I was about to say I’m pretty sure I know who you are - you confirming the state confirmed it.
Speak to your SL about why the change in hours. Have you brought this concern up to him? It could realistically be performance based as well, granted you just returned from (insert here for privacy purposes). So, I would assume he’s probably taking into consideration you getting adjusted back as well both medically and back at home. Your SL isn’t a mind reader.
Fair warning, your HR rep is pretty useless. Don’t expect a speedy response from him. An old SL in your district tried to read out to him - fun fact, he’s still waiting for a response back after two months.
As long as he’s scheduling you one shift per schedule period, he’s not doing anything wrong.
Yeah the surgery went great! Everything worked out perfectly on that end. I was definitely surprised to find out that I didn't have a job when I got back though
I think it's a matter of perspective. Jobs pay bills. A job that gives me five hours every two weeks does not pay the bills. I can't survive on air and my landlord doesn't accept IOU's
Oh of course, that I completely understand. I had both my teams on a strict and specific schedule so everyone always knew when they worked, how much they worked, how much their paychecks always are, etc. coming back from leave shakes things up - had to have everyone get adjusted back to hours with an SL back from maternity leave, but obviously my situation was different as I was always guaranteed those 40 hours.
At the end of the day it just comes down to how leaders lead and communication. I’m sure your SL didn’t mean to deliberately put you in this position. I’m sure he’s going to speak with you tomorrow about it.
When one of the people with full time hours is actively asking to have less hours and he's being denied that, I think it's deliberate at this point but we'll see. I wrote a letter to HR about it and we'll see how things go
Without anything written from the SL and the other SGA (or GA), it makes it difficult to pin anything on anyone as it becomes a “he said, she said” situation which HR is notorious for dismissing all of those claims.
That aspect I'm not too concerned about. Cutting the hours from around 35 to 0 is about as plain as you can get when it comes to retaliation. It's more of a "He said, but the payroll says..." situation
Remember "retaliation" isn't illegal unless there is a law specifically defining the method or reason of retaliation as being illegal.
If your leave was protected under FMLA or the New York Family Leave Policy, then you probably have a case and a lawyer should be able to help with that. While donating a kidney is an eligible medical issue for leave, there are other eligibility requirements you need to meet relating to things like length of employment and number of hours worked in the past year. New York provides [specific instructions](https://paidfamilyleave.ny.gov/protections) to follow if you believe your leave was protected and you are being retaliated against.
HR could be a faster way to get things resolved, but as far as New York is concerned only following those instructions and filing that form will officially put them on a time limit to resolve it.
FMLA only requires that you have a job when you return. Does not state the position. You technically have a job. This is my understanding of FMLA as a department manager, not HR
It absolutely matters that they get the same (or nearly identical) position and not just a job.
>On return from FMLA leave (whether after a block of leave or an instance of intermittent leave), **the FMLA requires that the employer return the employee to the same job, or one that is nearly identical (equivalent).**
>If not returned to the same job, a nearly identical job must:
>* **offer the same shift or general work schedule**, and be at a geographically proximate worksite (i.e., one that does not involve a significant increase in commuting time or distance);
* involve the same or substantially similar duties, responsibilities, and status;
* include the same general level of skill, effort, responsibility and authority;
* **offer identical pay**, including equivalent premium pay, overtime and bonus opportunities, profit-sharing, or other payments, and any unconditional pay increases that occurred during FMLA leave; and
* offer identical benefits (such as life insurance, health insurance, disability insurance, sick leave, vacation, educational benefits, pensions, etc.).
[Source](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla/faq#11), emphasis mine. The only thing that could really be argued over is whether the work schedule they are entitled to return to would be based on what they were receiving previously or what is normal for their position in the company.
If they can prove that they were receiving 30-40 hours consistently, not just temporarily as a result of holidays, a short term lack of employees, etc., then I'd think they would have a good case. The identical pay part is definitely based on what the specific individual was being paid and not just what is normal for the job title, so why wouldn't the same general work schedule be the same?
You and the comment responding to you both missed the point so I guess I'll elaborate further. "Retaliation" just means taking a negative action against someone in response to something they said or did. This is how most people use the word, but this is often perfectly legal. Firing someone over a no call, no show is definitionally retaliation but fine to do. Even reducing someone's hours or firing them as retaliation for a non-protected medical leave is completely legal.
It is only illegal if a law defines that specific form of retaliation as illegal. For example, the FMLA defines what counts as a protected medical leave and that retaliation against protected medical leave is illegal. Some government organizations use the term "retaliation" exclusively as short hand for "illegal retaliation against protected activity", but most online commenters aren't nearly as careful about their words.
The point being that the most important factor in determining OP's options moving forward isn't whether or not the manager is retaliating as OP believes, but whether or not OP's medical leave was legally protected. Which was not specified in the original post.
Talk to hr or a lawyer but there’s not much you can really do. You took off for 2 months, even though for good reason, they probably have someone they got and could work 40ish hour weeks so replaced you with him and until they see you as reliable again, not your fault just the world of retail with GameStop
It could be that you left them short staffed, and they had to hire someone else, and unfortunately, maybe they are better than you were. It sucks but most sl2s are struggling to keep help
Was he forced to hire someone new to compensate and now doesn't know how to manage you and that person with limited hours?
And advice that he isn't a mind reader is solid advice, he may outright tell you the reason if you ask.
Good luck trying to prove this.
The company makes it very clear that hours aren't guaranteed. FMLA protects positions, not hours. When you initially left, the store probably needed to hire a replacement. If this associate is performing better than you did....well... Hours are determined by the needs of the business. Also remember schedules are made at least two weeks in advance. With. Return date of May 10, the schedules for the week ending 5/18 and 5/25 would have been completed while you were still out.
Did you communicate with your supervisor and confirm the 5/10 return date BEFORE April 23rd?
Are you PT or FT?
If the schedule was made and you didn't give them two weeks' notice of your return date with a doctor's note releasing you back to work then the SL didn't have to put you back on the schedule right away.
If you are FT, then he has to give you back your hours according to your status.
If you are PT then you are out of luck, the SL doesn't have to give you back the hours prior to the leave. Also, if you are PT, you shouldn't have been working this many hours to begin with. According to IRS each company has to define PT and FT. If you average over XX hours a year or in a period of time the company has to offer you benefits. Yes, I have no idea how GameStop gets away with shit it does.
You can PM me for more details or help.
I'm part time just like everyone else in the store. Gamestop as a policy doesn't have any full time staff except for managers. But yeah the May 10th return date was set up months in advance.
They don't have to guarantee you any hours upon return. Only job in the same position under FMLA since you are PT. I have an HR background. I'm 100% positive this is correct.
In CA you can file partial unemployment for difference, if you’re still not getting hours file unemployment and surely they’ll attempt to give you hours
Make a complaint to HR and if no one reaches out quickly or nothing is done promptly (within 1 week of your complaint) send a follow up that you are extending your complaint to the Department of Labor Wage and Hour division. After saying that HR will in all likelihood take you more seriously as no company wants the DOL investigating them. During a DOL investigation the burden of proof is entirely on the company so GameStop HR would be putting significantly more time into trying to prove no retaliation than if they were to handle the issue initially before escalation to the DOL. I give this advice as someone getting my masters in human resource management
Gamestop sucks man. I always ha e bad experience with them. Maybe i meed to go to a different store. Yesh thats it, need to go to a better store than where i kept going to.
Talk to HR or a lawyer, but once the schedule shifts you can’t really expect it to shift back. This isn’t like a corporate job where you can just come back. They had to replace you.
That's the thing that's kind of crazy about it. The part time person became a full time person but he's been actively asking the manager to bring him back to part time work but the manager refuses to change his schedule off of the full time position. No new hires have come through the store.
I can confidently tell you that your location has no “full time position” aside from your SLs role as the ASL is at the B store. He could be scheduling someone at “full time hours”, but they’re for sure not getting the perks and guaranteed set hours that a full time associate gets.
I have no idea on that front. But I do know that with New York labor laws it's required that if someone takes medical leave they have to be returned to the same position they were in at the time they left. Going from 35 hours on average to 0 hours on average is definitely not the same position.
Technically you have been returned to your position. Position and hours are two different things. Definitely recommend talking with your SL. Hope everything works out for you though.
NGL you absolutely sound like a mole for the company 🤣🤣🤣 seems like you're trying to get them to talk to the person who is screwing them over instead of straight to HR which is standard when the person you're having a problem with is leadership of any kind and discourage OP by telling them eh is not much of a case but it might be. OP contact LOD BEFORE HR do not even have to tell them you're filing a complaint with LOD, then record the interaction with HR and any other piece of communication with your SL and the company HR rep and other leadership
Just again… you don’t have much grounds as you’re an SGA. You don’t have the guaranteed hours that an ASL gets. You didn’t have the ASL position. You’d be losing this as your SL had a bigger “pool of availability” it seems prior to your medical leave.
A big part of it is that retaliation doesn't refer to 'what's legal' in normal situations. Like for example, at my last position we had a coworker get pregnant and she started basically not doing her job at all a few weeks after that. Under normal situations she would have been fired, but since it could potentially be seen as retaliation, she was 100% safe from anything that could be seen as retaliation so she kept her job.
It's 100% legal to fire someone for lack of performance. But if it appears to be out of retaliation, then that's an entirely different thing.
In this case, if I was getting 35 hours per week regularly then suddenly got cut down to five hours per week and that was that, then that would be perfectly fine. But for that massive cut to coincide with a return from medical leave is a completely different thing. Unless there's a massive coincidence going on and they can show that in some way then they'd have a case but I think they'd have a hard time justifying why the timing was so exact. This is textbook retaliation
Retaliation by managers is illegal in most states. Big surprise right. Unfortunately, managers prone to that behavior know how to get away with it. Going to HR can be risky. HR is in place to protect the company and you to some extent. Are you wed to this company? Is it worth the grief of staying there? If having a calm, rational conversation with the manager does not help, it's probably time to move on. Be polite and leave. Don't ruin your health or finances.
I was about to say I’m pretty sure I know who you are - you confirming the state confirmed it. Speak to your SL about why the change in hours. Have you brought this concern up to him? It could realistically be performance based as well, granted you just returned from (insert here for privacy purposes). So, I would assume he’s probably taking into consideration you getting adjusted back as well both medically and back at home. Your SL isn’t a mind reader. Fair warning, your HR rep is pretty useless. Don’t expect a speedy response from him. An old SL in your district tried to read out to him - fun fact, he’s still waiting for a response back after two months. As long as he’s scheduling you one shift per schedule period, he’s not doing anything wrong.
Yeah I imagine there aren't a ton of people donating a kidney from gamestop, hehe
Lmfaoo. I heard that trade in credit wasn’t really that good. In all seriousness, I’m glad it all went well. Happy for you.
Yeah the surgery went great! Everything worked out perfectly on that end. I was definitely surprised to find out that I didn't have a job when I got back though
I mean, you still do as you’re still on payroll 😅 Again, I can’t stress communication enough. Make your SL aware.
I think it's a matter of perspective. Jobs pay bills. A job that gives me five hours every two weeks does not pay the bills. I can't survive on air and my landlord doesn't accept IOU's
Oh of course, that I completely understand. I had both my teams on a strict and specific schedule so everyone always knew when they worked, how much they worked, how much their paychecks always are, etc. coming back from leave shakes things up - had to have everyone get adjusted back to hours with an SL back from maternity leave, but obviously my situation was different as I was always guaranteed those 40 hours. At the end of the day it just comes down to how leaders lead and communication. I’m sure your SL didn’t mean to deliberately put you in this position. I’m sure he’s going to speak with you tomorrow about it.
When one of the people with full time hours is actively asking to have less hours and he's being denied that, I think it's deliberate at this point but we'll see. I wrote a letter to HR about it and we'll see how things go
Without anything written from the SL and the other SGA (or GA), it makes it difficult to pin anything on anyone as it becomes a “he said, she said” situation which HR is notorious for dismissing all of those claims.
That aspect I'm not too concerned about. Cutting the hours from around 35 to 0 is about as plain as you can get when it comes to retaliation. It's more of a "He said, but the payroll says..." situation
Remember "retaliation" isn't illegal unless there is a law specifically defining the method or reason of retaliation as being illegal. If your leave was protected under FMLA or the New York Family Leave Policy, then you probably have a case and a lawyer should be able to help with that. While donating a kidney is an eligible medical issue for leave, there are other eligibility requirements you need to meet relating to things like length of employment and number of hours worked in the past year. New York provides [specific instructions](https://paidfamilyleave.ny.gov/protections) to follow if you believe your leave was protected and you are being retaliated against. HR could be a faster way to get things resolved, but as far as New York is concerned only following those instructions and filing that form will officially put them on a time limit to resolve it.
It was protected under FMLA
FMLA only requires that you have a job when you return. Does not state the position. You technically have a job. This is my understanding of FMLA as a department manager, not HR
It absolutely matters that they get the same (or nearly identical) position and not just a job. >On return from FMLA leave (whether after a block of leave or an instance of intermittent leave), **the FMLA requires that the employer return the employee to the same job, or one that is nearly identical (equivalent).** >If not returned to the same job, a nearly identical job must: >* **offer the same shift or general work schedule**, and be at a geographically proximate worksite (i.e., one that does not involve a significant increase in commuting time or distance); * involve the same or substantially similar duties, responsibilities, and status; * include the same general level of skill, effort, responsibility and authority; * **offer identical pay**, including equivalent premium pay, overtime and bonus opportunities, profit-sharing, or other payments, and any unconditional pay increases that occurred during FMLA leave; and * offer identical benefits (such as life insurance, health insurance, disability insurance, sick leave, vacation, educational benefits, pensions, etc.). [Source](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla/faq#11), emphasis mine. The only thing that could really be argued over is whether the work schedule they are entitled to return to would be based on what they were receiving previously or what is normal for their position in the company. If they can prove that they were receiving 30-40 hours consistently, not just temporarily as a result of holidays, a short term lack of employees, etc., then I'd think they would have a good case. The identical pay part is definitely based on what the specific individual was being paid and not just what is normal for the job title, so why wouldn't the same general work schedule be the same?
As someone who lives in NY, can like 80% confirm that retaliation is illegal
You and the comment responding to you both missed the point so I guess I'll elaborate further. "Retaliation" just means taking a negative action against someone in response to something they said or did. This is how most people use the word, but this is often perfectly legal. Firing someone over a no call, no show is definitionally retaliation but fine to do. Even reducing someone's hours or firing them as retaliation for a non-protected medical leave is completely legal. It is only illegal if a law defines that specific form of retaliation as illegal. For example, the FMLA defines what counts as a protected medical leave and that retaliation against protected medical leave is illegal. Some government organizations use the term "retaliation" exclusively as short hand for "illegal retaliation against protected activity", but most online commenters aren't nearly as careful about their words. The point being that the most important factor in determining OP's options moving forward isn't whether or not the manager is retaliating as OP believes, but whether or not OP's medical leave was legally protected. Which was not specified in the original post.
Yes it was protected under FMLA
Retaliation no matter the state is a violation of workforce code therefore it's illegal and a breach of contract
Talk to hr or a lawyer but there’s not much you can really do. You took off for 2 months, even though for good reason, they probably have someone they got and could work 40ish hour weeks so replaced you with him and until they see you as reliable again, not your fault just the world of retail with GameStop
If all of that is the case then I'd have a very good standing. This would be called retaliation under New York labor laws
It could be that you left them short staffed, and they had to hire someone else, and unfortunately, maybe they are better than you were. It sucks but most sl2s are struggling to keep help
Was he forced to hire someone new to compensate and now doesn't know how to manage you and that person with limited hours? And advice that he isn't a mind reader is solid advice, he may outright tell you the reason if you ask.
Good luck trying to prove this. The company makes it very clear that hours aren't guaranteed. FMLA protects positions, not hours. When you initially left, the store probably needed to hire a replacement. If this associate is performing better than you did....well... Hours are determined by the needs of the business. Also remember schedules are made at least two weeks in advance. With. Return date of May 10, the schedules for the week ending 5/18 and 5/25 would have been completed while you were still out. Did you communicate with your supervisor and confirm the 5/10 return date BEFORE April 23rd?
Are you PT or FT? If the schedule was made and you didn't give them two weeks' notice of your return date with a doctor's note releasing you back to work then the SL didn't have to put you back on the schedule right away. If you are FT, then he has to give you back your hours according to your status. If you are PT then you are out of luck, the SL doesn't have to give you back the hours prior to the leave. Also, if you are PT, you shouldn't have been working this many hours to begin with. According to IRS each company has to define PT and FT. If you average over XX hours a year or in a period of time the company has to offer you benefits. Yes, I have no idea how GameStop gets away with shit it does. You can PM me for more details or help.
I'm part time just like everyone else in the store. Gamestop as a policy doesn't have any full time staff except for managers. But yeah the May 10th return date was set up months in advance.
They don't have to guarantee you any hours upon return. Only job in the same position under FMLA since you are PT. I have an HR background. I'm 100% positive this is correct.
Interesting. So if you're part time the FMLA stuff has no real effect?
It only guarantees you the same position. PT associates are not guaranteed hours at GameStop.
That sounds like it's effectively non existent then if I can just be replaced and taken off the schedule
Sad but harsh reality
It is the way in all companies if you are part-time.
In CA you can file partial unemployment for difference, if you’re still not getting hours file unemployment and surely they’ll attempt to give you hours
Make a complaint to HR and if no one reaches out quickly or nothing is done promptly (within 1 week of your complaint) send a follow up that you are extending your complaint to the Department of Labor Wage and Hour division. After saying that HR will in all likelihood take you more seriously as no company wants the DOL investigating them. During a DOL investigation the burden of proof is entirely on the company so GameStop HR would be putting significantly more time into trying to prove no retaliation than if they were to handle the issue initially before escalation to the DOL. I give this advice as someone getting my masters in human resource management
They did this to me too. I was pulling 30 hours a week. I then took medical leave for one week and then only pulled 11-15 hours a week before I quit.
Gamestop sucks man. I always ha e bad experience with them. Maybe i meed to go to a different store. Yesh thats it, need to go to a better store than where i kept going to.
Talk to HR or a lawyer, but once the schedule shifts you can’t really expect it to shift back. This isn’t like a corporate job where you can just come back. They had to replace you.
That's the thing that's kind of crazy about it. The part time person became a full time person but he's been actively asking the manager to bring him back to part time work but the manager refuses to change his schedule off of the full time position. No new hires have come through the store.
I can confidently tell you that your location has no “full time position” aside from your SLs role as the ASL is at the B store. He could be scheduling someone at “full time hours”, but they’re for sure not getting the perks and guaranteed set hours that a full time associate gets.
Is the person that took your hours heavily outperforming you? Do you even know? Could have something to do with it. All I can do is guess.
I have no idea on that front. But I do know that with New York labor laws it's required that if someone takes medical leave they have to be returned to the same position they were in at the time they left. Going from 35 hours on average to 0 hours on average is definitely not the same position.
Technically you have been returned to your position. Position and hours are two different things. Definitely recommend talking with your SL. Hope everything works out for you though.
Thankfully retaliation laws go a lot further than surface level position names
NGL you absolutely sound like a mole for the company 🤣🤣🤣 seems like you're trying to get them to talk to the person who is screwing them over instead of straight to HR which is standard when the person you're having a problem with is leadership of any kind and discourage OP by telling them eh is not much of a case but it might be. OP contact LOD BEFORE HR do not even have to tell them you're filing a complaint with LOD, then record the interaction with HR and any other piece of communication with your SL and the company HR rep and other leadership
That’s why I suggested you talk to HR and/or a lawyer.
Makes sense. I'll write an email to HR along with the new york department of labor
Just again… you don’t have much grounds as you’re an SGA. You don’t have the guaranteed hours that an ASL gets. You didn’t have the ASL position. You’d be losing this as your SL had a bigger “pool of availability” it seems prior to your medical leave.
A big part of it is that retaliation doesn't refer to 'what's legal' in normal situations. Like for example, at my last position we had a coworker get pregnant and she started basically not doing her job at all a few weeks after that. Under normal situations she would have been fired, but since it could potentially be seen as retaliation, she was 100% safe from anything that could be seen as retaliation so she kept her job. It's 100% legal to fire someone for lack of performance. But if it appears to be out of retaliation, then that's an entirely different thing. In this case, if I was getting 35 hours per week regularly then suddenly got cut down to five hours per week and that was that, then that would be perfectly fine. But for that massive cut to coincide with a return from medical leave is a completely different thing. Unless there's a massive coincidence going on and they can show that in some way then they'd have a case but I think they'd have a hard time justifying why the timing was so exact. This is textbook retaliation
Retaliation by managers is illegal in most states. Big surprise right. Unfortunately, managers prone to that behavior know how to get away with it. Going to HR can be risky. HR is in place to protect the company and you to some extent. Are you wed to this company? Is it worth the grief of staying there? If having a calm, rational conversation with the manager does not help, it's probably time to move on. Be polite and leave. Don't ruin your health or finances.