Automatic Termination for DUI is Unlawful

[Unregistered]

I’d like to see someone stand up to this BS auto-termination policy of Bob’s. There are a lot of things that can go wrong in a DUI. The stop can get suppressed. The arrest can get suppressed. The breath test can get suppressed. Even FST’s could get suppressed. So why are deputies immediately fired with absolutely no due process? There are no other policy violations that result in an instant termination. So why is this one the exception to the rule? Hell you can get arrested for possession of cocaine and not get fired on the spot. And that case is easier to prove than a DUI. So why are deputies’s rights I cringed upon for this? I hope someone nuts up and fights this knee jerk BS. I’m not excusing someone who gets a DUI, but should it cost you everything? If the right person catches one I bet it gets changed.

[Unregistered]

Look i dont agree with the policy. But seriously...just dont drive...

There is no excuse for it these days. Between Uber and Lyft, exercise a little self control and get a ride.

But yeah good luck with the policy. Its not going to change no matter how wrong I think it is. It also doesnt seem to be scumbag supervisors that get stopped. I never worked with JM but ive heard nothing but positive thinga about him.

[Unregistered]

Look i dont agree with the policy. But seriously...just dont drive...

There is no excuse for it these days. Between Uber and Lyft, exercise a little self control and get a ride.

But yeah good luck with the policy. Its not going to change no matter how wrong I think it is. It also doesnt seem to be scumbag supervisors that get stopped. I never worked with JM but ive heard nothing but positive thinga about him.

Call dodging, hang out his house, do nothing, non-back up slug. I'm positive of that. How the F he was made Corporal (wink wink). Dude was the Nebraska/19 CPO - used to freakin' live there.

[Unregistered]

Call dodging, hang out his house, do nothing, non-back up slug. I'm positive of that. How the F he was made Corporal (wink wink). Dude was the Nebraska/19 CPO - used to freakin' live there.

Fake news great guy.

[Unregistered]

I’d like to see someone stand up to this BS auto-termination policy of Bob’s. There are a lot of things that can go wrong in a DUI. The stop can get suppressed. The arrest can get suppressed. The breath test can get suppressed. Even FST’s could get suppressed. So why are deputies immediately fired with absolutely no due process? There are no other policy violations that result in an instant termination. So why is this one the exception to the rule? Hell you can get arrested for possession of cocaine and not get fired on the spot. And that case is easier to prove than a DUI. So why are deputies’s rights I cringed upon for this? I hope someone nuts up and fights this knee jerk BS. I’m not excusing someone who gets a DUI, but should it cost you everything? If the right person catches one I bet it gets changed.

STFU Arm Chair Lawyer. It’s not illegal you just don’t like it. Easy dont get a DUI and does not effect you. There is nothing to fight. If you get arrested Sheriff can fire you. May not like it but nothing illegal about it.

[Unregistered]

STFU Arm Chair Lawyer. It’s not illegal you just don’t like it. Easy dont get a DUI and does not effect you. There is nothing to fight. If you get arrested Sheriff can fire you. May not like it but nothing illegal about it.

I thought you departed this site. I see you're back sucking up to Bobs bogus policies. Now you STFU and leave this site. ill be consulting with a real attorney about this matter.

[Unregistered]

STFU Arm Chair Lawyer. It’s not illegal you just don’t like it. Easy dont get a DUI and does not effect you. There is nothing to fight. If you get arrested Sheriff can fire you. May not like it but nothing illegal about it.

Easy there son, no need to get all worked up. Nobody is condoning driving drunk. But, driving drunk might be the sign that employee has an addiction. And if they have an alcohol addiction related to job stress, which isn’t a stretch at this place, then they should be protected under ADA. And only a dub like you would think it’s final because the Sheriff says so. I bet if someone fought it from the above described position that it wouldn’t be so black and white after all. And considering there are bureau commanders and general counsel people who drive drunk it should be important. Not just because Bob says so.

[Unregistered]

The ADA most certainly protects alcoholics but you're missing a VERY important fact. Individuals that are actively consuming illegal substances are not protected because their are committing a crime. Only those recovering from addition are protected because they are not committing a crime.

While alcoholism in of itself is a not crime, getting a DUI is. Therefore any ADA claim made here is not going to go very far because the employee was fired for DUI, not being an alcoholic. Getting a DUI because you're a loser doesn't mean you've won the ADA lottery.

But let's take the DUI arrest out of the picture for a second... in order to be protected by the ADA as one with alcoholism... one would have to notify their employer that they have a problem, made attempts to receive help, and also have a diagnosis.

Otherwise, you're just like someone wanting legal protections due to blindness, but you've never told anyone nor received a diagnosis from an optometrist. You might say you were afraid of letting your employer know but that's not really going to be a valid defense. If you don't tell your employer, they don't know because they can't ask either!

[Unregistered]

Because no one with a problem ever does anything to hide it right? So apparently if you start drinking too much you have to tell your supervisor immediately together any help. But that will just get you a contract where you agree not to drink so when you drink again you’re fired. Maybe the DUI is the first time the problem becomes public. ADA still applies because it’s an addiction. Something you don’t understand and Bob the non-drinker doesn’t care about. I hope someone fights this bullshit archaic policy of King Bob.

[Unregistered]

No, the ADA does not apply when a crime was committed. DUI.

Previous poster covered that pretty well but you seem to have glanced over that one.