What are peoples views on this situation?

Fools Motto

Fools Motto

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 June 2011
Messages
6,600
Visit site
Our neighbouring yard, which currently employs stable staff to 'prep' TB yearlings ready for the up coming October sales, as are we at the moment. We don't have many yearlings in comparison, so they have just employed another young lady. I don't know this person personally, but we have met very briefly, and 'hi' in passing! From local gossip, she is keen but has never done it before. We are all currently hand walking the yearlings, on average about 4 miles a day, including up some hills. Both the yard I'm on, and the neighbouring one, don't walk/work together, but both bosses meet up on regular basis.
The other day, on this 'girls' first proper walk, she unfortunately suffered a large asthma attack, and in doing so, let go of her yearling. Said yearling caused minor chaos with the others and the line trailing around its legs. Now, it turns out, she failed to tell anyone that she suffered from asthma, and due to this has been dismissed. The person I work with, claims the dismissal was due to her letting the horse go! Rule 1 - never let go!! (I've let go of one before, had no choice, and I'm still here - somehow!!)
I think, it is all unfair, but what do you think about this?
 
It does sound unfair, of course trying to breathe if you are having difficulty is a priority over holding on to a horse, but it also sounds like this isn't the job for the girl either. Its very unfortunate but if I was responsible for those horses I'd be inclined not to let it happen again and I think that means getting shot of the new girl unless there is alternative work to offer her.
 
Seems fair enough to me, sorry. Not sure on the legal implications as I'm not in employment law, but...

She failed to disclose a (obviously relevant to her job) health condition in her application, and in doing so put herself and her yearling, and everyone else's yearlings at risk.
 
I'm my opinion she should have told them she had asthma. I can't think why she would be dismissed for letting go of the yearling. There will always be instances where it is impossible not to let go. BUT said yearling will probably try to get away again next time. Asthma is awful and she might have to accept the fact that she might not be able to work with horses depending on what triggers it.
 
lelly said:
I'm my opinion she should have told them she had asthma. I can't think why she would be dismissed for letting go of the yearling. There will always be instances where it is impossible not to let go. BUT said yearling will probably try to get away again next time. Asthma is awful and she might have to accept the fact that she might not be able to work with horses depending on what triggers it.
Click to expand...

I agree that she should have told them - particularly for the role she was employed to do. Sales prepping yearlings is pretty full on - and you simply DON'T let go of a valuable TB yearling - no matter what. I still have the scars on my hands/arms from hanging onto a yearling 20 years ago - the line ripped through my gloves and tore a fair bit of skin off the inside of my hands - and I dislocated my thumb, but I didn't let go!! It's a shame she lost her job, but it would be unsafe/negligent of her employers to have let her continue.
 
If there are no other jobs that the girl could do around the stables apart from handling the youngstock then I agree she had to go. She was not up to the job in question; the reason doesn't matter to me.
 
I dislocated my shoulder years ago hanging on to a yearling when the manager let go of his (he was a woeful horseman) but unfortunately one of the other handlers received a kick to the head and a brain haemorrhage in the same incident. I'm afraid, if there was no other work for her then she would potentially put others at risk when walking yearlings and therefore is not suited to the job. I'm not sure that instant dismissal would be the norm though.
 
If she hadn't been employed for long she would have few employment rights, most employers offer a trial period before offering a full contract, they would just have to say she wasn't suitable. I have no idea what the H&S, risk assessment would be for walking out yearlings but should be a plan 'B' as accidents do happen, I would imagine the employers would be more frightened that she was able to claim against their insurance if she or anyone else had suffered an injury.
 
What was her contract? If she's lied about medical history in a contract then instant dismissal is fair. If she's failed to inform an employer of it then the same. If no contract she's got little rights. Either way she's not suited to the job by the sounds of it (long walking and high stress situations) and could endanger herself, colleagues, anyone out on the land and horses.

Everyone can make mistakes or evaluate a situation and make a call as to whether it's safer to let go or hold on... But it's a whole different matter having a medical condition increasing these chances of a repeat performance by a huge degree.

People and animals safety (including the girl herself) should come priority to employer. So it sounds reasonable to me.

However if the asthma (and degree of it) were disclosed along with working history she should be compensated.
 
If she's not been employed a year they can get shut of you with minimal issues... Gets trickier if your pregnant but other than that u have stuff all rights.
 
I think that it is sad for the girl if she really wanted to work with yearling thoroughbreds, but I think that it is more unfair for the employer, which were not informed about that the girl had asthma, when she applied for the job. If she isn't suitable for the job which they hired her to do, I suppose that I don't think that it is unfair to dismiss her.
 
Poor girl. Having asthma myself, I know how awful and terrifying an attack can be. The problem with mine is you never know when it will come to light. For instance, I hadn't had an attack for years, then I went to go to see my friend and something in her house set me off! I thought it might have been her kittens, but I have been fine around them before. If it was a REALLY bad one, there isn't much you can do and I probably would have let go too.

It's very sad for her, but perhaps it is best for her to go, I just REALLY hope they did it in a tactful way, it can be upsetting and embarrassing at the best of times, let alone because of something as scary as an asthma attack.
 
No employment rights in this country (except for racial and sexual discrimination) for 2 years after you start a job - so no legal implications. The Equality Act 2010 (mostly replaced the Disability Discrimination Act wrt to protection at work because of illness or disability) wouldn't apply either because a) Asthma (AFAIK) isn't a protected 'characteristic' and b) her service was so short.

TBH, it's one thing to let go of a yearling because it's playing up but not so acceptable because you've got a condition that can flare up at any time. I don't mean that as unsympathetically as it sounds though!
 
The asthma attack may have been the final straw, as it were, BUT
Most people are taken in on jobs with a probationary period, and if she was still in that she has no recorse
This for all that it is sad for her, is several peoples livelyhood, the stud, the other grooms etc, not to mention the reputation of the yard, which will have a knock on for several years
I am sorry that was not the job for her, but if she felt like being nasty she probably could try and sue them.
 
elijahasgal said:
The asthma attack may have been the final straw, as it were, BUT
Most people are taken in on jobs with a probationary period, and if she was still in that she has no recorse
This for all that it is sad for her, is several peoples livelyhood, the stud, the other grooms etc, not to mention the reputation of the yard, which will have a knock on for several years
I am sorry that was not the job for her, but if she felt like being nasty she probably could try and sue them.
Click to expand...
see the posts above: in the first two years of a job she would have virtually no rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top