No rehire !!!!!!!!!!

[Yorker]

Can I ask everyone which hospitals in Dallas have the practice of labelling their employees as No rehire?

If there is no offence on the part of the employee and they served their notice period but left the organization before 6 months , can they still do that?

[JKL33]

I feel the same way about this that I felt reading about Jimmy John's and their "non-compete" clauses (which they have now apparently stopped).

There is just a point in my mind when..."your greed is showing". I believe this is another one of those situations.

[Nurse SMS, MSN, RN]

The error in thinking here is the "right to employment", at least in Texas. Texas is very red, Employment-At-Will state, no unions and laws that very blatantly favor employers over employees. There IS no "right to employment". You don't have a constitutionally protected right to a job, which is what would be required to have a valid discrimination complaint.

If this is something that truly chaps you, get involved in your state's political process.

[Been there,done that, ASN, RN]

OMG, Hold on, neither am I trying to get a job in the same organization nor am I listed as a "not eligible for hire". I heard from one of my friend and was reading on it.

It sounded unfair to me that's when I posted this topic to know everyone else's opinion.

Any facility has the right to label a previous employee as " not eligible for rehire".

Usually , this stipulation drops off after one year, and depends on the circumstances.

[Yorker]

How do u find out that you are on that list?

[Been there,done that, ASN, RN]

Call HR.

[KelRN215, BSN, RN]

Yes , I think its discriminatory because it taking away the right of employment from someone who deserves it. If they want to follow this policy then it should be relayed to the new hires so they can consider their option, matter of fact there was no employee handbook given.

People who, in your opinion, deserve employment are not a protected class. Employers mark employees ineligible for rehire for a variety of reasons. There is no discrimination here.

[bgxyrnf, MSN, RN]

Wow, that is crazy, doesn't that violate the term " equal opportunity employment "??

The nurse in your hypothetical had their opportunity at employment and ultimately severed it. Equal opportunity was clearly given.

In this case, it wouldn't be the hospital being unfair but rather the employee who left after being trained but without ever providing a return on the investment but later wishing to return.

Most organizations would place such a person on an 'ineligible for rehire' list, formal or otherwise.

[DTWriter]

Yes , I think its discriminatory because it taking away the right of employment from someone who deserves it. If they want to follow this policy then it should be relayed to the new hires so they can consider their option, matter of fact there was no employee handbook given.

When you own a business...so long as you do not discriminate against a protected class...you can hire or not hire who you want. Viva la America~ (for that, anyway :/ )

Honestly, would you re-hire someone who left during your unit's orientation? Come on! No one is entitled to a job.

In hindsight, if you liked the hospital, just not the unit you worked on, could you not have transferred to another unit? Better yet, did you vet out the unit (i.e. shadow, asked questions about the working conditions, etc.) before accepting the position?

Well, take it as a learning experience before you accept another hospital position.

Next thread!

[bgxyrnf, MSN, RN]

Hospitals elsewhere are hiring new grads under contract with financial penalties for leaving before a year or two. It is what it is.

Well by all means, let us defend the practice of seeking out those at a serious (financial) disadvantage and having them pay for the serious (and rather pervasive) problems in hospital work environments!

I know, I know...that's their choice if they want a job!

"It is what it is" ONLY because when nurses present arguments against it, they get this false dilemma thrown back at them. You want a job or not?

Come on, people.

Tangential to this thread.

[bgxyrnf, MSN, RN]

Yes , I think its discriminatory because it taking away the right of employment from someone who deserves it.

First off, there is no "right of employment," only a right to be free of discrimination based on being a member of a protected class.

As far as being "someone who deserves it," the one who deserves it is the applicant who most closely matches the employers needs based on their education, experience, personality, character, reliability, etc.

Having been previously hired and then leaving after a short time is a negative reflection on the latter two.

[Orca, ADN, ASN, RN]

Yes , I think its discriminatory because it taking away the right of employment from someone who deserves it. If they want to follow this policy then it should be relayed to the new hires so they can consider their option, matter of fact there was no employee handbook given.

There is no "right of employment". Any employer who I interview with has the right to either offer me a job or not. I am not entitled to that offer, and if they don't make an offer, I keep interviewing. It is called persistence. No prospective employer owes you, me or anyone else a job.

If this hospital invested the time and money to train and orient you and then you dumped out on them after less than six months on the job, I understand why they don't want you back. They have already taken a loss on you, and they don't want to risk the same thing happening again.

[gcupid]

We all know that changing specialties, or different campuses or sometimes even a different floor can make all the difference in the world within the same company. You shouldn't be DNR'd from an entire system of hospitals over an unfit match.

Even if it is expensive to train new grads, let's be honest. Companies cheat nurses out of so much money anyway. That money will be made back up before the nurse finds another place of employment. It's just the culture of healthcare to bully nurses.