# Steve's Music - Globe & Mail article



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-steves-music-hit-a-sour-note/article1995847/

"When Steve’s Music fired Shelley Altman two years ago, she probably wondered if she had the strength to fight back...."

Interesting commentary on the retail music business in my opinion. 

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I'm not so sure it is a comment on the retail music business as it is a comment on the lawyer/s involved. Kirman should have been on top of this, but you'd think the lawyer should have been able to provide a little wise guidance in the matter.

There's a lot of folks who seem to have misplaced their moral compass somewhere in the garage, and can't seem to find it.


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

Well, even here the lawyers hold sway. It took so long and yet no one came to their senses to correct the wrong before it required a judge. I'm not surprised by any of it, just disappointed.

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## ezcomes (Jul 28, 2008)

wow...thats terible...the world truly is going to hell in a han basket


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

"On Oct. 15, 2008, Ms. Altman discovered the company’s attitude had changed. She was at home recovering from treatment when she received a letter delivered by a bailiff. It was from a law firm representing Steve’s. The message was blunt. “It appears that you have been remiss in your duties and obligations towards Steve’s Music in failing to work minimum number of hours required by your employer from Monday to Friday,” the letter said. It added that unless Ms. Altman started working full time, she would be fired."*

Good for the lawyers. Companies like this should be castrated where they stand.


*


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

I'm missing something, even after reading the article twice. She couldn't work full time any more. She refused to take disability pay, as recommended by her employer, but later did take an unpaid medical leave? I'm sure I'm missing something, because if that was my employee, I'd maybe not do it through lawyers but I'd be saying a sad farewell to them as an employee of mine too, or (and this may not be possible everywhere) trying to find a reduced-hours-and-responsibilites position, where she could come and go as able. I KNOW I'm missing something here.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

Her dr's are the ones that make the work eligibility decisions and they decided she could work and advised her such. The medical personnel also did not suggest, encourage or pursue the application of disability, that application is entirely at the discretion of the attending dr's. An employer cannot make the decision you are disabled or medically unfit for your job. The company made no moves towards not letting her work and in fact encouraged to continue. A Judge does not dismiss a persons credibility lightly. In this situation it was the the ladies credibility that was dismissed. As the article states there is already well defined criterion by which a ill employee is to be treated and in this case this employer failed in a multitude of legal obligations and responsibilities. I am entirely willing to bet her application for benefits coincided with her medical leave as ordered by her dr's at the time (and because it was in the end only 6 months it was dropped when she tried to return). I say that because here in Ontario, disability can take from 3 months to a year to begin payments to anyone in Ontario (my mother took a year and a half from application to receiving her first payment when she was dying of cancer). Often the government will refuse and the dr's have to refile for it. Often the government will demand second and even third opinions about the nature of the illness, the permanence of the illness and so on.

Any company, any employer, has to abide by the law as it is set. The finding of the Judge, not the lawyers, the Judge, Her Worship found that the company failed to abide by the laws and held no credibility and decided thus. "The judge also cited several breaches of employment law by Steve’s which prompted her to add punitive and moral damages. " That is why this went the way it went. The company broke the law.

Steve's is a shop to which threads here on GC have been dedicated to the poor service towards customers as people. I've been here long enough now to have seen more than one thread on that come and go. Really, who is surprised they got taken to court over how they treated an ill employee eh?


----------

