I believe that I was a good employee and that no other legitimate reason for my termination existed.
I know of other people who used to be employees of Trantor who were also fired because they made Worker's Compensation claims. because I filed a Worker's Compensation claim against the company. Brasher, 776 S.W.2d 567, 571 (Tex.1989).Ĭarrozza did not deny that he violated the three-day rule, but averred in his own affidavit only the following: I, in good faith, believe that I was terminated from Trantor, Inc. Absent such controverting evidence, summary judgment based upon Tranter's affidavits was proper. Carrozza, however, offered no evidence challenging *314 Tranter's explanation that he was terminated solely for violating the three-day rule. They could also have been readily controverted, as that rule also requires, by evidence of facts and circumstances belying Tranter's neutral explanation and thereby raising a material issue of fact.
#Tranter inc.wichita falls tx free#
Tranter's affidavits, although from interested witnesses, were clear, positive and direct, otherwise credible and free from contradictions and inconsistencies, as required by Tex.R.Civ.P. Miller Brewing Co., 852 S.W.2d 57, 61 (Tex.App.≿ort Worth 1993, writ denied) Parham v. Uniform enforcement of a reasonable absence-control provision, like the three-day rule in this case, does not constitute retaliatory discharge. Tranter's summary judgment evidence included affidavits of supervisory and administrative personnel to the effect that Carrozza's termination was unrelated to his compensation claim, and that he was terminated solely for violating the three-day rule. Tranter moved for and was granted summary judgment. Carrozza then sued Tranter for discharging him in retaliation for having made a compensation claim, as prohibited by Tex. After a hearing, the arbitrator denied Carrozza's grievance, finding that he had been properly terminated.
Carrozza filed a grievance with his union and sought arbitration. This rule calls for the mandatory termination of any employee who, failing special circumstances, is absent three consecutive work days without receiving permission beforehand, or giving notice during those three days. Consequently, Tranter terminated Carrozza for violating the "three-day rule" in its collective bargaining agreement. Carrozza did not inform Tranter before or during his absence that he would not be reporting to work as scheduled. After he recovered, Carrozza did not report to work the day he was scheduled to return or the next several days. Mark Carrozza, an employee of Texas Division-Tranter, Inc., was injured on the job and received compensation benefits and medical leave.
#Tranter inc.wichita falls tx trial#
The trial court granted summary judgment, and the court of appeals reversed. The question presented in this case is whether an employer is entitled to summary judgment in a retaliatory discharge action brought under the Workers' Compensation Law when a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the discharge is established and the employee fails to produce any evidence of retaliatory motive. Holly Crampton, Wichita Falls, for respondent.
0 kommentar(er)
