

...silver lining for citrus growers?...wonder if the PR dept. at Sunkist or Minute-Maid is willing to step up to the plate?

JS, I posted a similar concern when I first saw this story over the weekend. A few years back, our local parade committee actually had a "uniting the Orange and Green" theme for our annual parade here in St. Croix, USVI. Yes, even we celebrate the day with a parade (40 some years now.)

@ getalifevirginia...if there is more to this story, please post it. The story posted on msnbc.com over the weekend did offer a little more detail, such as the fact that these same employees had been wearing the orange on Fridays for several weeks. That is why I raised concerns about them being fired the day before St. Patrick's Day. Did you check the story link above for the actual Sun-Sentinel story?

JS - "I wonder if this is in any way related to the fact that Saturday was St. Patrick's day and orange was the color of the Protestant opposition to the green of the Irish Catholics. Either that, or just a strange coincidence in the timing."

I was thinking the same thing. The two colors choices that are out for St Patty's are orange and black & tan (colors of the invading English army - or so I was told, not really a history buff myself)

I wonder if this is in any way related to the fact that Saturday was St. Patrick's day and orange was the color of the Protestant opposition . . .

JS in SD -- Good call. Don't know if it's truly what's behind this "anti-orange" mass layoff, but that was the first thing that came to mind for me.

I could understand the pink slips if they were told in advance "Don't wear orange", but I don't see how choosing to wear a given random color can alone be grounds for terminating any employee, whether worn as part of a group, or just as an individual. If I happen to wear purple one day and it turns out my boss hates that color, he can fire me for that simple and innocent act alone, in some states? I call BS on that. States that would allow such a thing SUCK, period.

There are only 3 countries in the world that allow "fire at will". The US, North Korea, and some other backwards country. What does that tell you?

Care to prove that statement? Or is this just mouthing off? If there is only 3 countries, what's the 3rd? Should be easy to remember right? I guarantee you if a company in China wanted to fire someone, they can. How about the countries in the Middle East? I bet some of them bosses can hire and fire at will for any reason.

Your statement is ludicrous and should never have been made. Hell we couldn't even fire a GSA worker at my last job who was a secretary who had such extremely long, fake, curved nails her typing speed went down to like 5 words a minute. Refused to change them and we were still unable to terminate. As far as I know she STILL works there.

At will employment goes both ways. Employees have rights too, they have the right to quit for whatever reason they want. Even if that means leaving their employer high and dry when they most need them, the employer can't force an employee to stay if they want to quit (that would be akin to indentured servitude, no?).

At will people, AT WILL!!! It goes both way and no, I'm NOT an employer, we're a middle class family that struggles to make ends meet every month like lots of other households. I just don't believe in taking rights away from any group.

And anyone that believes there isn't more to this story, is naive.

Orange the color for protestants. Being a protestant myself that was my first thought.

gabisgumby - So you're saying that in states that aren't "at will employment" that employees could be forced to continue working after they want to quit?

No, actually workers have the right to quit anywhere.

I fail to see any "rights" that emplyees gain under "right to work". It's all employers' rights.

the thinker-318752

No wonder Republicans are so in favor of right to work legislation.

Could it be to counter the Democrats rewarding people to saty home and not work?

Think this over, "thinker" .... were the employers who sent these people home more likely Republicans or Democrats? What in your irrational mind made you believe that the fired employees wanted to stay home?

Have you actually looked into the benefits of "staying home" as an alternative to working, or are you still buying the ridiculous Reagan lie about "welfare queens"?

The part of the story that is missing was each shirt had the words printed on it with invisible ink, "My boss is an idiot."

I'd be willing to bet it was more Florida Gators in March Madness than anything to do with St Pat's.

The employer finally gave this response. "The Ipso facto Corpus delecti oblogotto Venezuela, in relation to the first party of the second party, whereas, the first party has no relation to the second party, and whereas, the hypoglycemia hypotnus has a higher ratio due to mass concentration algae in the lower intestinal fortitude. Ref: the case Massey V.S. Ferguson, whereas: the first party of the offended party was not actually a party of the second party non offended, as they did not know of a party going on. So when the first party splish splashed while taking a bath, the defendent could not have known there was a party going on. Therefore the termination of said parties whereas in the case of the case was solely rested upon the defense that the employer chooses to rest their case while pleading insanity, and throws themselves at the mercy of the court!"

Just for starters, It's Discrimination by a "heinous" violation of the Individual's FREE SPEECH. The "at will" Law that these People are [actionably] being punished under is UNCONSTITUTIONAL...1) Free Speech is not "only" Free Speech if it's about Protest 2) Free Speech does not "discriminatorily" "only" exist within confines of "collective bargaining"; being used in this instance to punitively say and [actionably] carry out against Individuals, that, "if you don't have collective bargaining Rights, you don't have Individual Free Speech Rights to ANY and ALL elements of your own Individual Personhood" and 3) the Law is "purposefully intended to and serves only to" set in stone and punitively "trophy" bronze 4th Amendment "Illegal Search and Seizure" of the Individual's very person, AND CONTROL THEREOF, by and for the Employer to be able to actionably "employ" [the Law] for just that very self-fulfilling and wrongfully purposeful reason.

Something like that!!! (apparently outside of "Law Firm"-speak, on my part! OH MY!!!)

Depends if it was a Right to Work State, if so they can fire anyone without justification, and they could be seen as a united workforce which would be seen as a threat to employers.

impatient girl

I'd be willing to bet it was more Florida Gators in March Madness than anything to do with St Pat's.

Congratulations impatient .... I think you figured this one out. The boss was probably a Seminoles' fan.

Mystery.....not sure what civil rights law text you read every other page of, but you are way off base on a couple of basic facts. First of all "Free Speech" as protected by the U.S. Constitution applies to public speech and has little if any relationship to an employer's right to dictate the workplace conduct of its employees. Unless the speech pertains to a protected class of behavior or is protected by a current or potential aspect of collective bargaining (and there is no indication in this story that either are the case), there is absolutley nothing preventing your employer from telling you to change your shirt or shut your pie hole. There's about a million things you are free to say on the pages of the New York Times or scream from your perch on a a soap box that your employer has every right to prohibit. Don't like Apple computers? Feel free to write an editorial, but try voicing your opinion in the Apple cafeteria. Think you boss in an incompetent baffoon? You can tell Oprah, but good luck saying it to his face. Fact is, absent any restrictions contained in a collective bargaining agreement, most employers can fire you any time they want for just about anything. The biggest mistake this law firm made was giving a stupid sounding reason..however, even that is not generally illegal.

Union lovers, go ahead and unionize. Only 11% of Americans are part of a union. If more people thought they were a good thing that rate would be much higher.

I have worked for several companies and a union. The union was by far the worst experience of my life.

knock...knock...then a...who's there...orange...orange who...orange you glad that ain't a bunny in my pocket...i'm glad to see ya'...smile...

Objection!

Very few in the U.S. know that orange is the color of the Orangemen, a group of protestant Irish activists and that wearing orange on St. Patrick's day would be considered offensive by a Roman Catholic in Ireland. Of course, wearing green on St. Patrick's day is highly offensive to the Irish protestants too, especially after being murdered, shot and blown up for decades by terrorist Irish Roman Catholics. However, in this case, the law firm really takes the prize by assuming its employees know anything about this and then firing them over it. What's next? Everone has to know everything about all colors, symbols and language offensive to all cultures and religions all the time? This is the completely moronic nonsense the legal profession uses to completely destroy people and their existance with complete impunity and near immunity from any recourse or consequences. This law firm and its decision makers deserve to be completely destroyed and put out of business by its 14 former employees for this, but, unfortunately, that's unlikely.
Oh, and, BTW, orange is one of University of Florida colors (the other being blue). It may be that it's not Irish Catholics who were offended, but some Florida State University alumni. Looking at the mainstay of this law firm's business, which is foreclosures and foreclosure evictions, it's obvious that the lawyers are bunch of psychopathic morons with law degrees and law licenses with absolutely no conscience about what they do and to whom. Shakespeare was right about lawyers and attorneys and, wouldn't you know, there's an ocean nearby too.

Do they refuse to represent criminal clients if they wear orange jumpsuits?

impatient girl

I'd be willing to bet it was more Florida Gators in March Madness than anything to do with St Pat's.

Those were my thoughts too. Maybe the boss was a Norfolk fan.

They said they had been wearing orange on payday for a few months and they are fired this week?? Something is not passing the smell test here.

@Roger-785733 Yes, employers do have rights as well, but where I work there are steps to take for firing people - particularly for minor infractions such as this. Where I work (a mid-sized finance corporation) if they don't like you wearing something to work, you go through the steps. First there is a verbal warning. Then there is a written warning. They also give you ample time to show you are making a correction. If you don't, then they can fire you. It's sort of the "3 strikes and you're out" rule. But you don't just walk into your office wearing an orange shirt and they say, "You're fired!" without any warning. There must definitely be something more to this story.

Larry-2260635

They said they had been wearing orange on payday for a few months and they are fired this week?? Something is not passing the smell test here.

Perhaps they had been told not to do it anymore. Remember, we're only hearing one side of the story.

Aside from that, they were dressing that way in anticipation of happy hour after work. Hardly the kind of professionalism I would expect from a business that is going to take loads of my money.

Bobby Jones, if it weren't for unions, you would not have any sick days, vacation, health care, 40 hr work week, breaks, lunches, and your children would be working or you would have been working 60 plus hrs a week as a child. So if you are so anti union, just put your mouth into action, work without all the benefits I mentioned above. Also work for 20% less than you are making now. Of course you won't do this, you are a coward and spineless in your convictions.

McLovin-1519009, #1.47- Thanks for replying. Just for this moment, I've pulled out the one text that I'd had in mind when I wrote what I did above. No every-other page about it, for me; Debate on the Constitution, page 982, Article I: "Congress shall make no law __________________________________; or abridging the freedom of speech...." and

page 982, Article IV : "The right of the people to be secure in their persons,_____________________....."

I completely understand your attempt to "parlay" to where you're trying to "parlay to" ("only" Governmentally and Public, per se) with what you've said in your comment (and I absolutely, but even still respectfully, wholeheartedly "disagree" with your interpretation). That is why we have the Courts. Unfortunately, the Florida State Legislature, apparently, and this Law Firm obviously exist as ones, amongst many, of piss-poor epitomes of UNconstitutional "dictates" of Representation.

Thank you, again, for replying.

starsailing

Are you actually that ignorant? Try re-reading my original post before you put your other foot in your mouth.

Coward and spineless huh? What's cowardly and spineless is needing the union to fight your battles. I left the union because they are scam artists and liars. Seems you have fallen hook line and sinker to their propaganda.

Do you need a pacifier now?
"You would be working 60 hours" sniffle sniffle. "Your kids would be working" boo hoo.

I have worked ever since I was 15. Some of us don't balk at the idea of a work ethic. Go work your 6 to get 8.

By the way I left the union for self employment, so I do work "without" your benefits. Seems the benefits of self employment out weigh the benefits of having a union's hand up your ass moving your mouth.

Fire the law firm.

jim-4120631, #1.51- EXCELLENT!!!!!!!!!! BRAVO!!!!!!!!! So well said.(for the most part) Thank you for speaking it out there to be read.

(except for the part about probably nothing being done or happening because of it )

Leader of the pact to cohorts....."I guess the boss wasn't a Gators Fan after all."

SingBiker

mb-757763,

Don't know where you got that info, but it is completely false. You can be fired at-will in most middle-Eastern and African countries. And let's not forget China. Just spent 6 years in Egypt, and workers can definitely be fired there for no reason.

Great! We rate right up there with the best...

@starsailing, are you Charlie from Always Sunny??? Too funny on the legalese

If these people just did their jobs, without trying to impart their own little twist, they would still be at work. Imagine that. Do your job, and do it well, and you will go far. Don't let the Republican hating Liberals fool you by saying they want to fire everybody for the smallest thing. That's just foolish, and shows their lack of any business knowledge. Hiring people, training a replacement, and the lack of productivity during that period costs a lot, and no employer would want to go through that without there being a dire need to do so. Republicans know this because they know business. Liberals consistently regurgitate the same rhetoric anytime there is an article, on the internet no less, regarding someone who was fired "for no good reason". They have no idea what actually happened or for what reason, but it sounds good to them and furthers their uninformed opinions.

I sure hope everyone had a chance to read this crap. That's right boys and girls, just keep your heads down, your mouths shut and do the bidding of your Corporate Masters and you might be able to keep your crappy, low paying "at will","right to work" (for the lowest wages offered) job.

@starsailing

if it weren't for unions, you would not have any sick days, vacation, health care, 40 hr work week, breaks, lunches, and your children would be working or you would have been working 60 plus hrs a week as a child. So if you are so anti union, just put your mouth into action, work without all the benefits I mentioned above.

Where have you been for the last 60 years, living under a rock? All of those things are protected by LAW now. So what was the point of the unions again?

@Mystery Rhee Just for starters, It's Discrimination by a "heinous" violation of the Individual's FREE SPEECH. The "at will" Law that these People are [actionably] being punished under is UNCONSTITUTIONAL...

Head up pal. It's unconstitutional when the Supreme Court says it is. Not because you don't like it. And do us all a favor, actually post a coherent comment, and not that idiotic gibberish you must have thought was impressive.

I stand by what I wrote. You would have not have 40 hr work weeks, no overtime, no vacation, no sick time, no healthcare, etc. Bobbypoo worked for the unions twice, suckling from the teets of the union learning to do his trade in a professional way, getting all the benefits because of the union. Self employed huh, nice way out of not having to give up all your benefits that were obtained for you by unions. I have never been employed by a union. I do know the history of labor. Laws were enacted because of the unions interest years ago. My grandfather was a part of that movement years ago in Mpls when a cop hired by employer to break up union walked up and shot a man. I have been working since I was 13, substituted for 15 yr olds when they needed a day off at a Fed gas station if working age has anything to do with your failed arguement. Bobby just be honest for a second and admit you are republican and want to do away with unions so the rt wing can complete its takover of the U.S.A. Corporations are people...too funny. Self employed...too funny, nice excuse for sucking off the teets of the union all those years.

#1.66- One Ringey-dingey (chortle-snort)- Two Ringey-dingey (snort-chortle)...."Hello, Supreme Court.....yes, apparently I just need to offer my sincere apologies to you for my misunderstanding that 1) I have an opinion and 2) for thinking myself to have the Right to express it......" (snort-chortle-snort) "Oh, btw, while I've got you on the line.....Heads-up! ~ you've got a major "Collective" UNCONSTITUTIONAL curve ball (that someone else with a real opinion might tell you about) coming at you, too".

Bobbypoo worked for the unions twice, suckling from the teets of the union learning to do his trade in a professional way, getting all the benefits because of the union.

Wrong the union came in and took over the labor part of the company I was working for. They cut our pay by 30% because we were not "trained by the union" Something I had been doing for ten years without one single complaint. They forced us all to become an apprentice and still charged and master technicians rate and pocketed all the money. I worked for the union for 9 months. How long would you put up with that kind of treatment?

I have never been employed by a union

That's why you know nothing about them.

Bobby just be honest for a second and admit you are republican and want to do away with unions so the rt wing can complete its takover of the U.S.A. Corporations are people

Nice try again. Sail just admit you are making assumptions and have no idea what you are talking about.

Self employed...too funny, nice excuse for sucking off the teets of the union all those years

The funny part is you trying to vilify people for putting forward an effort to better ones life. The only thing being sucked is a working man's paycheck by the corruption of the unions.

Bobby Jones

I have worked ever since I was 15. Some of us don't balk at the idea of a work ethic.

Working when under 18, working for very poor wages, working demanding hours, none of that is "work ethic". So none of your preaching makes any sense.

Now, I've been working since I was 16, but that's because my parents wanted me to start learning work ethic before I entered the real work force on my own.

Work ethic is doing your job with integrity, efficiency, and being productive. Not taking advantage of your paycheck or of the trust given to you as an employee.

Work ethic has nothing to do with being taken advantage of by your employer. That's called something else: being a tool.

Now, I've been working since I was 16, but that's because my parents wanted me to start learning work ethic before I entered the real work force on my own.

None of my preaching makes sense? So you saying the same thing somehow makes sense now?

I get it you are also making assumptions I was forced to work. You must have forgot unions saved us from forced child labor.

Be forewarned folks. If you are going to make a political comment only anti_Republican comments won't get collapsed on this blog site. Any anti-Democrat retort will be collapsed.

It is newsvine's interpretation of freedom of speech - free to speak out against repubs but not dems.

Right Bobby, non union companies very fair. I worked as a truck driver for CDC in 80's, non union. Grade levels 4,5,6,7. All the Mgr drinking and softball team guys got the grade 7 pay, driving vans and working docks. Only 1/3 class A drivers got G7 pay, some Class A drivers got 4,5,6 pay. I set up new system of pay level per job done. 4 van, 4-5 dock, 6 straight truck , 7 class A, 8 backup for all. Passed around rumor of possible joining union if MGR did not clean up mess. Sat with workers on one side of room, MGR/HR on other. We were talking about the Vikings football game among us and every now and then I would say out loud, "THE UNION REP SAID THEY COULD HELPS US WITH THAT, UNION REP SAID GOOD IDEA" Did that 1/2 hr. Meeting began, the company agreed to all terms. Drivers had 1 month to get class B and A licenses to retain grade. Yeah some guys were driving illegal. Just the words union said out loud about 20 times, got the workplace legal and fair. Higher and fair wages. No more boss favorites who didn't do jack to earn a buck. Thank you UNIONS! Never even contacted union. Every job is affected because of good union training and higher wages and better benefits. Better for families, better for middle America, and the rich got just as rich!

star,

Consider yourself lucky you didn't get the union involved. Like you said you have never been part of a union. It's not the pretty picture you think it is. Like I said before only 11% of Americans are unionized mainly by choice. We are all free to work for a union if we want. It's not for me and obviously not for you because you would of brought the union in back in the 80's.

@eric in oregon

Old joke. This is the original:

What's the difference between God and a RepubliCon? God doesn't think he's a RepubliCon.

If "Free Speech" only applied to a public place, then: a corporation allowed "personhood" by the Supreme Court as a "private" "citizen" would be taxed at the same high rate as private citizens, would have to follow the laws of private citizens (such as a drug or food company that caused other people to die being charged with murder, instead of little or no police action against them). In the case of this particular law firm that forecloses on property and evicts people, it would seem that they have very little scruples about any rights of private citizens, except their own as a corporation.

The trouble with government these days is the Supreme Court, that regularly violates the U.S. Constitution in allowing corporations to have extraordinary powers and privileges.

Law, banking, and financial services are some of the professions in which it really does matter how you dress. When potential customers are looking for someone to represent their interests, and big amounts of their money are at stake, they will choose, overwhelmingly, the firm whose employees look 'professional'. That means, conservative suits in quiet (usually dark) colors; crisp, white or light-colored shirts. Nothing too attention-getting, sexy, bright, or flamboyant.

Dressing the part is a professional necessity in these fields. I don't blame the employer one bit. A portion of the staff dressed in orange week after week could very well ruin the business.

Sounds to me like these employees were either clueless--or more focussed on their happy hour than on their careers. Time for people to grow up and take responsibility; if they don't prioritize their job and the needs of their employer, there are other people who would love to have that job, who will.

@Mystery Rhee

Again, you make almost no sense with your postings. How about instead of trying to be witty and clever (in which you are absolutely failing at) you actually post something that doesn't look like it was written by a spastic 4 year old?

And they were not even smart enough to say the were protesting something, which probably would be protected speech and therefore NOT fireable.

I think this law firm is goofy for doing this, BUT I will uphold their right to do so.

This one is obvious to anyone who has lived in FL. The head of the lawfirn is probably a Seminole who didn't take kindly to his staff wearing Gator colors. I'm sure they knew where bossy pants graduated and were trying to play head games. The whole UF/FSU thing is serious business in Fl. It's pretty rediculous.

There has to be. They probably wanted to cut their staff in half without having to pay out unemployment. Being that they are all lawyers, someone came up with the *ingenious* plan to fire everyone who was wearing orange that day.

In the end, these lawyers' propensity for being a (fill in the blank with whatever obsenity comes to mind) will catch up with them.

muttbbucket

Orange is THE racist color...were any of them of non-white status?

Leave it to a mutt to try to spin this story into a racial one...

mutt says: "Orange is THE racist color"

Actually, orange is the color of the Protestant minority in Ireland...

Saturday was St. Patrick's day...

DOWN WITH BROBDIGNAG!!!

I use to live in FLorida and that state will fire people just to have a laugh for the day. Does not matter how long you were employed if management wants to fire some one just for a laugh they can. We always had a saying that they can fire you if your boss does not like the color of the clothing you wore that day. This is a good example of it.

muttbbucket

Orange is THE racist color...were any of them of non-white status?

"of non-white status?" WTF?

I'm a huge racist and even I don't know what that means.

Also, people with ms are asked to wear orange this month to raise awarness about ms.

No wonder some go nuts and return to the former employer with payback! Years ago a group of folks were terminated because their employer took it as a sign of protest. Today that boss still has to paint her house (association mandated) eight times a year, her car even more often! She moved two counties away and the same occurs. No one has yet to be caught and cops suspect many more than the terminated folks are involved. I wouldn't want our cat to return with a fresh color of paint! Employers beware!!

Actually the WILL have to pay unemployment. Unless they did something willfully detrimental to the company, you cannot fire them without paying unemployment. I don't believe this fits that.

i also used to live in fla.and you are right!! they will fire you just because they had an arguement with ther` spouse just to vent fustration at not winning the fight!!

without having to pay out unemployment.

Most state require employers to pay unemployment if they fire employees. When employees quit the employers are exempted from paying unemployment.

the thinker - I worked in FL for nine years exclusively at law firms. I was fired once and my friends were fired from time to time. Having worked in Philly most of my life, it shocked me that the Florida law firms would fight to keep a fired employee from collecting unemployment compensation and fight it they did. In Philly that doesn't happen very much at all. Top Florida unemployment in 2009 was $1100 a month, even if you were a rocket scientist. In PA a friend of mine got twice that amount when she was terminated. When it comes to employees, FL is so cheesy you'd almost think you were in Wisconsin!!!!

I suspect there is more to the story than "they just wore orange so they could be identified later". I doubt that we will ever get the full story, though, because those who were fired obviously were the ones who ran to the media screaming, "We got fired just for wearing orange shirts."

I think you are NOT thinking Thinker! People who are fired are NOT elligible for unemployment benefits. Also- I've worked my whole adult life and strongly believe in personal responsibility.......and I'm a liberal!!!!!

I agree there's a little more going on here that isn't reported! Of course now the media has jumped all over and the firms is labeled the bad guys it wouldn't make a difference what the firm would say. Why didn't they put them on right before leaving if it was for after work anyhow? Maybe also being a Law firm they have a dress code and I could see where orange shirt wouldn't work. What if one of them had to appear in court that day and show up in an orange shirt ya right.

People who are fired for cause are not eligible for unemployment. If they are simply terminated without rational cause, they are eligible.

I would hope there is more to this story. What ever happened to giving a warning or a write up? It's a frickin law firm, can't they communicate with their staff?

All this crap about orange being the protestant color in Ireland......this is America......St. Pat's day is about drinking hell amounts of beer and having a parade. No one here gives two poops about the Irish Protestant/Catholic holy war.

Something was going on at this vulture nest of a law firm.....and since this happened in Florida....you can bet it had nothing to do with Ireland's stinking church war.

wizard you are correct

People who are fired for cause are not eligible for unemployment. If they are simply terminated without rational cause, they are eligible.

thats why the lawyers rep said "considered threatening" to cover here but from wrong full termination law suite.

Peace3229398 - what do you think unemployment benefits are for? Of course you can collect unemployment if you're fired. What the heck are you talking about?? Maybe you shouldnt tell people to "think" if you cant even come up with the right answer dude...

JR - people fired for a cause ARE also eligible for unemployment. The employer may fight the payout to the ex-employee through the state but there's no guarantee the state is going to side with the employer. If ex-employee can prove his/her case, they WILL get unemployment benefits.

I'm guessing there's more to this story.

Maybe, but guessing is not fact it's just speculation. There may be nothing more to this story than that the law firm is comprised of paranoid jerks.

I just love it when people say stuff like "I'm guessing there's more to this story." without knowing all the facts. It's the same sort of cheap innuendo that passes for news and info-tainment any more; it is really just a shortcut to fact finding, research, and critical thinking.

I think you are NOT thinking Thinker! People who are fired are NOT elligible for unemployment benefits. Also- I've worked my whole adult life and strongly believe in personal responsibility.......and I'm a liberal!!!!!

Well I can't speak for Florida but in Oklahoma they most certainly CAN and DO collect Unemployment, unless they were fired for "just cause." I know 'cause I've drawn it a few times myself. Being fired or "laid off" is EXACTLY what unemployment is for.

Employers can fight having to pay for unemployment. Just because someone is fired doesn't mean it's an automatic "benefit".

Hell, sometimes states even award employees that are fired for stealing. In 1995 I fired an employee because I caught her on camera with her hand in the till. New Jersey wanted to award her unemployment because it was less than $100. I fought it and won, but I had to appeal. Unemployment is easy to get in most states.

It must be hard for lawyers to iron a pair of pants cause they would always have a hand in one of the pockets!!!

Where do you people get your information????? Hellooooooooo???? Yes you can be FIRED AND STILL GET unemployment. You have to have not done something egregious, such as stealing from your employer or something else that the state deems as not in the employers best interest. Where did the idea that if you fire someone the employer does not have to pay unemployment? UMMM YES THEY DO!!!!! How do I know this, because I do the payroll for a mid-sized company and we have to pay unemployment tax QUARTERLY. Yes companies do try to keep people from collecting because it affects their Charge Ratings. Too many fired people collecting and the percentage that you pay goes UP! And Florida is the worst, they will grant benefits even if some one has stolen, they don't send you a determination on a claim, you have to call them and badger them to get any information. I recently had to have our account credited because they were giving benefits to people who quit for other jobs!!!!!!! And Jim, that is just too true, we had to appeal and fight one person who was caught on camera for almost a year because she kept appealing. Find out the laws in your state, educate yourselves about what is legal and what is not.

muttbbucket, what is THE non-racist color? I'm curious because I'm a 40 y/o white guy. That automatically makes me racist, even if Im not. Which in itself is racist, but thats for another day.

So, please, help a percived racist out. I was unaware of the orange color being THE color of racism. Please enlighten me.

Sumatymrolls, hand in someone elses pocket!

Work in 'right-to-work' states full of 'at-will' contracts, and you and your family will never know job security. Unfortunately, most of you living in these anti-labor-rights areas won't make it into the middle class; you'll remain stuck in the working class, or slide into poverty as you live in forced, early retirement, sorry to say.

Best you upgrade your education if you can, move out of these Republican-dominated Right-to-Work places in the nation, and live in more liberal areas that have employers that respect your hard work and will be willing to invest in you and your skill sets for a long time to come.

Perhaps these people could picket the business. That would really hurt the business and its reputation

Send them an email: info@erwlaw.com

Let them know how you feel. I did.

I did.......

Asking if they knew of a good lawyer to sue my boss for firing me for the color of my shirt.............

If you let your child spend the night at a friend's house with the understanding that they stay there and not go anywhere else, and then they snuck out and went to a movie, I am sure the child's response would be, "I can't believe I got in trouble JUST for going to a movie!" No, it wasn't just for going to a movie, but for being in willful disobedience to the parent....

Likewise, I suspect there is more to the orange shirts than, "We all wanted to look alike."

What does Oregon State have to do with this firing? Maybe the Orange shirt had a picture of a Beaver on it!

And maybe it was the law firm owner's beaver. Just sayin...

Or maybe they were terminated because they failed to maintain a professional appearance. These guys are not stocking shelves at a grocery store. They are in a business where they ask clients to pay from $300->1000 per hour.

People go to a law office for serious support to reconcile an issue. They don't want lawyers with personality, they want an intimidating presence that will get their issue resolved swiftly.

Or as Don Henley said, "The more i think about it old Billy was right, let's kill at the lawyers, kill 'em tonight!"

I guess that put quite a damper on their happy hour

Everybody misses the first part of that speech. The topic is, "How to overthrow the government and set up a dictatorship." That makes the entire statement mean almost the direct opposite of the assumed meaning.

Then come the followup questions -

"So, how long have you been a Pumpkinist? What inspired you to become one? What are the core beliefs of a Pumpkinist? Why does it necessitate wearing orange? Was management at the company made aware that you were wearing orange due to your pumpkinist beliefs? Did you just make this "Pumkpinist" thing up for a frivelous lawsuit?"

The employer is not allowed to discuss or question your Pumkinist beliefs. That is a BIG no-no.

Or just say you're a Pastafarian and it was orange pasta day :-)

Religion is merely a strong belief. What difference does it make how long you have practiced the belief? Are you a stronger Pumpkinist because you have been "practicing" for 3 years versus 2 months or does it merely make you a longer practitioner?

Pumpkinists are expressly forbidden to discuss details of their religion to those outside their faith.

The Great Pumpkin dictated this and all their commandments to his chief prophet Linus.

Bull... - Is this just another spin-off of the LSD church? They are very secretive of their religious details and only reveal upon acceptance into the cult.

The first rule of Pumpkinism is you do not....

Hail, All Pumpkinists!

The best thread ever!!!

They belong to the church of the orange-tinted happy hour. Good enough for me.

I see that almost all of you Pumkinists responding to this thread have the SAME ORANGE avatar... Is this some kind of conspiracy? Are you people threatening me??

EGAD!! I have one also - have I been brainwashed and assimilated too???

Seriously - I think that every one of us here that are too lazy to change our orange avatars should go to work tomorrow and FIRE OURSELVES.

Terry SAYS: "There must be more to this than people are saying. You don't just fire employees needed to do business without reason."

Hi Terry,

This your first day on the planet? Welcome to the great society!!!

needed to do business

That is the catch phrase. It sounds like they were no longer needed and this was as good an excuse as any other to terminate. (Not that they needed an excuse to begin with.)

ercillor-2107261

That's a pretty dumb comment. So are you a troll, or just an ass?

This was a employee washout action. companys should replace thier employees every 2 to 3years. to avoid any longterm pensions or entitlements they might get.

According to Obama, this is healthy for the economy.

I would fire them simply for owning an orange shirt-ewww.

Terry says: "That's a pretty dumb comment. So are you a troll, or just an ass?"

Golly Terry, you really ARE an intelligent person... I never would have been able to generate such a creative reply... Are you in anger management?

Terry, in a just and logical environment you would be correct however this happened in Florida!

Sorry don, but that's the Republican stance. The democrats are pro-union and workers rights and protecting you from things like this. Nice try though. I guess Obama thought up the whole health care bill on his own too, right? Oh wait, it was largely based off of bills the Republicans put forward previously.

hey don....you've confused your left and your right again! Democrats HATE right to work states, and the GOP has ushered in right to work legislation in most of the states they took control of in the 2010 elections.

Now...many people are confusing right to work laws with at will laws. Florida, like Illinois and many other states are 'at will' employment states which means your employer can terminate you at will for any or no reason. Right to work states make it more difficult to form or maintain a union because employees cannot be compelled to join a union upon hire and allows employers to refuse to take union dues as a payroll deduction. Big difference.

I hope their employees take this opportunity to dress civilized adults and not giant pumpkins.

And you're confusing "right to work" and "at will employment".

"Right to work" laws usually involve not being forced to join a union in order to work in a unionized workplace or not forced to pay union dues. Florida DOES have unionized workplaces (which apparently mostly people commenting on this article do not seem to realize).

"At will employment" means you can quit or be fired at any given time. Pretty much any non-contract and non union employee in any state is an "at will" employee. And if you look at most employment agreements it will make great pains to make that fact clear.

Some states do have implied contract laws, but I'm hardly going to go take the time to go research those at the moment.

Note the right to form a union is a FEDERAL (National Labor Relations Act) law, and no state laws can preempt that.

Some states do have laws in place to limit the ability to fire "at will" employees, but those laws have nothing to do with "right to work" laws. And ANY employee employed in any state in the US that does not have a contract stating otherwise, or that is not part of a union is an "at will" employee as per "at will doctrine".

Note, I live in Washington State which is not a "right to work state", but heck if they can't fire your "at will" employed arse for pretty much any reason they see fit (unless you're in a union, or have a contract stating otherwise).

How can it be lawful? Because in Florida you can be terminated for no reason at all, and with no advance notice. How can it be justifiable? We don't know. They're not talking. But if I was a client, or potential client, I'd ASK them!

Spaceman Mike,

"Right to Work State" really means, bend over and grab your ankles.

Florida is the FU State, and the Laws they enact in Tallahassee, and the way those Laws are enforced, attest to the fact that FLORIDA has no respect for the U.S. Constitution, etc.

I think you are all confusing "right to work" (which refers to unionizatoin and your right to decline to join a union) with "at will" employers (which means they can fire you at will - no reason needed).

Both screw you in their own peculiar ways, but very different concepts at the core.

Well, at least one good thing will come from Global Warming, the rising sea level will put most of Florida underwater. After that happens all we have to do is apply a large amount of toilet bowl cleaner and flush

Yeah, I was a manager for the US Gov't and you could forget firing someone. You just worked "around" them. There were good people that did the job and there were the butt heads that needed firing and you couldn't, so you just dealt with it. I used to say they were like a broken gun, "won't work and you can't fire it"

While a "common sense" approach would dramatically reduce litigation and prove the best solution, there is no longer an objective standard of what "common sense" actually means. You can't measure "common sense" and the courts, lawyers, and unions can't accept anything less.

That's right Sparty. Common sense isn't so common.

People who work for the goverment are almost fire proof, The employees are very well protected. Working for unions is good too. Even Mcdonalds will has some job protection, they will at least give some one a warning.

Temporary agencies in this country should be outlawed. They treat people like disposal trash. only in America this type of people exploitation exist. Both Obama and Romney support right to fire employer laws.

you sound like a dick, rick.

firing someone, messing with their livelihood because "you disagreed" or "didn't like them"... lucky for you you probably hire minimum wage drones that are too uneducated to realize they can sue you...

it's bosses like you that are why we need unions!

UNION AND PROUD!

Working for a union is not always so good. I worked for a union that cought wind of the company giving us full time hours but not the benefits. The union told the company, that they either needed to make us actual full-time employees and give us the benefits to go with it or to give us less hours. My boss decided I only needed 10 hours a week.

doyourhomework,America!

it's bosses like you that are why we need unions!

UNION AND PROUD!

Union Thugs like you are the reason thousands of jobs have moved overseas. Also, good luck suing a boss for firing someone in a right to work state just because he doesn't like them, or any other reason except for federally defined and protected reasons. Not liking someone is a perfectly legal reason to fire someone in a right to work state. It is not the wages and benefits that unions bring to the table that force jobs overseas it is the obstruction to getting the job done. It is just easier and cheaper to get the work done when you don't have an obstructionist union that wants to file a frivolous grievance for the color of the damn toilet tissue. Or pay someone to sit on their ass at a factory because their machine is broken, and the union doesn't want them assigned something else to do. When I see that kind of crap going on, I think it is good enough for you that some Chinese or Korean is doing your job.

Terry says: "Union Thugs like you are the reason thousands of jobs have moved overseas"

Hi 'doyourhomework,'

We have to cut Terry some slack. He's into name-calling right now. High school is tough for him.

Actually, the reason that "thousands of jobs have moved overseas" is simple: It's cheaper to manufacture overseas and the manufacturers are not requuired to pay import duty on their products as they come into the US. What would YOU do if you were a US manufacturer? Pay 35 cents an hour for Chinese labor, or pay a living wage to American citizens for their labor?

Trouble is, our entire manufacturing sector seems to be heading to China; or already there.

We've ground our pearls to flour and it will not serve for bread.

ercillor-2107261

Troll

It's interesting that you are siding with the employer.

I don't know if I would call it siding with the employer. I live in Florida and agree that Florida has a special type of stupid compared to other states. But, depending on the size of the law firm, firing 14 people is going to have an impact.

Those people had to be working on something. Just having other employees take up the slack is going to be problematic. I would think that they had to have planned this to ensure that clients billable hours would not suffer.

Assuming that they did happen to plan for the mass firing, having the exact same group of people who got fired coincidentally show up all in orange shirts just doesn't sound right.

Or, maybe the partners had a bug up their butt and decided to fire those in orange and risk the work that would not be done. However it happened, I'm sure we'll be hearing more.

JM-1992894- Stop being a fanatical populist. It's the employers company, he pays the employees, and he has the right to hire and fire who he wants. If he's a sharply dressed guy and likes his employees to be thats his buisness. His employees should know not to wear unfashionable, unflattering colors like orange.

Then the employer wonders when his employees sabotage his company. Treating employees fairly and decently has its paybacks. One disgruntled employee can destroy a company/ just ask Goldman Sachs how much damage Greg Smith did in one day.

Thanks Jenn for making that clarification. The article loses sense as written. I did not realize Florida is a dual state.

Slight correction Jennj99738: "at will" means either the employer or employee can freely terminate employment without cause, but if the termination is initiated by the employer, employees are still entitled to received qualified benefits for which they've already paid, as well as unemployment compensation; what is more commonly referred to as being "laid-off". "Fired" is generally understood as meaning "termination WITH cause", i.e., the employee violated company policy or was engaging in illegal conduct. Florida just happens to recognize BOTH so-called "right to work" AND "at-will employment".

Thanks for the clarification, Jenn and Chris. There was something about the article that didn't quite make sense. Under the definition provided by Chris, these workers probably have some sort of recourse. It can hardly be said that the employees violated company policy; unless the company has a stated idiosynchratic aversion to orange attire. I would say that the person who pulled the trigger on 15 employees should be canned.

I was fired by a law firm in the Tampa Bay area. I then applied for unemployment compensation and the firm tried to fight it. Unemployment compensation granted the compensation to me, because of the circumstances of my firing and very possibly because the firm has a horrible record of firings. This firm fired some of the best, hardest working people I ever worked with. One guy I worked with there was the assistant to the HR person. When he was hired, he was promised a raise after a year. Now he was an extremely hard working guy. A year went by and the HR person reneged on the raise and this guy was devastated and quit. I felt very bad for him as well as the legions who followed him out the door with their boxes.

not a bad theory. I was thinking the boss is an FSU fan and felt they were all wearing Gators orange. It is Florida after all, football is religion.

Either way the reason for the firings is STUPID and should be illegal. I hope the fired employees picket this law firm and get the fact that it obviously has a sanity problem amongst the partners and pulls this sort of crap.

Anyone thinking of applying for a job there best think twice and those still there would be well advised to keep the Resume updated and ready to send out at a moments notice. This firm doesn't deserve the loyalty of its staff nor the restraint shown by the fired Orangemen/women.

Elizabeth R. Wellborn must be an Irish Catholic.

@Brian-397693 If it IS, in fact, anything to do with Protestants wearing orange in protest, this law firm needs to kiss its own butt goodbye because then they just practiced religious discrimination toward a large group of employees which is one of the few things that you can't do even in an "at will" employment state. I know several employers that think they can indiscriminately fire people because it's an "at will" state. Many ignorant ex-employees believe they can too but I know some now well-off former employees because they were fired for absolutely no reason whatsoever. In a few of the cases, the court ordered them to rehire the employee and pay back wages OR pay the equivalent of 5-10 years of salary to the employee AND left it up to the employee which of the two they chose since it was up to them to decide whether they wanted to work in a hostile work environment.

I'm Irish and I didn't wear green Saturday. But it's also my daughters birthday, and was her 21st and mines today so we had a big party for b-days and St. Pats day.!! Neither of us is Catholics so weren't aware much less upset by anyone in orange. My grandfather was full Irish and catholic and I never heard of this orange thing!

Maybe this law firm is at the verge of going bust and just thought this was a quick and efficient way to clean house?? Think I will check out the site to let them know what I think about these firings. Think Florida and all the states that can get away with this type of crap need to get new laws out-lawing this. What a crude and bone headed thing to do with the state of the economy and high unemloyment rate!!! Somebody should unleash some really p.o'd leprachauns on these EPIC FAIL employers!!!

I am an IRISH Protestant and we wear Orange. Sorry we just do, we do not object to your wearin' of the green.

But this wearing of the orange did not happen on St Paddy's Day. Of course this was an act of defience. Provong it is a whole other matter.

It is Florida. You know full well it had nothing to do with Ireland's Protestant/Catholic holy war.

There was something else going on down at *Dewey, Scruwem, and Hauw*.

It seems to me that perhaps this company was considering some downsizing and took the opportunity of this group of individuals wearing the same color shirt as a way to fire them "for cause" so they could fight their unemployment claims. If they had laid off the employees they would not be able to fight.

ABSOLUTELY NOT! The wearing of the ORANGE on St. Patrick's day is a direct insult to the Irish Catholics to whom this day is a holiday. You might as well wear a white hood on MLK day! Shame, shame... NO orange - only green, unless it's the flag itself!

Or maybe this law firm really hates the Queen of England.

well they didn't wear orange on St Paddy's day, they wore it the DAY BEFORE. And from my understanding the law firm fired them because they interpreted as an act of protest

"Some employees at the law firm said they were told management saw their matching orange shirts as some sort of sign of protest."

which means that if that is the reason behind the firing it is illegal. But if the law firm just doesn't like orange, then that's a legal firing.

Thanks for clarifying the colors of the Irish flag. I come from the Protestant Irish of County Down. My grandfather belonged to the Order of the Orange. Never in my life have I worn orange on St. Pat's Day - I wear green like everyone else in celebration of St. Patrick and the emerald isle.

But not if they're Republican. Morgan & Morgan are Devout Democrats.

Morgan & Morgan is a good firm. I think these fired employees ought to call them. John Morgan is representing Zenaida Gonzales against Casey Anthony in a civil suit, I believe. He's a good guy - office is in downtown Orlando.

It's about time these scumbag lawyers reap what they sue...er, sew.

I say the workers should hire representation...sue the company, the leasing company who the law firm rents from, the law firms families for harboring unethical scum. Sue for lost wages, loss of consortium ( a personal favorite) and throw in there some punitive damages. Sue. Sue. Sue.

That sounds more logical.

The Air Traffic Controllers were fired because their contract stated that they COULD NOT go on strike, it was illegal. They were given warning and those that came back kept their jobs.

If they were protesting management then that would be protected under workers rights.

right on MinerFortyNiner - there is a legal quandary here. the workers claim it was just for fun which then makes the firing legal.

However, if in fact management viewed it as a sign of protest and that prompted the firing, then because of management's interpretation of the orange shirts and their intent behind the firing, they broke the law.

Wrong mark .. a gross overstatement ... employees have a huge number of rights ... enshrined in hundreds of labor laws both state and federal ...

This action is insufficiently reported in thius article to make an informed judgement as to the question of "rights" ... lets reserve judgement until we know more.

The law firm I was fired from did work comp work. They fired employees in droves. They have now expanded from work comp to labor law experts. Guess they had to learn how to skirt the laws regarding employees and I'm sure they're expert at it. Hey, we're talking lawyers here.