So YOU are the one I’m supposed to talk to about getting a raise! Gimme some more money, dammit! 
My issue was more about letting her keep a job for 8 months that she abandoned for political reasons. Even if you have leave hours on the books, its hard even getting two full weeks off for a vacation. Let alone walking away for 8 months. Paying her for that time is just unbelievable to me.
But, its not my state and they obviously operate differently.
I can’t even remember my last two week vacation. There’s always some scheduling conflict at work. I’m lucky to get a full week off. That’s 9 days for a trip, if you count the two weekends.
We had someone I knew at my work who took a comparable amount of time and had donated time (state employee). It doesn’t seems that unheard of- not common, but not crazy strange.
Maybe at your particular workplace it is hard to get vacation time. For me? If I want to take two weeks off, I don’t have any pending deadlines and the boss doesn’t foresee any wild fires arising with my name on them, I can jet. Now eight months would cause some pause. But taking off for that long for maternity leave is not unheard of. That’s what temps are for. That’s why employees are (hopefully) cross-trained.
That’s sad for you, but it’s not relevant to Fulton’s situation. Where I work, it’s standard for people to take off for at least 2 weeks during the year. Or longer, if they’ve got enough time stocked up. It’s one of the few benefits of working in the public sector. We may not get salaries like our private sector counterparts, but we usually have nice vacation and sick leave.
That kind of frustration I’m sympathetic to, although there’s a part of me that says when she leaves for her 8 months, you start acting like she’s not coming back.
Someone I know had a son who suffered a Traumatic Brain Injury in a car accident in November. Her accumulated leave got her through till February, donated leave covered her till the end of the school year–she was a teacher. I don’t know what her plans are for the next school year–the son is not yet finished with rehab.
And my mother has been known to have hissy fits about my dad’s workplace not being very encouraging of employees taking vacation–except that one must use it before the end of the year.
But given the tragic death of Trayvon Martin–I’m willing to cut his mother some slack about taking time to try to prevent similar deaths, as opposed to other potentially good causes.
So you’re saying that the coworkers should’ve been barred from giving her their hours?
And I’m not sure about your characterization of her reasons as “political.” I mean, there’s a reason people paid attention to Cindy Sheehan, and it’s NOT because she was just one of the faceless many who opposed the Iraq war…
Hah! I almost said, “Upthread”, but that sounds too much like, “My post is my cite.” 
Some notables were mentioned, leading me to think it was either public knowledge or someone was public with the knowledge.
I’m trying to put myself in someone else’s shoes. If I had been asked in the immediate aftermath, I’d give time to his mom. Definitely. If I had been asked three weeks ago, I may have felt pressure to do so. Especially in a job where things get political pretty quickly. And who is making the request? Friends? People active in the union?
My issue (and I’m by no means outraged) is that the rule can be abused. If the rule is they can donate - well, they donated, and they had every right to. As long as it’s applied to everyone and no one is turned down, who cares?
I see what you did there
The Justice for Treyvon Martin Foundation is opposed to the ‘inappropriate application’ (whatever that means) of Stand Your Ground laws. They also want Zimmerman in jail for a long, long time and his parents campaigned for his arrest.
So people are donating hours so that a woman can lobby Congress and also spend her time making a case out of a man who has yet to be proven guilty by a jury of his peers.
That sounds political to me.
Where I work, every request for donated leave is vetted by HR. It’s not like the water cooler crew can send out a random email, soliciting leave for anyone who’s hard up. There’s a process involved, and everyone is told the when, why, and how before they donate.
We have no idea about the politics of her office. If her workplace is anything like mine, everyone got one email from HR announcing the situation and that was it. It wouldn’t have been like the United Way drive, where people often DO feel pressured.
It may be legal for Ms. Martin to accept all this donated leave, but from a moral standpoint I don’t think she should. It’s a utterly selfish use of resources. It is virtually impossible for her to be the only person in her workplace in need of paid time-off to deal with family problems and with this huge donation of leave going to Ms. Martin chances are the next person who needs help is going to out-of-luck because of donor fatigue. If I were in her place, I would accept maybe a three weeks or less and then ask all the would-be donors to contribute to the others who have equally pressing needs for paid time off.
Bullshit.
Do you forget that your OP is still up there for everyone to see?
Here’s what you said:
You specifically alleged a misuse of a Catastrophic Leave bank; you explicitly asserted that hours could not be donated to an individual; you explicitly said that rules would prevent this in your state, and that the rules must be similar in Florida, suggesting that you believed that rules had been broken; and you strongly implied that there was some sort of regulatory or legal violation of the FMLA.
That’s why I said “I hope”. I don’t know and you don’t, either.
This is also bananas.
You’re assuming that all the coworkers with excess leave and generous hearts donated to Fulton.
You’re also assuming that all the coworkers who donated to Fulton do not have enough leave to donate to any other hardship case.
Or that these requests pop up frequently enough to even warrant this kind of concern.
The thing about political thingies is that they don’t speak to everyone. The next sad sack who comes a-begging can rely on the people who are pro-Zimmerman (or generally apathetic to the whole thing). Or they can just suck it up and deal. No one is entitled to anything.
You made a specific assertion that “those who did donate were made public.” You have provided no evidence for this assertion.
Thanks, for some reason I didn’t see that link earlier. I can’t tell from the context of the article that everybody who donated had to release their name to the public, or if some people were okay with their names being released while others had the opportunity to keep their names confidential.
I see what you’re saying about pressure, but I’ll withhold my concern regarding that until someone actually steps forward to say “I was politically pressured to donate my leave time.” The fact that a rule CAN be abused doesn’t mean that it HAS been abused, and the fact that pressure COULD be a problem in this situation doesn’t mean that it IS.
And as for people (not you) saying that it’s selfish of her to accept the donations - I think I will cut a little slack to a woman whose unarmed teenaged son was shot to death in what are demonstrably unclear circumstances.
But it’s reasonable to assume, unless you know otherwise, that these cases are handled like other cases at lots of other institutions. There is no reason even think people’s names were made public. That would be an extraordinary situation that differed from any public sector I’ve known about.
Original:
Clarification:
The newspaper was reporting on who donated, so someone is talking.
Hell, her kid could’ve died in his sleep and I would have felt compelled to donate. That’s just a horrible thing. Losing your kid? <shudder>
(But if someone asked me so I could make a political statement, I may have felt uncomfortable, even if I agreed with said politics. That’s just me.)
Right.
According to the Miami Herald article i linked earlier in the thread:
Miami-Dade has a population of 2.5 million people. How many people do you think are employed by the County? It’s surely well into the thousands, right? Does the fact that 192 people donated suggest that County employees, as a whole, felt somehow pressured or intimidated into donating?
Well, what are we supposed to think?
I just assumed the records were made public. I don’t think my assumption was unreasonable.