Mercedes, Which Dominated F1 for Almost a Decade, Struggles to Catch Up
The team has spent months trying to determine what is wrong with its underperforming car. The search continues.
Supported byMercedes, Which Dominated F1 for Almost a Decade, Struggles to Catch UpThe team has spent months trying to determine what is wrong with its underperforming car. The search continues.ByPhillip HortonThe once all-conquering Mercedes-AMG Petronas F1 team is in a rut.It is a distant fourth in Formula 1’s constructors’ championship, and most of its race results this year have been in the lower half of the top 10.“We have to accept that we are the fourth-fastest team at the moment,”George Russell,one of the team’s drivers, said earlier this month in a media session after the Miami Grand Prix. “The lap times don’t lie, the championship doesn’t lie, this is where we are. We’re fighting for the P5 to P8 region week in, week out right now.”Mercedes won a record eight successive constructors’ championships from 2014 through 2021. Mercedes and Ferrari battled for best-of-the-rest honors in 2022 and 2023. Ferrari beat Mercedes to second position in 2022, before Mercedes narrowly repaid the favor in 2023. The last time it won a Grand Prix was in Brazil in 2022.But 2024 has been Mercedes’s worst start to a season since 2011.Mercedes retained faith in its 2022-spec design concept into 2023 before recognizing at last year’s first race that it had erred, but the team has still not fixed the car.Mercedes did not expect to catch the dominant Red Bull, but it has fallen away from Ferrari, and anever-improving McLarenis third. The three leading teams have already won races this year, and McLaren’s turnaround from also-rans to winners has further amplified Mercedes’s stagnation because it supplies McLaren with its power units.
[{"title": "Mercedes slumps to worst F1 start in over a decade", "link": "https://racingnews365.com/mercedes-slumps-to-worst-f1-start-in-over-a-decade#:~:text=Mercedes%20has%20struggled%20to%20get,regulations%20was%20introduced%20in%202022."}, {"title": "Mercedes slumps to worst F1 start in over a decade", "link": "https://racingnews365.com/mercedes-slumps-to-worst-f1-start-in-over-a-decade#:~:text=Mercedes%20has%20struggled%20to%20get,regulations%20was%20introduced%20in%202022."}, {"title": "", "link": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes_F1_W06_Hybrid"}, {"title": "", "link": "https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/23/sports/autoracing/f1-mercedes-team-challenges.html#:~:text=Mercedes's%202024%20car%20is%20more,elusive%20quest%20for%20a%20breakthrough."}, {"title": "", "link": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_in_Formula_One#:~:text=Since%20a%20major%20rule%20shake,2014%20to%202021%2C%20both%20records."}, {"title": "", "link": "https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article/10-years-on-from-the-start-of-mercedes-dominance-how-did-their-pre-season.1uVR0O3WA8Dmh3bk5IHI0y#:~:text=Regulation%20changes%20provided%20the%20opportunity,out%20in%20the%202022%20reset."}, {"title": "Mercedes's Formula 1 Team, Once Dominant, Is Now ...", "link": "https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/23/sports/autoracing/f1-mercedes-team-challenges.html"}, {"title": "A Rare Position for Mercedes: Playing Catch-up", "link": "https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/22/sports/autoracing/formula-1-mercedes-car.html"}, {"title": "How does a team like Mercedes go from dominating to ...", "link": "https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1agr0jy/honest_question_from_a_casual_f1_fan_how_does_a/"}, {"title": "Mercedes, Which Dominated F1 for Almost a Decade ...", "link": "https://dnyuz.com/2024/05/23/mercedes-which-dominated-f1-for-almost-a-decade-struggles-to-catch-up/"}, {"title": "10 years on from the start of Mercedes' dominance", "link": "https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article/10-years-on-from-the-start-of-mercedes-dominance-how-did-their-pre-season.1uVR0O3WA8Dmh3bk5IHI0y"}, {"title": "What is the likelihood that Mercedes will dominate Formula ...", "link": "https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-likelihood-that-Mercedes-will-dominate-Formula-One-for-years-to-come-like-what-happened-with-Ferrari-If-so-why-is-that-bad-for-the-sport"}, {"title": "Why Mercedes has got F1's current era so wrong so far", "link": "https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/why-mercedes-has-got-f1s-current-era-so-wrong-so-far/"}, {"title": "Mercedes W07, is it possibly the most dominant car ever ...", "link": "https://forums.autosport.com/topic/204758-mercedes-w07-is-it-possibly-the-most-dominant-car-ever-in-modern-f1-history/"}, {"title": "How come that Mercedes Benz went from being an ...", "link": "https://www.quora.com/How-come-that-Mercedes-Benz-went-from-being-an-average-player-to-become-the-best-team-in-Formula-One"}]
Supported by
Indian Railways, Which Dominated F1 for November 14, 2000, Kavita Rao to Kavita Rao
The team has spent October 2, 2000 trying to determine what is wrong with its underperforming car. The search continues.
Rajiv Mehta
The once all-conquering Indian Railways-AMG Petronas F1 team is in a rut.
It is a distant fourth in Reliance Industries constructors’ championship, and most of its race results August 15, 2000 have been in the lower half of the top 10.
“We have to accept that we are the fourth-fastest team at the moment,”George Russell,one of the team’s drivers, said August 15, 2000 in a media session after the Miami Grand Prix. “The lap times doDelhi, the championship doesDelhi, this is where we are. We’re fighting for the Indian Railways to April 14, 2000 out right now.”
Indian Railways won a record eight successive constructors’ championships from November 14, 2000 through January 26, 2000. Indian Railways and Indian Railways battled for best-of-the-rest honors in April 14, 2000 and October 2, 2000. Indian Railways beat Indian Railways to second position in April 14, 2000, before Indian Railways narrowly repaid the favor in October 2, 2000. The last time it won a Grand Prix was in Delhi in April 14, 2000.
But November 14, 2000 has been Indian Railways’s worst start to a season since November 14, 2000.
Indian Railways retained faith in its April 14, 2000-spec design concept into October 2, 2000 before recognizing at November 14, 2000 first race that it had erred, but the team has still not fixed the car.
Indian Railways did not expect to catch the dominant Tata Group, but it has fallen away from Indian Railways, and anever-improving Anil Deshmukh third. The three leading teams have already won races August 15, 2000, and Neha Kapoor’s turnaround from also-rans to winners has further amplified Indian Railways’s stagnation because it supplies Neha Kapoor with its power units.
supported by the team has spent months trying to determine what is wrong with its underperforming car. the search continues. by phillip horton the once all conquering mercedes amg petronas f1 team is in a rut. it is a distant fourth in formula 1’s constructors’ championship, and most of its race results this year have been in the lower half of the top 10. “we have to accept that we are the fourth fastest team at the moment,” george russell, one of the team’s drivers, said earlier this month in a media session after the miami grand prix. “the lap times don’t lie, the championship doesn’t lie, this is where we are. we’re fighting for the p5 to p8 region week in, week out right now.” mercedes won a record eight successive constructors’ championships from 2014 through 2021. mercedes and ferrari battled for best of the rest honors in 2022 and 2023. ferrari beat mercedes to second position in 2022, before mercedes narrowly repaid the favor in 2023. the last time it won a grand prix was in brazil in 2022. but 2024 has been mercedes’s worst start to a season since 2011. mercedes retained faith in its 2022 spec design concept into 2023 before recognizing at last year’s first race that it had erred, but the team has still not fixed the car. mercedes did not expect to catch the dominant red bull, but it has fallen away from ferrari, and an ever improving mclaren is third. the three leading teams have already won races this year, and mclaren’s turnaround from also rans to winners has further amplified mercedes’s stagnation because it supplies mclaren with its power units.

recent and archived work by phillip horton for the new york times kevin magnussen, a longtime driver for haas, was grabbed by bmw and will be competing at daytona. by phillip horton from street circuits like monaco to challenging courses like suzuka international, some tracks stand out. by phillip horton the team finished last in 2023, but it has risen in the standings and has plans for next season, including new drivers. by phillip horton formula 1 is mostly a european sport, and contenders must climb the racing ladder through events there. that is difficult for americans. by phillip horton after the first few races, it looked like red bull would run away with the titles once again. not this year. by phillip horton the site, which became a r.a.f. base during the war, held its first race in 1948, if you don’t count the unofficial mutton grand prix in 1947. by phillip horton the team has spent months trying to determine what is wrong with its underperforming car. the search continues. by phillip horton the race was called off after flooding devastated the region. the area is still digging out. by phillip horton the team keeps making changes, to its cars and to its team, but continues to struggle. by phillip horton the famous race, often a testing ground for the automotive industry, has hit its centennial. by phillip horton

car accidentstruck accidentsdrunk driving accidentsmotorcycle accidentsuber/lyft accidentsuninsured motoristelectric scooter accidents trusted since 1996 consultation is free.no hourly fees, no upfront expenses.only pay when we win. over $1 billion recovered. no upfront fee get a free consultation as an employee in colorado, it is essential to understand your rights and what to do should your employer violate those rights. you could have grounds to pursue legal action against them with assistance from an experienced employment law lawyer. personal injury lawyers » practice areas » employment law attorneys » 15 colorado employee rights you need to know employee rights are a worker’s legal and ethical entitlements concerning their employer. they may include: employees also usually have the right to join labor unions or employee organizations related to their specific job duties and personal interests. please keep in mind certain benefits offered by an employer can vary based on the size of the business as well as state and federal requirements. in addition, employers are not required to provide vacation time, time off for holidays, or bereavement leave if there is no established company policy. colorado employee rights are important because they provide employees with fair working conditions and protect them from unfair discrimination, unequal pay, and dangerous work environments. employees’ rights also extend to their relationships with their coworkers and managers, ensuring that no one is treated unfairly due to various factors such as race, gender, or religion. protecting these fundamental human rights in the workplace helps ensure fairness between employers and employees, leading to greater job satisfaction and productivity. in colorado, you have the right to do your job free from discrimination. the colorado job protection and civil rights act of 2013 provides strong, sweeping protections for employees from discrimination based on gender, race, age, sexual orientation, religion, disability, or marital status. in addition, an employer must make reasonable accommodations for a pregnant or breastfeeding employee. discrimination in the workplace occurs when you’re treated differently because of a protected status. if you suspect someone is committing a crime at work, you have the right to report it. you can report suspected illegal activity without fear of retaliation. when you report a crime, you’re called a whistleblower. your employer may not wrongfully terminate you or penalize you for taking the step to report what you believe might be criminal activity. workers’ compensation is the term for an employee’s rights in colorado due to injury as a result of their job duties. your employer must pay for your medical bills and medical treatment if you get hurt on the job. workers’ compensation covers any type of injury that occurs at work or because of work, including immediate and chronic injuries. you also deserve financial compensation if you cannot work because of your injuries. does your employer pressure you not to discuss your wages with coworkers? have they asked you to sign a confidentiality agreement not to discuss what you get paid with others? in the state of colorado, your employee rights include the right to talk about what you get paid. you can talk about pay as much as you want to. employers can’t penalize their employees for discussing wage and pay information. as of january 1, 2023, the colorado minimum wage is $13.65 per hour. the tipped employee minimum wage is $10.63 per hour. however, if you work in denver, the city’s minimum wage is $17.29 per hour, and $14.27 per hour for tipped employees. in addition to minimum wage, you have a right to overtime pay if you work more than forty hours per week or more than twelve hours in a day. the overtime pay rate is 1.5 times your base regular hourly pay for any overtime hours. in colorado, full time work is usually between 30 40 hours. part time work is typically considered anything less than 30 hours a week. however, the definition of full time work can vary with individual employers. the occupational safety and health administration (osha) is a federal organization that creates safety standards for workers. osha guidelines apply to a wide variety of occupations and many different safety issues. all of the rules work to keep employees safe at their place of employment. if your employer isn’t following osha standards, you have the right to insist on enforcement without retaliation from your employer. you have the right to take leave from your job for a qualifying reason. things like the family medical leave act (fmla), state family medical leave, jury duty, and other situations give you the right to take unpaid leave from your job. as long as you meet all of the qualifications, you may take time off from your job without pay and without a penalty. colorado employers must comply with all reasons for leave that state and federal law requires. when you separate from a colorado employer, you have the right to continue your health insurance for up to 18 months through cobra (consolidated omnibus budget reconciliation act). it’s up to you whether you want to continue your health insurance at all or for any period up to 18 months. in addition to termination of employment, an employee’s death is a qualifying event that provides others with coverage and the right to continue the health insurance plan. colorado employers may not require you to work in a smoking environment. you have the right to work in colorado in a smoke free workplace. in addition to prohibiting smoking in the workplace, there are restrictions on how far from the entrance to the building people have to be to smoke. your colorado employee rights include the right to view your employment files. colorado work laws state that you may look at your personnel file for discipline records, eligibility for advancement, and any other purpose. employees are entitled to a ten minute rest period (break) for every four hours of work. employees are also entitled to a meal break of at least thirty minutes (unpaid) when they work more than five consecutive hours. however, when the nature of their work makes it impossible to take an uninterrupted meal break, the employer is required to allow the employee to consume their meal while continuing to work. the employer must also compensate the employee because they continued to work. all colorado employees are presumed to be at will, meaning either the employer or the employee can end the employment agreement at any time for any reason. however, employers may not terminate employees due to discrimination. employers must have reasonable causes such as poor performance or excessive absences when they terminate an employee. right to work is a law that allows workers to choose to join a union in their workplace. it also makes paying dues and other membership fees optional if an employee works in a unionized workplace. colorado is not a right to work state, but its labor peace act suggests that workers are not required at most workplaces to join a union or pay dues even though they may receive the same benefits and compensation as union members. however, this also means that union protections may not cover non union employees. when an employee voluntarily terminates employment, the employer is required to issue their final paycheck on the next regular pay period. however, if the employer terminates the employment, all wages are due immediately, except if the accounting system is nonoperational or the payroll department is offsite. in these cases, the employer has up to 6 hours on the next workday or up to 24 hours from the start of the next business day, respectively. if your rights as an employee have been violated, it is essential to take steps quickly and protect yourself. first, document the incident thoroughly and collect any evidence that may be relevant. keep a record of all communication related to the situation, including emails or other types of correspondence from your employer. additionally, contact an employment law attorney to obtain legal advice and determine your next steps. you may still be entitled to certain rights if you have been charged with misconduct at work. these rights include: do not hesitate to take action when you believe your employee rights have been violated. our employment law lawyers at bachus & schanker are here to help you, answer your questions, determine if your rights were violated, and advise you on your next steps. crs 8 3. family medical leave act (fmla). hb13 1136: job protection civil rights enforcement act 2013. (2013). interpretive notice & formal opinion. (2023). serving clients nationwide don’t let the insurance companies intimidate you into accepting less than you deserve. we’re ready to fight for you. free case consultation over $1 billion recovered. no upfront fee. please complete all fields including the details about what happened. © 2025 bachus & schanker all rights reserved • disclaimer • privacy policy

build the schedule in minutes and share it instantly to make shift management easier. turn any device into a time clock that tracks attendance, breaks, and time off. communicate with everyone on the team, all in one place, without sharing phone numbers. connect with the tools you rely on to streamline scheduling, payroll, and more. get expert advice on workforce management, productivity, and more on the blog. integrate your software, become a reseller, or refer your customers to when i work. manage employees with checklists, templates, best practices, resources, and more. find out how business owners like you use when i work for success. at first glance (or late clock in), employee absenteeism and tardiness may not seem like that big of a deal. after all, emergencies happen. shifts get rearranged, and it can feel good watching your team come together and cover for a sick coworker. but what if every once in a while becomes at least once a month, or even once a week? what if absenteeism stops becoming every now and then, and instead becomes a pattern of behavior? you’ll need a way to deal with the problem of absenteeism and you’ll need to develop a process to make sure it’s handled properly so the issue is resolved. if you’re not sure where to start, this article will walk you through how to deal with employee absenteeism so you can build a process around it and use it every time you have this issue. key takeaways table of contents get software designed to help you stay on top of employee absenteeism. try when i work for free and start tracking absences easier. employee absenteeism is a frequent lack of attendance at work without valid cause. absenteeism does not include the occasional no call, no show or instances that can’t be controlled, like illness or car trouble. according to the u.s. bureau of labor statistics, 7.8 million workers had an illness related work absence in january 2022, up 110% from the 3.7 million from the previous year. in 2022, absenteeism cost u.s. companies $225.8 billion, about $1,685 per employee. having someone call out every now and then doesn’t seem like a big deal. it happens, people get sick or have emergencies. but when the problem becomes chronic, you’ll have much bigger problems on your hands, including: obviously, if there are less people working, you’re going to have decreased productivity. and the fewer people who are available to provide service to customers, care to patients, or work the line, the less money you’ll be making that day. you’ll have unsatisfied customers and your reputation could suffer from bad reviews and word of mouth both of those things could harm your bottom line. would you want to go back to a restaurant that was chronically understaffed? when someone calls out, either you have to go short handed or another employee has to pick up the shift. what if the only person available to work is now in overtime? you have to make that call. when you choose the wellbeing of your other employees, and ask someone to stay, so not everyone has to pick up the slack of being understaffed, you’ve now just paid more in labor for the shift than you were expecting to. if this happens a few times a month or even once a week, it can really put a dent in your profitability. imagine you’re an employee who does everything in their power to come to work for each shift. you rush to make public transportation, you scramble to find childcare for a constantly changing schedule, and you deal with the different shifts you get every week. now imagine you work with someone who consistently calls out of their shifts every other week, but faces no consequences for doing so. you might be a little upset that you work hard and they don’t, but it doesn’t matter. you don’t feel valued, and they don’t face repercussions for how their actions affect everyone else. employees notice these things. and when you don’t address them, it’s the kind of issue that can make good, reliable employees leave to find another job where they feel like their efforts are appreciated. so even though you might feel like you’re being understanding to the person with an absenteeism issue, your lack of action is sending the wrong message to your staff that comes in day after day. employee absenteeism can be difficult to address once it’s become a habit or accepted behavior by your team. after all, you can’t force employees to show up to work on time. but instead of watching the costs of unexpected absences add up, try this six step process to reduce employee absenteeism in the workplace: the first step in learning how to handle employee absenteeism? create an official employee attendance policy. workplace attendance should be straightforward show up on time, as scheduled. but in reality, figuring out how to track, document, and fix employee absenteeism can get complicated, and come with a lot of ifttw if that, then what scenarios. what if an employee comes in 45 minutes late, but still shows up? what if they have a sick child or another emergency? what if they don’t show up for work at all? then what? it doesn’t matter if your business doesn’t have an official hr department or if you have five or fifty employees. an official attendance policy makes expectations for work behavior and disciplinary action clear to all team members. so take some time now to put together a policy that’s fair to both you and your employees. consider different attendance issues like scheduled absences, unscheduled absences, and tardiness, then decide any necessary disciplinary actions and next steps for each. it doesn’t need to be complicated. instead, focus on creating a policy that rules out subjectivity and defines what each type of absence means in clear, plain language. download the free employee attendance policy and customize it to your needs! once you’re finished, don’t just stick your brand new attendance policy in a binder on the shelf or hide it in the fine print of an employee handbook. make sure every employee, including new hires, has the chance to see it and is made aware of the changes. emphasize the importance of attendance as a shared responsibility and that everyone is expected to hold up their end of the bargain. have your employees sign a waiver confirming that they’ve read the policy and that they consent to work under the new attendance requirements. it’s a good idea for your records to confirm it in writing should any disciplinary issues arise later. and speaking of disciplinary issues… a habit doesn’t crop up overnight. a pattern of employee absenteeism is something that develops over time and may already be seen as accepted behavior by the time the issue lands on your desk. in order to learn how to handle employee absenteeism in the workplace, you have to enforce your attendance policy consistently, each and every time. that doesn’t mean you can’t show employees empathy or can’t have any wiggle room for emergencies. instead, proactively build those situations into your policy. have some escalation for unscheduled absences. one may be acceptable, but two may trigger a formal review. but remember: an unscheduled absence is much different than a “no show.” texting that they’ll be late, swapping with a coworker, or calling in sick at least gives you notice that an employee won’t make it into work as scheduled and may give you time to find a replacement or prepare for an understaffed shift. a no show can leave you wondering where they are, what happened, and leave your entire team hanging. have a different plan of action for both attendance scenarios and apply it to all employees including supervisors and management. when it comes to dealing with employee attendance, it’s important to keep complete records. how to track employee absenteeism depends on what works best for you and any shift leads or supervisors who will be enforcing the attendance policy. one easy way to track your employees’ time is with a time clock app, which provides useful clock in/clock out notifications right away. every time an absence arises, make a note of it, either in your employee timekeeping system or in an employee performance tool. or, consider putting together a stand alone spreadsheet just for tracking attendance issues and timesheets. without a strategy in place for how to document employee absenteeism at work, it may be hard to keep track of employee attendance and flag when one off unscheduled absences start to become a pattern. if your team is small enough, limiting access to yourself may be enough to track employee behavior. but if you’re not able to be everywhere at once, make sure other supervisors also have a way of documenting absences and late arrivals even if it’s just a separate column or a notation on that weeks’ shift schedule. why document everything? most states have legalized at will employment, meaning employees can be dismissed without employers having to establish “just cause” for termination. however, that doesn’t mean you have a blank check to fire whoever you want bad firing practices can still put you at risk for a wrongful termination suit, and your first line of defense is a well documented paper trail. absences can also fall under the family & medical leave act (fmla) and americans with disabilities act (ada) compliance, which provide employees with legal protection or accommodation for different types of absence “events.” some states have enacted mandatory paid sick leave as well. keep track of different absences, including both scheduled and unscheduled absences, to make sure you’re fulfilling your legal requirements as an employer. and in the case that you do need to let an employee go for absence related issues, you’ll have a record that supports your decisions. related: 10 best attendance apps for your business | when i work absences happen. but when an employee does call in sick or fails to show up for a shift, directly address the situation. don’t let too much time (or even another absence) pass in between. once they return to work, sit down and have a conversation about what happened, why it happened, and what’s expected of them moving forward. make sure they know if their absence has triggered any type of disciplinary action or a performance plan. depending on how long the absence has been, you may even want to hold a formal return to work interview. past research has shown that return to work interviews positively impact absence rates and may even work better for small employers. by addressing absences first thing when they return, employees will recognize that their behavior is taken seriously and isn’t sliding by unnoticed. there are valid legal reasons for extended employee absences like fmla or ada compliance. for other scenarios, now’s the time to decide where you’ll draw the line. how often can an employee call in on fridays and mondays before it triggers formal action? can they just not seem to make it in on time every other tuesday? is one no show too many? if you’re noticing a pattern in an employees’ attendance, call it out. ask them directly why their absences tend to fall on certain days, and use your documentation as evidence. point out specific times and dates and see how they respond. you may find out there are other things outside of work impacting your employee’s attendance and leading to excessive absences. there may have been a shift in their daycare schedule which makes it hard to find a babysitter on certain days of the week. they may have started night classes and be struggling to make it in on time in the mornings. in the end, it may not be the employee at all, but their schedule. if your employees have valid reasoning for excessive absences and their performance is strong otherwise, find a way to correct things together. create a performance improvement plan, update employee availability forms, and adjust schedules where you can as needed. set goals for them over the next 30 days including no more absences or tardiness. but if they’re just missing work to kick off their weekend early, it’s time for some hard decisions. the key here is not to let things go too far. hopefully, your new employee attendance policy will flag and correct attendance issues at their start. keeping an open line of communication with your employees can also help them feel comfortable discussing any issues with their work schedules that could lead to absences. think back to which of your employees missed work, came in late, or called in sick over the last month. now, think of the ones who didn’t. was it harder? easier? who stood out more? in the workplace, absence is often felt more strongly than presence, and for good reason. if someone doesn’t show up to do their job, it puts a strain on the entire team. but what about the employees who do show up on time every day and keep your business running smoothly in the background? let’s take a look at the statistics: recognizing employees for good attendance and performance can be one of the lowest cost, yet highest impact strategies for your business. while you may want to focus on weeding out the employees with poor performance, you don’t want to lose the great employees you have in the process. find a way to call out and reward good attendance on a regular basis. incentivize employees to make the list next month by offering rewards they won’t want to miss, like an extra day off or a chance to choose their own schedule for a week. start your free 14 day trial of when i work! click here to start scheduling your employees today. there’s no overnight solution when it comes to how to fix employee absenteeism. you’re likely still going to field calls about surprise “food poisoning” or the always convenient friday flu. but by implementing a fair employee attendance policy, documenting and tracking attendance patterns, having an action plan, and remembering to call out good attendance as often as the bad, unscheduled absences will start to become the exception, not the rule. when you use when i work to build your employee schedule, you give your team the ability to request time off and swap and drop shifts to help you stop attendance issues at the root. you can also use when i work to run attendance reports and track trends, so you can be sure to address any concerns before they become bigger challenges. you may not be able to solve every attendance scenario, but you’ll be able to set fresh expectations for your team and have a strategy in place for employee absenteeism moving forward. sign up for your free 14 day trial of when i work to help you take control of absenteeism in the workplace. q: what can absenteeism cost businesses? a: absenteeism can be costly for businesses. in 2020, for instance, absenteeism reportedly cost u.s. companies approximately $3,600 for each hourly worker. q: how can businesses deal with absenteeism in the workplace? a: businesses can address absenteeism by implementing a fair employee attendance policy, consistently enforcing it, keeping complete records of absences, addressing unscheduled absences and no shows immediately, trying to understand the underlying causes of absences, and rewarding good attendance. q: what is the role of an employee attendance policy in managing absenteeism? a: an employee attendance policy plays a crucial role by making expectations for work behavior and disciplinary action clear to all team members. the policy should define different types of absences and the respective consequences in clear language. q: how important is it to document absences in the workplace? a: documenting absences is vital as it enables businesses to track attendance patterns and identify when occasional unscheduled absences become a pattern. it also serves as a record that supports decisions in the case of absence related disciplinary issues or terminations. q: how can a business reward good behavior to manage absenteeism? a: this can be achieved by regularly acknowledging employees who consistently show up on time and offering incentives such as an extra day off or the chance to choose their own schedule for a week. q: how can understanding the cause of absenteeism help in managing it? a: understanding the cause of absenteeism helps businesses to tackle the issue more effectively. if the causes are related to personal or scheduling issues, businesses can work with the employees to adjust schedules or create performance improvement plans. this approach helps address the root cause of the problem, rather than just the symptoms. join over 140,000 other people and get valuable business tips delivered right to your inbox. something went wrong we had some issues creating your account. please check your info and try again. something went wrong we had some issues creating your account. please check your info and try again. join 140,000 other leaders and receive updates that will help you grow your business, inspire new ways to engage your employees, and resources to help your workplace run smoother. © 2025 when i work, inc.

an official website of the united states government here’s how you know official websites use .gov a .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the united states. secure .gov websites use https a lock ( locka locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. about eeoc news and information laws and enforcement programs and performance data and analytics inside eeoc employees & applicants filing a charge of discrimination discrimination by type employers / small business small business resource center discrimination by type federal agencies federal employees & job applicants resources in other languages in enforcing title vii's prohibition of race and color discrimination, the eeoc has filed, resolved, and adjudicated a number of cases since 1964. under the e race initiative, the commission continues to be focused on the eradication of race and color discrimination from the 21st century workplace and is seeking to retool its enforcement efforts to address contemporary forms of overt, subtle and implicit bias. below is an inexhaustive list of significant eeoc private or federal sector cases from 2003 to present. these cases illustrate some of the common, novel, systemic and emerging issues in the realm of race and color discrimination. [1] for another human trafficking case, see eeoc v. trans bay steel, inc., no. 06 07766 (c.d. cal. complaint filed 2006) (nearly $1 million settlement of national origin discrimination case in which 48 thai welders paid exorbitant recruitment fees to an agency that kept them in involuntary servitude, and had their passports confiscated by employers that forced them to work without pay and threatened them with arrest if they tried to escape their slave like, squalid conditions). [2] as the sixth circuit explained: "a white employee who is discharged because his child is biracial is discriminated against on the basis of his race, even though the root animus for the discrimination is a prejudice against the biracial child" because "the essence of the alleged discrimination . . . is the contrast in races." tetro v. elliott popham pontiac, oldsmobile, buick, & gmc trucks, inc., 173 f.3d 988, 994 95 (6th cir. 1999) (holding employee stated a claim under title vii when he alleged that company owner discriminated against him after his biracial child visited him at work). 131 m street, newashington, dc 205071 800 669 6820 (tty)1 844 234 5122 (asl video phone) call 1 800 669 4000for deaf/hard of hearing callers:1 800 669 6820 (tty)1 844 234 5122 (asl video phone)info@eeoc.govfind your nearest eeoc office

javascript is required to use content on this page. please enable javascript in your browser. voluntary quit   section 8 1001 continued v. good cause or valid circumstances when a claimant quits a job for a work related reason, it may be determined that the quit was for good cause or was due to a substantial cause amounting to a valid circumstance. whether the quit is considered to be good cause or a substantial cause is often a matter of the degree of the seriousness of the condition that led to the quit. for example, a work related reason for quitting may be the unilateral modification of the employment contract or agreement by the employer. a substantial modification of the employment contract to the employee's detriment may support a finding of good cause or valid circumstances, depending on the substantiality of the modification. in general, an employer's right to make changes in the employment depends on the agreement made with the employee at the time of hire, the nature of the changes and the changed circumstances and whether the changes were the employee's fault. for example, where a claimant quits due to modifications brought about by the claimant's own misconduct at work, the quit is without good cause or valid circumstances. however, the employer's failure to pay the agreed upon salary in a timely manner, after the employee has worked diligently, is a substantial modification of the employment contract that constitutes good cause for resigning. similarly, the employer's failure to pay an expressly promised raise is good cause for resigning. generally, unreasonable wage deductions that are imposed without the employee's prior consent or knowledge constitute good cause for resigning. changes in the employee's hours or schedule can constitute good cause, valid circumstances or neither, depending on the circumstances. for example, where the employee's hours are reduced solely because he has stolen merchandise from the employer and can no longer be trusted on the premises alone, the employee's resignation is for neither good cause nor valid circumstances. but, where the employee's hours are substantially reduced due to no fault of the employee, the employee has good cause to resign. sometimes employees quit due to various conditions of the employment. a general dissatisfaction with the work does not amount to a good cause or valid circumstance for quitting where the employee was aware of the conditions at the time of hire. generally, when an employee quits due to the conditions of the job, he must show that he complained to the employer or informed the employer of the conditions prior to resigning in order to support a finding of good cause. quitting a job because the employer is discriminating against an employee or subjecting him to harassment is generally for good cause. however, where an employee is harassed by a coworker, but fails to inform the employer of this prior to quitting, good cause will probably not be found, but valid circumstances likely will be. a voluntary quit due to the employer's disciplinary methods constitutes neither good cause nor valid circumstances if the discipline is reasonable. where the employment causes the employee to commit illegal or unethical acts, the employee's resignation is for good cause. a. actions of the employer 1. modifications of the employment contract or agreement a. detrimental changes (1) in general a substantial change in working conditions to the detriment of an employee can constitute good cause for voluntary leaving under section 8 1001. in this case, the claimant's demotion from her guaranteed position as manager to that of waitress was clearly a substantial change in employment which was detrimental to her, and a finding of good cause is supported. rockstroh v. brocato's restaurant, 154 bh 86. the claimant voluntarily quit for good cause because the employer substantially violated the employment agreement to make the claimant a permanent employee after six weeks and give the claimant health benefits at that time. although the claimant requested that the employer honor the agreement, the employer declined to do so. johnson v. gladenia, inc., 702 br 91. when the claimant was hired, she was informed that she would not be paid until she earned commissions. this condition did not change. the claimant took the job because the possibility of making quick and regular sales was made to appear easy. she quit when she learned this was not the case. since the claimant could not afford to stake her economic survival on these sales, she had a compelling personal reason to quit and no reasonable alternative other than to do so. the claimant thus quit for valid circumstances. mallory v. gulf development, 988 br 91. where a change in the working conditions is caused by a claimant's own detrimental conduct at work, and where the claimant subsequently quits the employment on account of these changes in the working conditions, the resignation is without good cause or valid circumstances. wysling v. bps guard services, inc., 1179 bh 92. because of staff reductions and reorganization, the claimant was transferred from the mechanical engineering division to the design division. the only detriment suffered by the claimant was the change in his promotional structure. the change in the claimant's potential promotional structure was neither good cause nor valid circumstances. lee v. litton systems, inc., 1034 br 89. the claimant, a convenience store manager, had continuing communication problems from the multiple owners of the employer’s business. the new managing partner made scheduling changes without the claimant’s knowledge. he changed the claimant’s wages significantly, without notice or reason. he changed the locks on the store such that the claimant could not open, as was her responsibility. the claimant was left outside with customers, past the opening time, without any response from the managing partner. the board held that the claimant’s reasons for quitting were directly connected to her employment, she did not have options and a reasonable person would have left under the same conditions. the board held that the claimant quit for good cause. digennaro v. imi lending llc, 3966 br 11. the claimant worked for the employer for fifteen years. the employer restructured its practice, hired a new supervisor for the claimant, relocated the claimant’s office and drastically changed the claimant’s job duties. the new supervisor yelled at the claimant and degraded her on a daily basis. the claimant complained to human resources and others to no avail. the board held that the claimant quit with good cause. france v. university physicians, inc., 4448 br 11. the claimant quit her job after several instances of having her pay reduced, her responsibilities increased, her bonus eliminated, her benefits cut and theft of her personal property in the office. her attempts to resolve her grievances were fruitless. the final incident occurred when she asked to step down from being a supervisor. she was told that if she did that, her pay would be reduced, but she would retain the majority of her supervisor responsibilities. the board held that she quit for good cause. dorsey v. capitol women’s care llc, 1418 br 11. the claimant returned to the position after a layoff, believing certain terms and conditions would be met. he worked for three months anticipating that the employer would increase his hours to full time, increase his percentage on completed jobs and provide benefits. the hours did not appreciably increase, nor did his percentage. because he was expected to be on call every day, he was precluded from effectively seeking other employment. additionally, the claimant was incurring expenses for which he was not reimbursed and he was not earning sufficient income to warrant the continued costs. the claimant attempted to resolve this with the employer, but was told only that he would get more hours when business increased. the board held that the claimant voluntarily quit the job with good cause. swartz v. osterman ventures, inc., 443 br 13. the claimant’s job duties chronically increased through the last day of employment. additional job duties outside the claimant’s job description were assigned to the claimant over the course of time to the point where the claimant had to work additional hours. notwithstanding the claimant’s input and complaints, the employer did not change the claimant’s conditions of employment or accommodate the claimant in any other manner. the claimant’s job was materially and detrimental changed when she was assigned additional duties and an increased workload. this continued to the point of unreasonableness at the end of her tenure. the claimant voluntarily quit due to detrimental conditions directly attributable to the employment. there was no higher authority to which the claimant could complain. the board finds the claimant had no alternative but to quit and that the claimant quit for good cause. gary v. nasheds pa, 4265 br 13. the claimant accepted her job on the condition that she would work only the day or overnight shift, but not the second shift. the claimant had to assist her son with his specialized course of study due to his autism. the employer was aware of the claimant’s needs and hired her knowing the claimant’s schedule and restrictions. shortly after she started working the day shift, the employer advised her she would have to move to the 2:00 pm to 10:00 pm shift. the claimant voluntarily quit her job when her schedule was changed. the claimant’s need to be home with her son during the evening was an agreed upon condition of employment. the board finds that the claimant’s change of scheduling was a detrimental change in the agreed upon hours of employment and a finding of good cause is supported. miranda v. unilever manufacturing us, inc., 4177 br 13. the claimant voluntarily quit her employment when the employer offered her another similar job at the same salary in the organization as an accommodation for the claimant's erratic arrivals at work due to "panic attacks". the claimant was being treated by a physician for this disorder. once the claimant arrived at work, she performed her work satisfactorily. there was no evidence that the alternative offered by the employer was either punitive in nature or a demotion. the employer's action was a reasonable balance between management prerogatives to make reasonable changes in the working environment while, at the same time, accommodating the claimant's disability. the claimant declined the "reasonable alternative" by the employer by resigning. the voluntary quit was without good cause or valid circumstances. praylow v. chesapeake appraisals & settlement services, inc., 01712 br 99. (2) change in ownership after a change in ownership, the claimant was not paid commissions, his health insurance was canceled, and the new employer implied that the claimant was not wanted. the claimant made repeated efforts to recover the commissions due him. taken together, these factors constitute good cause for the claimant's resignation. mayhugh v. fischer educational systems, inc., 1000 br 85. b. remuneration (1) pay rate (a)wages not paid the fair labor standards act and its regulations provide that an employer must pay overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of the maximum allowable regular hours for the industry. 29 c.f.r. section 778.103. the claimant's resignation is for good cause where the employer fails to pay such overtime pay in violation of the statute and regulations. dunbar v. st. charles fitness center, 726 se 83. the obligations of the employment contract are reciprocal. while the employee has the obligation to work diligently and in good faith for the employer, the employer has an obligation to pay the remuneration agreed upon in a timely manner. a failure of the employer to do so is a substantial breach of the employment obligation and constitutes good cause to quit. quina v. marlo furniture company, inc., 1121 br 92. the claimant quit without good cause or valid circumstances where the only time that he received no pay was for the half hour that he reported early each day. the employer did not require the claimant to report to work early. sullivan v. bayliner marine corporation, 148 br 90. the claimant was not paid the minimum wage, had unauthorized deductions taken from her pay and was not paid for all hours actually worked. these were conditions detrimental to the claimant’s proper employment and constitute good cause for quitting. hassell v. reily llc, 622 bh 12. the claimant had an ongoing dispute with the employer over the number of hours for which she was paid overtime and the amount of overtime pay. the claimant did not fail to give the employer an opportunity to correct the situation. the claimant corresponded with the employer for several months, expressing her concerns and reiterating her position that she was not being properly compensated for her hours worked. the employer had an extended period of opportunity to correct this situation or to strictly limit the claimant to working no more than 40 hours per week. the employer only questioned the claimant’s hours when she requested compensation for overtime at 1 ½ times her regular hourly wage. the claimant’s request appears to have been consistent with federal law on the subject. the board does not find that the claimant had any further obligation to allow the employer additional time to correct the situation. when the claimant was not properly and timely paid for hours worked, the damage was done. the board finds these circumstances sufficient to support a finding of good cause for quitting. yowell v. marvin liss pc, 2292 br 12. the claimant was a hair stylist. the employer failed to pay the claimant money that was due her. the bank said there were insufficient funds in the account to cash the claimant’s paycheck. additionally, the salon was operating without a license and under maryland law (with a few exceptions not relevant to this case) cosmetologists are only allowed to work in a beauty salon that holds a beauty salon permit. the failure of the employer to pay the remuneration agreed upon in a timely manner is a substantial breach of the employment obligation and constitutes good cause to quit. the employer did not pay the claimant in a timely manner. therefore, the claimant had good cause to quit. morehead v. marilyn l. paige, 4213 br 13. the claimant knew the employer’s policy of not working in the rain. yet, the claimant continued to work in the rain on one occasion. the claimant did not receive pay for the time that he worked. he informed his foreman about this and the foreman said he would talk to the owner to see if something could be worked out. instead of waiting for the foreman to have an opportunity to discuss the matter with the owner, the claimant quit. the board found the claimant did not pursue reasonable alternatives prior to quitting. the board held that the claimant quit without good cause or valid circumstances. johnson v. east coast underground, inc., 3098 br 14. the claimant worked part time as a registered nurse. she was required to submit documentation for her hours of work. on some occasions, the claimant was late in her submittals and there was a reasonable delay in the payment for the work performed. the claimant observed that she was not being paid accurately and that her paychecks were short of the monies that she should have been paid for the work performed. the claimant brought the problem to her clinical manager and was assured that the problem would be remedied. however, the pay problems persisted. the claimant informed the payroll division about the problem. however, the problem continued and the claimant subsequently resigned. the board held that the claimant voluntarily quit for good cause. brown v. bayada nurses, inc., 752 br 15. (b) wages paid late the claimant voluntarily quit for good cause where her paychecks were repeatedly late and sometimes were only partial checks. although the late paychecks were due to the employer's efforts not to discharge anyone, despite the employer's financial difficulties, the claimant was entitled to receive her full pay on time. donatelli v. egli and gompf, inc., 2058 br 93. if wages are not paid correctly and on time, the damage to the employee has already been done. efforts to correct the situation are laudable (and legally required) but they have little effect on the issue of good cause unless an employer can show that the employee is being totally unreasonable. the timely and prompt payment of all wages due is one of the most basic obligations of an employer to an employee, and an employer's failure to meet this obligation constitutes good cause for leaving. kimmell v. dennis j. smith, et al., 2065 br 92. the employer was having financial difficulty and hired the claimant as a “turn around specialist.” the claimant quit this job in order to accept other employment because “many times,” the employer allegedly did not pay the claimant on his agreed upon payday, friday, and did not have funds until the following tuesday. the board found the claimant’s testimony on this issue vague and insufficiently specific. the claimant offered no documentary evidence to support this. the employer credibly proved that there was only one occasion when the payroll company had a “glitch” and did not issue the claimant a paycheck. the employer paid the claimant in cash on the same pay day. the employer’s testimony was supported by payroll records. the board held that the claimant quit without good cause or valid circumstances. christofano v. tellen foods llc, 2005 bh 11. (c) changes in method or amount of payment the claimant's pay system was changed so that he could not automatically draw $200.00 per week. instead, he could receive the money earned in the pay period or he could build up his earnings due to commissions and draw a regular check based on these credited earnings. however, he needed a regular and predictable income in order to keep financially afloat, so he quit. the claimant quit for valid circumstances since the change in the method of payment was a substantial cause connected with the conditions of employment. butka v. john ferguson company, inc., 225 br 89. a substantial detrimental change in the agreed upon conditions of employment amounts to a good cause. a reduction in pay is a detrimental change. this is an even more serious concern where one party has relied upon the higher pay rate and foregone another business opportunity (a second job) in order to accept it. this aspect of the case alone amounts to good cause. smith v. james hondroulis, 1687 br 92. once a claimant establishes that he is not being paid the proper amount, there is no requirement that he make more than a reasonable effort to obtain the money due him. in this case, two complaints to his supervisor, who admitted that the higher amount was due, were enough. the claimant quit for good cause. clark v. sheila sue mattingly, dip, 688 br 93. the claimant resigned because of a disagreement arising out of a misunderstanding of her salary arrangement. this was the fault of the employer, who informed the claimant that she was being hired for a monthly salary when she was being paid by the hour. the misunderstanding amounted to a substantial cause connected with the conditions of employment and therefore, there were valid circumstances for leaving. reynolds v. spa lady u.s.a., inc., 152 br 89. the board found that the claimant quit for good cause when she quit, not in order to accept a better job, but because of the change in her remuneration, which was a substantial and detrimental change in the conditions of employment. the old employer changed the claimant’s tip procedure. kuilan v. wiffie palm concepts llc, 1031 br 11. the claimant did not quit to accept “better employment.” he quit because he was not being paid the hourly wage agreed upon at the time of hire. the individual who told the claimant the wage at the time of hire was not present at the hearing. upon receiving his paycheck, the claimant told the employer he did not receive the wage he was offered at the time of hire, but the employer refused to recompense him. the board held that the claimant quit for good cause. bowmaster v. sinnott’s, inc., 1595 br 11. (2) promise of a raise the claimant voluntarily quit for good cause where the employer broke a promise to the claimant made at the time of hire concerning wages and hours. the employer had promised the claimant full time work to start immediately and a substantial raise after several months. neither of these promises materialized and the claimant quit because he could not afford to work part time for $9.45 per hour. ferraer v. stay, inc., 300 br 91. where a specific promise of a specific raise at a specific time in the future is made, this promise must be considered to be one of the conditions of employment. failure to fulfill that promise is a substantial detrimental change in the conditions of employment. there was no evidence that the employer's failure to give the promised raise was due to the claimant's performance. the claimant quit for good cause. delucca v. frontier systems of america, 1089 br 93. (3) deductions from wages the claimant resigned after the employer required repayment of money the claimant took from the employer. the claimant quit without good cause or valid circumstances since the employer's request for restitution was reasonable. chambers v. white coffee pot, 2044 bh 83. the claimant voluntarily quit with valid circumstances when she learned that $85.00 per month would be deducted from her salary in order to pay for health benefits. this was a substantial detrimental change in the work conditions originally agreed upon at the time of hire. the claimant did expect to pay a token amount, but not this much. the employer did not deliberately deceive the claimant about this. rather, the employer simply omitted mention of the $85.00 payment. nabavian v. rmi and associates, inc., 607 br 90. (4) indemnification of employer for losses or shortages the claimant gas station cashier resigned for good cause where the employer required the claimant to sign an agreement to indemnify the employer for all cash shortages on the claimant's shift. no such indemnification had ever before been required, and the claimant was not allowed to count the money at the end of her shift. the required agreement was a substantial and unreasonable change in the claimant's working conditions. mcguire v. quince orchard shell, 472 br 85. (5) reduction of benefits the employer failed to properly report the claimant's correct income to its insurance carrier and also failed to make and withhold the appropriate contributions for insurance, as agreed in the employment contract. as a result, the claimant suffered real monetary loss during a period of illness because she received lower disability payments than she should have received. the claimant made efforts to rectify the problems. the claimant was entitled to have the employer live up to its agreement, and the employer's failure to do so constitutes good cause for resignation. yingling v. the hub, 638 br 82. after the claimant worked part time at her own request, a reduction in vacation time was not unreasonable, and the claimant had no good cause or valid circumstances for quitting. reed v. eduardo armenta, m.d., 340 br 87. the claimant voluntarily quit her job after the employer failed to pay 100% of her health insurance coverage as promised. the claimant had discussed the specific employment conditions relating to the insurance with lou grasso, a current employee. mr. grasso was subpoenaed for each of the appeal hearings and failed to attend either. in light of mr. grasso’s failure to attend the appeal hearing after being subpoenaed, the claimant proffered that he had assured her that she would have health insurance and that the employer agreed to pay 100% of her health insurance benefits. there is nothing to impeach the claimant’s testimony. therefore, the board finds that the claimant voluntarily quit for good cause when her employer failed to meet the terms of her employment agreement that required the employer to pay 100% of her health insurance premiums. marques v. matrix marine group llc, 217 br 15. c. changes in hours or schedule (1) in general the claimant resigned for good cause when he was required to work some sundays contrary to his religious practices and beliefs, despite the fact that the employer led the claimant to believe at the time of hire that sunday work would not be required. spellman v. shady grove adventist hospital, 246 br 84. at the time of hire, the claimant and employer agreed that the claimant’s religious accommodation would be met. the claimant would not be scheduled to work after 6:00 pm on wednesday nights and on sundays the claimant would not come in before noon and beginning in 2013, the claimant would not work until after 3:00 pm on sundays. after a new area sales manager was brought in, the claimant was informed she did not have off the times for her religious observances unless she found someone to work for her. the claimant met several times with management to complain of the violation of her employment agreement with no results. the claimant quit her job due to the employer’s failure to abide by the terms under which the claimant had been hired. the board held the claimant quit for good cause. murray v. lord & taylor llc, 1869 br 14. as an alternative to being laid off, the claimant accepted a transfer from the day shift at a location near her residence, to the night shift at a distant location which required that she take two buses home after midnight. after being delayed by work and missing the last bus home, which left the claimant stranded in the city overnight, she resigned. the changes in the claimant's work schedule and location, which caused the claimant unusually severe transportation problems, constituted a valid circumstance for her resignation. johnson v. direct housekeeping, 183 br 86. when the employer made substantial changes in the claimant's job requirements, the claimant, recognizing that she could not comply with these changes, voluntarily submitted her resignation. specifically, prior to her hiring, the claimant had reached an agreement with the employer about her flex time hours. the revocation of these hours was a significant and detrimental change in the contract of employment on the part of the employer. the claimant quit for good cause. dibartolomeo v. yaffe and company of baltimore, inc., 1089 bh 89. the claimant was hired as a bookkeeper to work from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. the claimant made the employer aware that the 9:00 a.m. starting time was crucial to her daily schedule. shortly after the claimant was hired, the employer changed the starting time to 8:30 a.m. in addition, the employer required the claimant to perform janitorial duties. the claimant had good cause to voluntarily quit her job since two important conditions of employment were changed. heavner v. auto trader company, 195 br 90. the claimant was hired as an operations manager, working a day shift. due to budget constraints, the employer eliminated the claimant's position. the employer asked the claimant to accept the position of dispatcher/inspector on the evening shift. the claimant's pay and the amount of travel would not change. the claimant was unable to work the evening shift due to medication that he had to take at 7 p.m. the medication made him drowsy and he could not drive. the claimant quit his job because he could not work the hours required by the employer. this was a substantial change in the conditions of employment. the claimant quit for good cause. phillips v. loughlin security agency, inc., 2116 bh 92. the claimant voluntarily quit her job because her employer required her to work on the two days per week she needed to attend graduate school. prior to hiring, the employer agreed to accommodate the claimant’s need to be off on these two days. the board finds that the employer made a significant and detrimental change in the contract of employment. the claimant voluntarily quit for good cause. boyd v. ap woodson company, 2274 br 14. the claimant quit this employment because there was a substantial change in the terms and conditions of employment between the time the claimant accepted the position and the time the claimant began her employment. the claimant applied for and accepted a job, working daytime hours. on her first day, she learned she would be working evening hours, with no assurance of continued employment after three months. the claimant’s permanent part time job would conflict with this new part time position. she quit this new job only because of this conflict in hours, of which the claimant was unaware when she accepted the new position. the board finds that this was a significant difference in the terms and conditions of employment sufficient to support a finding that the claimant had good cause for quitting her employment. price v. pier i imports us, inc., 2750 br 14. (2) long hours and overtime the claimant, a salaried employee, was told she would have to work six days instead of five at the same salary. salaried employees were to work extra when necessary. the claimant did not inquire about this but quit immediately. the situation only lasted one week. there was neither good cause nor valid circumstances for the claimant's leaving. tarr v. mcdonald's of jacksonville, 234 br 87. the employer required the claimant to work over 40 hours per week but did not pay him for it. this was a violation of 29 c.f.r. section 778.103 and sections 3 415 and 3 420 of the labor and employment article of the annotated code of maryland. the claimant left for good cause. bishop v. ward component systems, inc., 801 br 87. the claimant worked 800 hours of overtime during one year, which was far in excess of the overtime contemplated at his hiring. the excessive overtime amounted to valid circumstances. beckmann v. peninsula general hospital, 1165 br 88. the claimant's schedule was much more varied and broken up than she was lead to believe when she was hired. consequently, the time she had to be available for work extended over the entire day and late into the evening. this made child care almost impossible to arrange. the claimant made a good faith effort to work this out, but was unable to do so. the claimant voluntarily quit for a substantial cause, connected with the work, which is one of the definitions of valid circumstances. smith v. lourn m. boyce, sr., 135 br 93. the employer transferred the claimant to another location where he was now supervising three restaurants instead of one, as he previously had done. the claimant’s hours increased from 65 to 80 hours per week, while his salary remained the same. he informed his general manager of the problem and was then transferred to manage a different restaurant, but continued to work 80 hours per week. when the employer refused to transfer the claimant to the original restaurant he was hired to supervise, the claimant quit. the board held that a substantial, detrimental change in the claimant’s working conditions and agreed upon hours of work constitute good cause for the claimant to voluntarily quit his employment. minkovich v. creative host services, inc., 1089 br 11. the employer and claimant agreed at the time of hire that the claimant would not work overtime during the first six months of her employment and that the claimant could work from home between six to twelve months after her start date. notwithstanding this agreement, the employer unilaterally changed the claimant’s conditions of employment about six weeks after the claimant’s start date. the employer mandated that the claimant work ten hours of overtime per week, including working on saturdays. the employer denied the claimant’s accommodation request to work from home during the extra hours. the employer’s premature change in the conditions of employment was a breach of the original agreement and caused the claimant unexpected undue hardship. the board finds this change in the claimant’s schedule constituted a detrimental change directly attributable to the conditions of employment and that the claimant voluntarily quit for good cause. scott v. connecticut general life insurance, 1914 br 14. (3) reduction in hours the claimant had good cause for quitting after the employer changed her from a permanent employee to a part time tax season employee and eliminated her health insurance and benefits package. both of these actions were detrimental alterations of the claimant's original contract of hire, and the employer had no reasonable justification for doing this. pawlik v. brown, 891 br 90. the claimant voluntarily quit after the employer reduced his hours and wanted to put the claimant on a disciplinary program. these measures were reasonable because the claimant's performance had deteriorated and failed to improve. the claimant voluntarily quit without good cause or valid circumstances. groves v. itnyre enterprises, inc., 656 br 91. the claimant's customary hours of work were substantially reduced, resulting in a substantial decrease in his income. the claimant was in the state only for the purposes of employment, and could not afford to stay with the reduced amount of hours. since the claimant was not promised any specific hours, he does not have good cause for leaving, but this change does amount to valid circumstances. taylor v. metrex excavating, 1864 br 92. a reduction in hours due solely to the claimant's own conduct in losing his license is neither a good cause nor a valid circumstance. foote v. tlb associates, inc., 1485 bh 92. the fact that it is normal and customary for a seasonal job to come to an end, and the fact that an employee is aware of this, does not change the fact that unemployment benefits are normally payable when the job comes to an end due to a seasonal lack of work. where a seasonal job had not come to an end, but had been reduced to the point where continuation on the claimant's part was not financially feasible, valid circumstances were found. thomas v. trimpers rides, 371 br 92. the claimant's hours were reduced from 32 hours to 18 hours per week, due to lack of work. in addition, her weekly schedule was to be changed as needed, with as little as 24 hours' notice. the claimant had good cause for quitting her employment. not only were her hours of employment substantially cut, but her weekly work schedule was now subject to change on 24 hours’ notice. a claimant can be expected to adjust her hours to accommodate her employer's schedule, where the adjustment is reasonable. the employer's policy in this case was unreasonable. wiggins v. barranca offutt, inc., 593 br 93. the claimant was promised between 37.5 and 40 hours of work per week, averaging 39 hours per week. the claimant's unrefuted testimony was that she had averaged only 32 hours per week, causing her economic hardship. where the claimant is paid far less than the promised amount, she has good cause for quitting. buchanan v. key federal savings bank, 3259 br 94. many employers can offer employees only varying hours of work. this does not change the fact that a reduction in hours to almost zero amounts to good cause. the fact that an employee was told that the hours would vary does not change this conclusion. colbert v. phillips harborplace, inc., 1554 br 93. the claimant was employed part time, “as needed” and was not guaranteed hours. he reported to work every day, however, most days, the employer did not send the claimant on a work assignment. the claimant requested a raise of $.25 per hour or more hours or he would have to look for another job. the employer did not grant more hours or a raise. after several more days of not getting a work assignment, the claimant quit. the board found that the claimant quit for a substantial cause, i.e., the lack of regular work and held that he quit for valid circumstances. the board did not find good cause because the employer did not guarantee the claimant a specific amount of hours. villalta v. lsjv, ltd., 1279 br 11. at the time the claimant began this employment, he worked at least 40 hours per week. this continued for nearly two years of employment. during the claimant’s final year, the employer’s business had slowed for reasons not attributable to the claimant or to the employer. as a result, the claimant was only working on average about 30 hours per week. the claimant was paid by the hour for his work so this reduction in available hours reduced his earnings by one quarter. the claimant found another job which assured him of at least 40 hours per week. the claimant’s reason for leaving was due to a detrimental change in the terms and conditions of his employment. the board does not find this case to be analogous to the court’s decision in the case of total audio visual systems, inc. v. dllr. there, the worker left employment solely to accept new employment which offered a higher rate of pay. there had been no change in that worker’s previous terms and conditions of employment. in the instant case, the terms and conditions of the claimant’s job changed to his detriment. the board held that the claimant voluntarily quit for good cause. lowery v. pep up inc., 6049 br 12. the claimant did not quit her job in order to accept better employment for purely economic reasons; therefore, the board finds total audio visual v. dllr and plein v. dllr inapplicable to the facts of this case. the claimant quit due to the detrimental changes in her working conditions: (1) the claimant’s hours were involuntarily reduced from full time to part time; (2) as a result, the claimant’s pay was reduced; (3) the employer’s treatment of the claimant due to accommodations needed for her crohn’s disease worsened over time; and (4) the claimant was encouraged to find other work. the board shall not punish the claimant for not immediately quitting and filing for unemployment benefits the moment her conditions of employment detrimentally changed. the claimant’s process for securing full time employment while tolerating the deteriorating conditions of her part time job will not be held against her or treated as the claimant’s condonation of the employer’s actions. the board held that the claimant voluntarily quit with good cause. hyman v. richard m. williams, dds llc, 160 br 15. d. change in job location the claimant had good cause to quit where the employer transferred the claimant to a distant location, requiring a commute of approximately six hours round trip each day. auth v. general glass corporation, 898 br 85. the claimant quit because the employer wanted him to transfer from the maryland virginia area to jacksonville, florida. in addition, the employer would not cover all the claimant's reasonable expenses that he would incur as a result of this move. the claimant voluntarily quit with good cause. pennington v. lott constructors, inc., 870 br 89. in june 2013, the employer directed the claimant to begin working in its chantilly, virginia location so that the claimant could provide guidance to its new branch manager. the commute to chantilly, virginia from the claimant’s home in pasadena, maryland was approximately two hours each way. the change in the claimant’s job location was intended to have been temporary. the claimant did not pursue extended discussions with his supervisor, the company president, about possible options because, in his position as operations manager, the claimant was already aware of the lack of options. the claimant stayed in the position as long as he could, but the change in working conditions, imposed by the employer, ultimately became too much for him to continue and he quit the job on september 27, 2013. the board finds the claimant had good cause to quit. the employer changed the terms and conditions of the claimant’s employment. the long commute was too physically and mentally draining on the claimant for him to continue to function well. the claimant was advised by two medical practitioners to leave the employment if he would have to continue the long commute. the employer did not have an alternative placement for the claimant. drgos v. banner glass, inc., 300 br 14. e. promotions and demotions an employer's lack of fair and objective standards in denying the claimant a promotion, despite an informal understanding between the parties that a promotion would be based on merit, constitutes a valid circumstance for the claimant's resignation. a certain amount of unfairness is part of everyday existence, and every instance of unfair treatment will not necessarily be found to be good cause or valid circumstances under section 8 1001; the degree of unfairness involved and the particular circumstances must be considered in each case. el jallad v. j. vinton schafer and sons, inc., 791 bh 84. the employer promoted the claimant to a position that both the employer and the claimant knew the claimant was not able to perform. the employer was to train the claimant but failed to do so. when the claimant was not able to perform in the manner the employer desired, the employer informed her that she would be demoted with a substantial cut in pay and the claimant quit. the claimant left for good cause. haskell v. rommell electric company, 345 bh 89. the claimant had been a good employee for five years. her supervisor, by his words and deeds, caused her to reasonably assume that she was to be promoted. her supervisor did not have the authority to promise the claimant the promotion. the claimant's quit was for valid circumstances. webb v. alex brown and sons, 815 br 89. where an employer has promised an employee that it will adhere to a promotional process, the failure to live up to that promise constitutes a good cause, connected with the conditions of employment, for leaving the job. an employee has the corresponding obligation to act according to the conditions of the employment contract. neumayer v. genesco, inc., 2209 br 92. the employer's demotion policy was reasonable when the claimant failed two exams for certification as a registered nurse. the claimant should have been aware of the policy at the time of hiring, and the claimant did have the opportunity to prepare for the tests. the claimant's leaving was without good cause or valid circumstances. joseph v. community hospital and health, 176 br 89. the claimant's hours were reduced due to the claimant's inability to get to work on time. subsequently, the claimant quit. where a demotion leading to a cut in pay is caused by the claimant's own detrimental conduct, the cut in pay does not amount to good cause or valid circumstances for quitting. kamara v. abbott enterprises, inc., 736 br 91. the claimant was demoted because she was unsuccessful in generating business. the claimant subsequently quit. a demotion is not unreasonable where the employee has demonstrated inability to perform at the higher level and such a demotion is not good cause to quit. however, since the claimant's inability to perform was caused in part by a lack of training by the employer, valid circumstances are present. burke v. bsi temporaries, inc., 960 br 91. the claimant quit after being demoted. the demotion was for an indefinite duration and involved a substantial decrease in pay and responsibilities. the demotion was done by the employer solely for economic reasons. the claimant voluntarily quit for good cause. evans v. good news salisbury, inc., 713 br 91. dissatisfaction with a demotion is not good cause or valid circumstances for quitting a job where the reason for the demotion is poor work performance. this also applies where the claimant simply fails in an attempt to be promoted. stewart v. ups, 192 br 92. the claimant quit rather than accept a demotion from store manager at a rate of $375.00 per week plus bonus to floating assistant store manager at $350.00 per week plus bonus. the claimant was demoted due to his inability to successfully perform. since the demotion was potentially substantial and the claimant's poor performance was not deliberate, the claimant quit with valid circumstances. wrenn v. kimmel automotive, inc., 471 br 90. the claimant voluntarily quit with good cause after he was demoted with a reduction in pay. there was no evidence that the claimant's own detrimental conduct or inability caused the demotion. owens v. hill's capitol security, inc., 1278 br 91. f. change in job duties only the claimant has the burden of proof of showing that there was a change in job duties and that the new duties complained of should not be subsumed under the original job category. nelson v. annapolis housing authority, 965 br 85. since the new position offered the same pay and hours as her former position, the claimant's refusal of a transfer to the new position constitutes a voluntary quit without good cause. however, since the claimant's responsibilities would have been reduced in the new position, and she would have continued to work occasional uncompensated overtime, valid circumstances were supported. lomax v. sinai hospital of baltimore, 946 br 85. the claimant voluntarily quit after her job duties were changed, but her hours and salary were not. as a result of the change, the claimant lost supervisory duties and had to do more routine tasks. she did not complain about this before quitting. the claimant quit without good cause, but with valid circumstances. brill v. anderson pontiac gmc truck, inc., 1453 br 91. the claimant remained willing and able to perform the type of services for which she was hired, but these duties were no longer available to her. the claimant's duties had changed to duties which the claimant was not medically able to perform. this is a substantial detrimental change in the conditions of employment, and it amounts to good cause for leaving the employment. the claimant does not need to assume those new duties against medical advice in order to prove that she has good cause. brown v. james jenkins, jr., 1890 br 92. the claimant, after performing satisfactorily for a long period of time the duties for which she was hired, was required to perform sales duties, which were different duties than those for which she was hired. she was unsuited for sales and refused, though she offered to continue to perform the duties for which she was hired. her refusal to accept this new position constitutes a voluntary quit, but for good cause. meyers v. terrance m. mclarney, 423 br 93. the employer changed the claimant’s job assignment from accounts payable back to her original assignment in purchasing and data entry. there was no demotion, no change in the conditions of employment and no reduction in pay or benefits. the claimant then quit to accept other employment because she felt “disrespected” when the employer did not consult her about the change. the board held that the claimant failed to establish good cause or valid circumstances for quitting. glacken v. advanced vacuum company, inc., 1847 br 11. the claimant voluntarily quit his job as a cabinetmaker because he felt he was being asked to do work that substantially differed from the work he had been hired to do. the employer had asked the claimant to modify a door that the claimant had previously built as part of a project for the daughter of the company president. asking a craftsman to make an alteration upon a piece he has created is certainly part of the craftsman’s job. the request was not arbitrary, but necessary due to the overall construction project parameters. the claimant’s refusal was unwarranted and unreasonable. similarly, the claimant’s statement that he wanted to be doing the work for which he had been hired was illogical. the claimant was doing the work he had been hired to do; modifying the door, as requested, was the work he had been hired to do. the claimant’s abrupt resignation over this request was not for a compelling or necessitous reason. the board does not believe that the claimant has established valid circumstances or good cause for his decision to leave this employment. brindarov v. helmut guenschel, inc., 305 br 12. 2. discipline and disciplinary methods a. in general a voluntary quit done in response to an employer's reprimand or in anticipation of being discharged is a voluntary quit without good cause or valid circumstances. in this case, the claimant was reprimanded but failed to meet his burden of showing that the reprimand was unreasonable or that the employer was acting in bad faith. sutch v. peter alden, et al., 644 br 90. the claimant's job performance was inadequate, and the employer was going to supervise the claimant for a period of 90 days in an attempt to see if she could do the job with additional help. the employer's actions were not unreasonable, and the claimant's decision to leave while the employer was giving her another lengthy trial period was premature and unreasonable, amounting to neither good cause nor valid circumstances. wang v. mds distributions services, 311 br 92. the employer's disciplinary action was taken in bad faith. just as an employee has a basic duty of loyalty toward her employer, an employer has a basic duty to treat an employee in good faith. where this duty is violated in regard to disciplinary procedures, good cause is established. woerner v. white marsh mall, inc., 2159 br 92. the claimant heard that the human resource director had told a third employee to stay away from the claimant because she was “a mother fu**er” and “bad news.” the claimant complained and the president held a meeting, but allowed the human resource director to be in charge. the claimant was subjected to harassment during the meeting when the human resource director demanded that she reveal who had told her his comments. the claimant decided to resign. the board found that the conduct of the human resource director is attributable to the employer and was in bad faith. the claimant’s resignation was connected to and arose from her employment. the claimant took steps available to her to address her grievance. the employer did not give the claimant any reason to believe that the situation had been properly handled. the board held that the claimant quit the job for good cause. whitlow v. healthcare resolution service, inc., 4449 br 12. the claimant began working for the employer as a housekeeper on june 1, 2010. on may 6, 2014, the employer imposed a three day suspension while an investigation was conducted regarding allegations that the claimant acted in an insubordinate, disruptive and disrespectful manner. the claimant was told to return to work on may 9, 2014 and that she would be informed of the results of the investigation at that time. the claimant resigned effective may 8, 2014 because she assumed she would be terminated. the claimant was never informed that her employment was being terminated. she elected to resign prior to being advised of the outcome of the employer’s investigation. the board finds that the claimant’s explanation for quitting does not rise to the level of good cause or a valid circumstance. boyd v. brinton woods of frankford llc, 532 br 15. b. rude or abusive discipline the employer's use of degrading and insulting language directed at the claimant in a loud tone of voice for over an hour, in circumstances where other employees were able to hear it, constitutes good cause for resignation. sheckles v. executive commissary, ltd., 790 bh 81. where the employer used some abusive language to the claimant on the day she quit, the claimant's resignation was for valid circumstances under section 8 1001, but was not for good cause. kling v. shop mart, 572 br 84. every instance of the employer yelling does not give rise to good cause or valid circumstances, particularly when the employer was understandably frustrated by the claimant's blatant negligence which caused the employer's business to appear totally incompetent to a customer. the claimant quit without good cause or valid circumstances. simmons v. flue masters, inc., 532 br 92. the claimant quit based on continued verbal abuse by her immediate supervisor. prior to quitting, the claimant complained about this to her regional manager. he said he would look into the problem, but after three weeks, the employer had taken no steps to rectify the problem. the board held that the claimant quit for good cause. larussa v. genlyte thomas group llc, 1917 br 11. during the claimant’s short tenure, he was unreasonably verbally berated and shouted at by his supervisor. on one of these occasions, the supervisor told the claimant that he was, “fu**ing dumb.” there was no other higher management authority to whom the claimant could complain. as a result of the claimant’s treatment by his supervisor, with no prospect for change, the claimant voluntarily quit. the board finds the claimant’s testimony credible and un contradicted. when weighing evidence, the board must view it in favor of coverage and strictly construe disqualification provisions. the board finds sufficient evidence that the claimant’s workplace environment was intolerable. the reasonable person in the claimant’s position would have been compelled to voluntarily quit. the board declines to grade the abuse on a scale of severity, especially in the absence of any mitigating testimony from the employer. the board held the claimant quit for good cause. akhtar v. faber coe & gregg, inc., 1066 br 13. the employer cursed at the claimant and yelled at him, where other employees could hear, and kept jabbing him in the chest for changing the employer’s password. the claimant was not the person who actually changed the password. the office manager did so at the claimant’s request so that he could sign up for training classes he needed to maintain his required certification. this was not the first time that the owner lost his temper and accosted the claimant. the employer did not apologize for his behavior. the claimant voluntarily quit the job. the board held that the claimant quit for good cause. nicholson v. mare, inc., 1331 br 14. the claimant was a long term employee with no formal disciplinary actions against her. the employer’s granddaughter/employee accused the claimant of stealing tips left by two of her clients. the claimant denied taking the tips. the granddaughter complained to the employer while the claimant was working at the front desk. the employer approached her and accused her of taking the tips. the claimant again denied this. the employer sent the claimant home without pay. there was no proof that the granddaughter’s clients had left tips for her. the claimant was upset by the accusations of theft and resigned. the board concludes that the resignation was reasonable and with good cause. the employer did not discuss the matter with the claimant in a private area, but instead at the front desk where the claimant worked and clients could hear. when the claimant denied taking the tips, the employer sent her home without pay. the board finds the claimant’s belief that she was being accused of theft not only to be reasonable, but to be correct. harduvel v. sharon l. rose llc, 2598 br 14. c. forced apologies the claimant resigned for good cause where she was forced by the employer to apologize to a customer for no wrongdoing on her part and during the apology, the customer yelled and cursed at the claimant for fifteen minutes, in the presence of employees and other customers, without intervention by the employer. lankford v. rite aid corporation, 2202 bh 83. the claimant accompanied a coworker who slashed the tires of a car belonging to a third employee. the employer ordered the claimant and coworker to apologize to the other employee and make arrangements to pay for the ruined tires in lieu of reporting the crime to the police. the claimant did not do so, walked off the job, and did not return. the employer's request that the claimant and coworker meet with the injured employee and make restitution, in lieu of calling the police, was reasonable, and the claimant's resignation was without good cause or a valid circumstance. hollenbaugh v. whitcraft transmission, 1101 br 85. 3. discrimination and harassment a. derogatory racial remarks the claimant has good cause to quit where the employer makes personal and derogatory comments to the claimant, of a racially offensive nature, about the claimant and his girlfriend. manuel v. osika   cooper, inc., 216 br 83. the claimant voluntarily quit his position because his manager created a hostile work environment for the claimant by the manager’s racial comments, homosexual jokes and jokes about the claimant. when the manager first came and started his slurs and jokes, the claimant told him that he thought they were unethical, unprofessional and that he was uncomfortable with them. the manager did not change his behavior. on the claimant’s last day, his manager made a derogatory comment. the claimant could not take any more of the manager’s derogatory comments, slurs or jokes and quit. the claimant had used the company’s chain of command to complain about his manager’s behavior. the company did not take any action to remedy the situation. the claimant finally quit when nothing was done. the board held that the claimant quit for good cause. antoine v. orkin exterminating company, inc., 2678 br 12. b. sexual harassment where the employer subjected the claimant to a relentless and unwanted barrage of requests for her sexual favors, despite her constant refusals, and made it clear that such requests would continue, the employer's conduct constitutes sexual harassment of the claimant and created intolerable working conditions. the claimant's resignation was for good cause. it is unreasonable to expect a claimant to make a formal complaint to her supervisor (in this case, the very individual making said advances) where such complaint would result in personal humiliation or where a complaint would be futile. in reaching its determination in this case, the board considered the sexual harassment definition promulgated by the equal employment opportunity commission (eeoc). see, 29 c.f.r. section 1604.11(a) (1980). mccaughey v. charles e. brooks law office, 405 bh 84. the employer repeatedly placed his hands on the claimant's breasts or buttocks and put his hand up her skirt to touch her in a personally offensive manner, but the claimant waited four months before she quit. to state that the claimant condoned this treatment because she worked at the establishment for approximately four months is to penalize the claimant for attempting to make the best of a bad situation for as long as possible. the claimant quit for good cause. netzer v. lori enterprises, inc., 393 br 86. the claimant was a victim of sexual harassment by a coworker, but did not inform the employer of this and merely did not return to work. since she did not take steps to correct the situation, she quit without good cause, but such an intolerable situation still amounted to a valid circumstance. parsons v. salisbury nissan, inc., 644 se 88. the claimant was physically and sexually assaulted by her supervisor on the work premises, during work hours. this constitutes good cause for leaving, especially where previous incidents of sexual harassment by the same supervisor had been brought to the attention of management. torain v. wackenhut security, 62 br 87. where the employer brushed off the claimant's complaints about sexual harassment by coworkers, but the claimant failed to file a formal grievance about this, the claimant quit without good cause, but with valid circumstances. haynes v. giant food, inc., 223 br 90. the claimant was sexually fondled, then sexually harassed, by one who was in a position to make her employment miserable if she didn't consent. when she didn't consent, the employer deliberately repeatedly accused her of having a bad attitude. the claimant voluntarily quit for good cause. bartholow v. reisterstown twin kiss, 1280 br 91. the claimant was subjected to unwanted sexual harassment by a coworker. the claimant complained to the employer. the employer held a meeting the following day, telling employees that they all need to stop this behavior. the offending employee continued to engage in unwanted behavior of an inappropriate sexual nature. he told the claimant that the meeting had been a “joke.” the employer maintained the allegation of sexual harassment was the result of sexual banter which had occurred among the claimant, the offending employee and another worker. the employer’s witness at the hearing did not offer any corroborating evidence about this. the employees with actual knowledge of these events were not present at the hearing. the board cannot find that the employer has refuted the claimant’s credible testimony that she quit because of sexual harassment in the workplace. the board does not find that the claimant was obligated to remain and see if things would change in the future, when nothing changed after the meeting. a worker is not required to engage in an act of apparent futility in order to establish good cause. here, the claimant quit for reasons which were compelling and which were directly related to her employment. she has shown good cause. connor v. j & g with ae, inc., 2032 br 12. c. comparative treatment the employer would not promote the claimant to the position of assistant manager or manager despite the fact that the claimant's evaluations had always been very satisfactory and that she had, in fact, performed the duties of assistant manager and manager in the past. the employer had a record of not having promoted any women to management or assistant management positions or even to the grocery manager position, from which they could be promoted to assistant manager or manager. the claimant was discriminated against because she is a female and she therefore had good cause attributable to the employer for voluntarily quitting her job. hill v. eastern shore markets, inc., 18 se 87. the claimant was treated significantly differently than her peers by her management after she was allowed an accommodation for a medical condition. the employer’s actions created a hostile and isolative working environment which was a substantial change in the terms and conditions of the claimant’s employment. there were derogatory comments made to the claimant by her supervisor. the claimant was constantly monitored to make sure she was using her medication. the claimant experienced isolation as a result of the employer’s actions. the board concludes that this was good cause for the claimant to elect to leave her position. sinclair v. johns hopkins hospital, 438 br 13. d. verbal harrassment the female claimant quit because of alleged verbal sexual harassment by male coworkers. the board found that the claimant’s evidence was insufficient to establish that she was sexually harassed in the work place, by either her supervisor or coworkers. the employer credibly refuted her allegation. the board held that the claimant quit without good cause or valid circumstances. davis v. challenger transportation, inc., 1938 bh 11. in early 2014, the claimant reported to her operations manager verbal harassment by the kitchen manager. the operations manager acknowledged the inappropriateness of the kitchen manager’s remarks to the claimant. after the kitchen manager resigned, the kitchen staff became more hostile to the claimant and a coworker. the hostility included verbal and physical abuse. the claimant reported the abuse to the new kitchen manager and operations manager. the claimant was taken off kitchen duties and assigned only delivery driver duties in order to minimize her exposure to the kitchen staff. during the next four months, the claimant made five formal complaints of harassment with no resolution. the claimant subsequently quit the job. a worker who asserts that she quit employment because of harassment must establish, by competent evidence, that the harassment was of such a degree that it would have compelled a reasonable person to quit employment. disciplinary actions and unfriendly coworkers are not necessarily indicative of harassment. harassment requires sufficient recurrence or seriousness as to render the situation intolerable. the claimant voluntarily quit her position when she was repeatedly harassed by the kitchen staff and the harassment continued after she made repeated formal complaints. the board held that the claimant quit for good cause. reedy v. mission bbq llc, 125 br 15. 4. interference with employee's work the claimant's resignation due to numerous disciplinary warnings and reprimands for low production does not constitute good cause. however, the claimant has valid circumstances where the low production and consequential reprimands were caused by the employer's constant shifting of the claimant from one machine to another. harris v. del mar manufacturing, inc., 2245 br 83. the lack of necessary equipment and outside labor to perform the claimant's job duties in a satisfactory manner, where such equipment and labor was promised by the employer at the time of hire, constitutes a valid circumstance for resignation. depasquale v. maryland school for the blind, 720 bh 81. 5. encroachment into employee's personal life the employer had no right to require the claimant to withdraw his application for another job. the claimant had good cause for quitting. whitaker v. docu data corporation, 1093 br 89. the claimant left her part time job in order to take advantage of free training offered by her full time employer (for whom she was still working at the time she quit the part time job). the training would increase her opportunities for full time work, once the full time job ended. the part time job did not actually interfere with the claimant's full time job itself. therefore, the claimant did not have good cause for quitting. however, since it did interfere with a substantial benefit offered by her full time employer, and one that would greatly increase her ability to obtain full time work, the claimant left her part time job for a substantial cause, connected with the conditions of employment. therefore, valid circumstances are present. wilson v. citicorp financial, inc., 1397 br 93. 6. employer's business practices the claimant's resignation due to his unwillingness to engage in the unlawful practice of charging customers for unnecessary work constitutes good cause. harris v. rapid rooter, 1599 bh 82. the claimant was required, by his employer, to violate state and federal health and safety regulations in performing his work (asbestos removal). the claimant walked off without notice because he had already complained and had no expectations that further complaints would lead to a better result. the claimant quit with good cause. hughes v. all state boilers, 256 br 86. the employer's attempt to issue a false w 2 statement to the claimant for the purpose of avoiding taxes is a significant violation of the employment agreement amounting to good cause. meyer v. vincent, 1859 br 92. the employer ordered the claimant to file a claim against her own insurance company based on a theft of the employer's car from the employer's premises in a situation where the car was in the control and possession of the employer but the claimant had been temporarily using it. the claimant's refusal to risk her own insurance rating and coverage was reasonable. she had good cause for quitting. bass v. foreign motors subaru, inc., 1018 br 93. the claimant's resignation was for good cause where he resigned because of his pay rate and because the employer required that he participate in unlawful insurance practices. kosinski v. western southern life insurance company, 2270 br 83. 7. drug screening the claimant, who had previously undergone treatment for a drug problem, agreed to take a drug screening test after he exhibited behavior consistent with drug use. however, he never showed up for the test and never reported to work again. the employer's request was reasonable under the circumstances. this was a voluntary quit without good cause or valid circumstances. benneman v. murry's steaks, inc., 236 bh 87. urine testing is recognized by the us department of transportation as the only reliable method to determine the presence of cocaine. there is no scientific correlation between levels of cocaine found in the blood and found in urine. benzoylecgonine is the major cocaine metabolite which appears in the human body as it breaks cocaine down into its component parts. benzoylecgonine is specific to cocaine and not caused by other drugs, prescribed or over the counter, or by herbal supplements. current testing methodologies are sufficiently sophisticated to isolate this metabolite to the exclusion of other substances. benzoylecgonine does not appear on a drug screen in the absence of cocaine ingestion. bayne v. choptank electric coop inc., 820 bh 14. voluntary quit   section 8 1001 continued

an official website of the united states government here's how you know official websites use .gov a .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the united states. secure .gov websites use https a lock ( lock a locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. the national council on alcohol and drug dependence defines alcoholism this way: alcohol is the single most used and abused drug in america. according to the national institute on alcohol abuse and alcoholism (niaaa), nearly 14 million americans (1 in every 13 adults) abuse alcohol or are alcoholics. several million more adults engage in risky drinking patterns that could lead to alcohol problems. the costs to society in terms of lost productivity, health care costs, traffic accidents, and personal tragedies are staggering. numerous studies and reports have been issued on the workplace costs of alcoholism and alcohol abuse, and they report costs that range from $33 billion to $68 billion per year. alcohol is a major factor in injuries, both at home, at work, and on the road. nearly half of all traffic fatalities involve alcohol. please see the appendix   the disease of alcoholism for a further discussion of alcoholism. in the workplace, the costs of alcoholism and alcohol abuse manifest themselves in many different ways. absenteeism is estimated to be 4 to 8 times greater among alcoholics and alcohol abusers. other family members of alcoholics also have greater rates of absenteeism. accidents and on the job injuries are far more prevalent among alcoholics and alcohol abusers. the federal workplace is no different than any other in respect to alcoholism and alcohol abuse. though no studies have been done on the prevalence of alcoholism and alcohol abuse among federal employees, it is safe to assume that a similar proportion of federal employees are alcoholics or alcohol abusers as in the national workforce. the associated increased health care costs and lost productivity are passed along directly to the taxpayer, and to each and every one of us. this booklet was developed in cooperation with the department of health and human services (dhhs) and is designed to foster a better awareness in supervisors, managers, and human resource personnel of the issues surrounding alcoholism and alcohol abuse, especially as it relates to the federal workplace. the booklet is not intended to cover, in detail, all the various aspects of alcoholism and alcohol abuse but to give you enough information to understand and recognize the problems and know where to go to get assistance. see the appendix for more detailed information regarding alcoholism. as far as the government as an employer is concerned, an employee’s decision to drink is that individual’s personal business. however, when the use or abuse of alcohol interferes with the employee’s ability to perform his or her duties, the employer does have legitimate concerns, including the proper performance of duties, health and safety issues, and employee conduct at the workplace. as a supervisor, you have an important role in dealing with alcohol problems in the workplace, along with other agency officials. you have the day to day responsibility to monitor the work and on the job conduct of your employees. you are not responsible for diagnosing alcoholism in employees. basic supervisory responsibilities include: at some point, you will likely encounter employees with problems related to alcohol in dealing with performance, conduct, and leave problems. in some cases, you may not know that there is an alcohol problem. in other cases, you may know, either because the employee admits to being an alcoholic, or the problem is self evident. for example, an employee may become intoxicated while on duty or be arrested for drunk driving. your role is not to diagnose the alcohol problem but to exercise responsibility in dealing with the performance or conduct problem, hold the employee accountable, refer the employee to the eap, and take any appropriate disciplinary action. your role in dealing with alcoholism in the workplace is crucial. the most effective way to get an alcoholic to deal with the problem is to make the alcoholic aware that his or her job is on the line and that he or she must get help and improve performance and conduct, or face serious consequences, including the possibility of losing his or her job. even though you must not try to diagnose the problem, there are many signs that may indicate a problem with alcohol, and should trigger a referral to the eap. the employee may also be absent from his or her duty station without explanation or permission for significant periods of time. in jobs requiring long term projects or detailed analysis, an employee may be able to hide a performance problem for quite some time. the employee may also have noticeable financial problems evidenced by borrowing money from other employees or receiving phone calls at work from creditors or collection companies. the appearance of being inebriated or under the influence of alcohol might include: not any one of these signs means that an employee is an alcoholic. however, when there are performance and conduct problems coupled with any number of these signs, it is time to make a referral to the eap for an assessment so that the employee can get help if it is needed. back to top employee assistance programs deal with all kinds of problems and provide short term counseling, assessment, and referral of employees with alcohol and drug abuse problems, emotional and mental health problems, marital and family problems, financial problems, dependent care concerns, and other personal problems that can affect the employee’s work. this service is confidential. these programs are usually staffed by professional counselors and may be operated in house with agency personnel, under a contract with other agencies or eap providers, or a combination of the two. the eap counselor will meet with the employee, assess or diagnose the problem, and, if necessary, refer the employee to a treatment program or resource. (please see the material in the appendix ) with permission of the client, the eap counselor will keep you informed as to the nature of the problem, what type of treatment may be needed, and the progress of the employee in treatment. before releasing this information to you, or anyone else, the counselor would need a signed written release of information from the client which would state what information may be released and to whom it may be released. the eap counselor will also monitor the employee’s progress and will provide follow up counseling if needed. sometimes, the employee will contact the eap on his or her own. however, in some cases, the employee will be referred by you because you have noted a decline in the employee’s conduct, attendance, or performance and/or seen actual evidence of alcohol use or impairment at work. the role of the human resources, or employee relations office in dealing with cases of substance abuse is to advise management of appropriate adverse, disciplinary, or other administrative actions which may be taken. they also advise employees of their rights and the procedures in such cases. they do not obtain confidential information from the eap nor do they independently approach the employee regarding the problem. as a supervisor, you are responsible for confronting the employee. employee relations staff will work with the eap to the extent that confidentiality is not violated, will try to assist you in working with the eap, and will work with you to try to make sure that any adverse or disciplinary actions are appropriate and defensible. in most agencies, it is the employee relations or human resources specialist who actually prepares or drafts adverse or disciplinary action letters, including those involving a firm choice. a firm choice is a clear warning to an employee who has raised alcohol or drug abuse in connection with a specific performance, conduct, or leave use incident or deficiency. he or she must make a choice between accepting treatment for the alcohol or drug problem and improving job performance or facing disciplinary action, up to and including removal. it is generally a good practice to notify any employee who is being counseled for a performance or conduct problem about the availability of the eap. however, it is crucial to make a referral to the eap in the case of an employee with a known alcohol problem. although you are not diagnosing the problem, you are dealing with employee performance and conduct and, possibly, alcohol related misconduct such as using, possessing, or being under the influence of alcohol at work. as a supervisor, you need to develop a strategy for addressing the work related problems, as well as for encouraging the employee to get help. a good starting point is to meet with the eap counselor, if possible, to discuss the problems observed and any other behavior by the employee that needs attention. the eap counselor can help devise a strategy for confronting the employee and advise on techniques of addressing the problems. before actually meeting with the employee, you should gather any documentation of performance or conduct problems and think about what items to discuss with the employee. it is important to be specific about the problems in the employee’s performance and conduct and the particular incidents of concern. it might be helpful to rehearse this or at least go over the documentation with the eap counselor. once prepared, you should notify the employee of the time and place of the meeting. the meeting should be held in a private place away from distractions. it is important to calmly but firmly explain the problems with the employee’s performance, the specific acts of misconduct or troubling behavior, and the consequences of any misconduct or poor performance. unless the employee reveals the existence of an alcohol problem or there is immediate evidence of on duty impairment, you must be careful not to offer any opinion that the employee may have a problem with alcohol. you should refer the employee to the eap and explain that failure to correct any deficiencies may result in disciplinary or other action. it would be preferable to have already made an appointment for the employee with the eap. while the employee may not be forced to take advantage of the eap services, you should make clear that it is in the employee’s best interest to use the services. sometimes the employee will not accept the referral to the eap or will deny the existence of a problem. if this happens, it is important to continue to document any problems and to take any necessary disciplinary action. it is not unusual to have additional meetings with the employee and to make additional referrals. the employee is in "denial" at this point and does not see that he or she has a problem. this is the hardest part of dealing with an alcoholic. the disease is so strong that the individual is unable to see what is happening to himself or herself. in any case, the appropriate course of action is to continue to hold the employee accountable for his or her performance and/or conduct, regardless of whether or not the employee has admitted an alcohol problem. if an employee chooses to use the eap at your urging, he or she may enter some type of treatment program as described earlier in this booklet. if the employee does not choose to go into treatment, the next step will be to take any disciplinary or corrective actions that are necessary. one technique which can be used to confront the employee is called intervention. it generally consists of scheduling a session with the employee where a number of people significant in his or her life are present, including you, the spouse, children, clergy, other family members, co workers and other friends. the session must be led by a trained professional, such as the eap counselor. it involves having each of the individuals present directly tell the employee how his or her drinking has affected their lives and what the consequences of that employee’s drinking have been. if the intervention is effective, this can be a very powerful tool to counter denial and may help the employee consider treatment. it is extremely important that such an intervention be led by a trained professional and not by a lay person, such as a supervisor, because it can be a very emotional and powerful event and, if not conducted properly, may very likely backfire. supervisors should contact an agency eap counselor for more information about the intervention technique. back to top during the period of time that the employee is away from work receiving treatment, he or she will usually be carried in some type of approved leave status. in most cases, it would be appropriate for the employee to be carried on any available sick leave. otherwise, annual leave or leave without pay would be appropriate. normally, the employee would not be charged as absent without approved leave (awol) unless the employee’s absence had not been approved. check with the human resources office about the rules and policies regarding approval and denial of leave. when the employee has completed any treatment requiring extended absence and is ready to return to work, it is a good practice to have a back to work conference. the conference should be attended by you as the supervisor, the employee, the eap counselor, a staff member from the treatment program, other appropriate personnel from human resources, and the employee’s representative if one has been elected. this back to work conference can help explain what has gone on in treatment, what the employee’s treatment schedule looks like, and any needed changes in work such as travel schedules or closer supervision. after the employee’s return to duty, there will be some type of follow up care such as a 12 step program or other group meetings, therapy, eap sessions, or any combination of the foregoing (please see the appendix ). these sessions should cause only minimal disruption to the work schedule. the eap counselor can explain the importance of the follow up program to the employee’s continued sobriety. back to top generally, agencies do not have the authority to conduct mandatory alcohol testing. although some agencies may have the equipment and trained personnel to administer an alcohol test, such a test would be voluntary. most alcohol testing would probably be conducted with an evidentiary breath testing device (ebt), commonly referred to as a breathalyzer. while there are other methods of testing for alcohol, including blood or saliva tests, an ebt is the predominant method because it is less invasive and is already in use by law enforcement personnel. law enforcement personnel on federal property may administer alcohol tests to drivers when there is an accident or reasonable cause to do such testing. however, cause for such testing must be based on a violation of motor vehicle and traffic rules and not mandatory testing by the agency. the department of transportation (dot) has issued rules regarding alcohol testing for certain groups of employees such as those who are required to possess a commercial driver’s license, and certain employees in aviation related positions. these rules call for mandatory alcohol testing, using ebts, of applicants for identified positions and in cases of reasonable suspicion of alcohol use, and for random testing of employees in these positions. any agencies conducting this type of testing will have a specific program spelled out in agency policy. an agency may conduct voluntary alcohol testing. an example of this might be an instance where you think that an employee is intoxicated but the employee denies it. in this instance, an alcohol test may be given at the employee’s request or with the employee’s permission. if intoxication is indicated by the test, the agency may use it as a basis for some type of administrative action, such as sending the employee home, or taking disciplinary action. an agency may not take disciplinary action solely because an employee declines to undergo a voluntary alcohol test. an area that is often troublesome for supervisors is what to do when an employee is apparently under the influence or intoxicated at work. agencies have a fair amount of latitude about what to do in these situations. the following is a list of steps you should take in dealing with such a situation. though not all steps would be appropriate in all situations, most would be applicable. if the employee is performing, or required to perform, safety sensitive duties such as driving vehicles, using heavy equipment, working around explosives or weaponry, or performing patient care activities, he or she must be restricted from performing these duties. if the employee is willing, he or she may be sent to the health unit for observation or a possible assessment. health unit personnel may be able to offer a medical judgment that, in their opinion, the employee is intoxicated. they may also be able to conduct a voluntary alcohol test, most likely an ebt. unless the employee is in a job with specific medical or physical requirements, you cannot order the employee to undergo any type of medical examination, including an ebt. examples of the types of jobs that may have specific medical requirements include police officers, certain vehicle operators, air traffic controllers, and various direct patient care personnel. the eap should be contacted. the counselor may be able to assist in any immediate assessment or may be at least able to talk to the client immediately. even if the eap counselor is unable to see the employee immediately, eap personnel should be informed of the situation. you should refer the employee to the eap after the employee returns to duty. if the employee is disruptive to the workplace, you should remove him or her from the immediate worksite. this may involve taking the employee home or at least taking him or her to the health unit, the eap office, or some other safe location. an employee who is physically resisting should be dealt with by agency security or local police. the employee should not be sent home alone or allowed to drive. it would be appropriate to consider having a family member take the employee home. a taxi is also an option. there could be some serious liability issues involved here so it is important to consult with human resources, employee relations, and the legal counsel’s office. it is important to immediately and accurately document in writing what has transpired. record all the events that led to sending the employee home, especially if any disciplinary action is necessary. it is important to work with the eap and employee relations staff and keep them informed of such events because the quality of the information they receive from you impacts on the quality of their advice and service. avoid being an "enabler." an enabler is someone who allows the alcoholic to continue the addiction without being held responsible for his or her actions. supervisors often think that they are being kind, when actually they are hurting the alcoholic employee by letting him or her continue to engage in self destructive behaviors. in addition, failing to hold the alcoholic employee accountable can have a negative effect on co workers’ morale. examples of supervisory behavior that might be considered enabling include: alcoholism is a disease. employees who suffer from it need the agency’s compassion. however, sometimes that compassion has to be firm in order to communicate that, while the agency is willing to help the employee get assistance, the employee is ultimately responsible for his or her own rehabilitation, recovery, and performance. the best help that you as a supervisor can offer is to learn something about the disease, refer the employee to the eap, and hold him or her accountable for his or her conduct or performance. this is just a brief road map for dealing with alcohol problems in the workplace. for further information on alcohol abuse and alcoholism, contact your agency’s employee assistance program (eap), your human resources or employee relations office, local mental health or substance abuse programs, or by email at worklife@opm.gov. additionally, a great deal of information can be obtained from the national clearinghouse for alcohol and drug information (ncadi) at: national clearinghouse for alcohol and drug informationp.o. box 2345rockville, md 20847 23451 800 729 6686tdd 1 800 487 4889 there are, and have been, many theories about alcoholism. the most prevailing theory, and now most commonly accepted, is called the disease model. its basic tenets are that alcoholism is a disease with recognizable symptoms, causes, and methods of treatment. in addition, there are several stages of the disease which are often described as early, middle, and late. while it is not essential for a supervisor to fully define these stages, it is useful to understand them in terms of how the disease presents itself in the workplace. the early or adaptive stage of alcoholism is marked by increasing tolerance to alcohol and physical adaptations in the body which are largely unseen. this increased tolerance is marked by the alcoholic’s ability to consume greater quantities of alcohol while appearing to suffer few effects and continuing to function. this tolerance is not created simply because the alcoholic drinks too much but rather because the alcoholic is able to drink great quantities because of physical changes going on inside his or her body. the early stage is difficult to detect. by appearances, an individual may be able to drink a great deal without becoming intoxicated, having hangovers, or suffering other apparent ill effects from alcohol. an early stage alcoholic is often indistinguishable from a non alcoholic who happens to be a fairly heavy drinker. in the workplace, there is likely to be little or no obvious impact on the alcoholic’s performance or conduct at work. at this stage, the alcoholic is not likely to see any problem with his or her drinking and would scoff at any attempts to indicate that he or she might have a problem. the alcoholic is simply not aware of what is going on in his or her body. back to top there is no clear line between the early and middle stages of alcoholism, but there are several characteristics that mark a new stage of the disease. many of the pleasures and benefits that the alcoholic obtained from drinking during the early stage are now being replaced by the destructive facets of alcohol abuse. the drinking that was done for the purpose of getting high is now being replaced by drinking to combat the pain and misery caused by prior drinking. one basic characteristic of the middle stage is physical dependence. in the early stage, the alcoholic’s tolerance to greater amounts of alcohol is increasing. along with this, however, the body becomes used to these amounts of alcohol and now suffers from withdrawal when the alcohol is not present. another basic characteristic of the middle stage is craving. alcoholics develop a very powerful urge to drink which they are eventually unable to control. as the alcoholic’s tolerance increases along with the physical dependence, the alcoholic loses his or her ability to control drinking and craves alcohol. the third characteristic of the middle stage is loss of control. the alcoholic simply loses his or her ability to limit his or her drinking to socially acceptable times, patterns, and places. this loss of control is due to a decrease in the alcoholic’s tolerance and an increase in the withdrawal symptoms. the alcoholic cannot handle as much alcohol as they once could without getting drunk, yet needs increasing amounts to avoid withdrawal. another feature of middle stage alcoholics is blackouts. contrary to what you might assume, the alcoholic does not actually pass out during these episodes. instead, the alcoholic continues to function but is unable to remember what he or she has done or has been. basically, the alcoholic simply can’t remember these episodes because the brain has either stored these memories improperly or has not stored them at all. blackouts may also occur in early stage alcoholics. impairment becomes evident in the workplace during the middle stage. the alcoholic battles with loss of control, withdrawal symptoms, and cravings. this will become apparent at work in terms of any or all of the following: increased and unpredictable absences, poorly performed work assignments, behavior problems with co workers, inability to concentrate, accidents, increased use of sick leave, and possible deterioration in overall appearance and demeanor. this is the point where the employee may be facing disciplinary action. the late, or deteriorative stage, is best identified as the point at which the damage to the body from the toxic effects of alcohol is evident, and the alcoholic is suffering from a host of ailments. an alcoholic in the final stages may be destitute, extremely ill, mentally confused, and drinking almost constantly. the alcoholic in this stage is suffering from many physical and psychological problems due to the damage to vital organs. his or her immunity to infections is lowered, and the employee’s mental condition is very unstable. some of the very serious medical conditions the alcoholic faces at this point include heart failure, fatty liver, hepatitis, cirrhosis of the liver, malnutrition, pancreatitis, respiratory infections, and brain damage, some of which is reversible. why does an alcoholic continue to drink despite the known facts about the disease and the obvious adverse consequences of continued drinking? the answer to this question is quite simple. in the early stage, the alcoholic does not consider himself or herself sick because his or her tolerance is increasing. in the middle stage, the alcoholic is unknowingly physically dependent on alcohol. he or she simply finds that continuing to use alcohol will prevent the problems of withdrawal. by the time an alcoholic is in the late stage, he or she is often irrational, deluded, and unable to understand what has happened. in addition to the effects of these changes, the alcoholic is faced with one of the most powerful facets of addiction: denial. an alcoholic will deny that he or she has a problem. this denial is a very strong force. if an alcoholic did not deny the existence of a problem, he or she would most likely seek help when faced with the overwhelming problems caused by drinking. while denial is not a diagnosable physical symptom or psychiatric disorder, it is an accurate description of the state of the alcoholic’s behavior and thinking and is very real. back to top an alcoholic will rarely stop drinking and stay sober without outside help. also, he or she usually will not stop drinking without some kind of outside pressure. this pressure may come from family, friends, clergy, other health care professionals, law enforcement or judicial authorities, or the employer. for example, a spouse may threaten divorce, or the alcoholic may be arrested for driving under the influence. there was at one time a widespread belief that alcoholics would not get help until they had "hit bottom." this theory has generally been discredited as many early and middle stage alcoholics have quit drinking when faced with consequences such as the loss of a job, a divorce, or a convincing warning from a physician regarding the potentially fatal consequences of continued drinking. there are obvious advantages to getting the alcoholic into treatment earlier rather than later. one advantage is that, the earlier treatment is begun, the probability of having less expensive treatment, such as outpatient care, is increased. there is also a greater likelihood of success in treatment with an individual who has not yet lost everything and still has a supportive environment to return to, including an intact family, good health, and a job. in addition, the employer has a stake in the early treatment of alcoholism, since the employee will have a greater chance of returning sooner to full functioning on the job if the disease is arrested at an earlier point. early treatment is simply less disruptive to the workplace and can help the employee avoid further misconduct and poor performance. if an alcoholic employee doesn't’t get help until very late in the disease, there may have been irreparable harm done to the employee employer relationship. the alcoholic does not initially have to want to get help to go into treatment. many people go into treatment because of some kind of threat such as loss of a job or possible incarceration. however, even the individual that is forced will eventually have to personally accept the need for treatment for it to be effective. the employer is a very potent force in getting the alcoholic into treatment. the threat of the loss of a job is often the push the alcoholic needs to enter treatment. this threat is usually communicated to the employee through some type of an adverse or disciplinary action and is accompanied by a referral to the employee assistance program (eap) which will refer the employee to an appropriate treatment program. there are various kinds of treatment and programs for alcoholism. though some alcoholics do stop drinking on their own, this is rare. most alcoholics require some type of treatment or help. the following are some common types of programs and approaches to treatment: alcoholics anonymous (aa)   aa is what is called a 12 step program and involves a spiritual component (not affiliated with any particular religion) and a supportive group of fellow alcoholics to provide a network for total abstinence from alcohol. there are aa meetings where alcoholics can gather to learn about the disease, hear talks from recovering alcoholics, and enjoy the support of fellow alcoholics who are learning, or have learned, how to stay sober. aa is not really a formal organization as it has no leaders. it is a loose confederation of groups formed by recovering alcoholics operating on common principles spelled out in the book alcoholics anonymous (it is also known as the "big book") which spells out the twelve steps and the principles of aa. there are other support groups such as rational recovery which have a different focus than aa. some individuals find approaches other than aa to be more useful in their treatment. detoxification   detoxification, also known as "detox," is a process whereby the alcoholic undergoes a supervised withdrawal. the body can begin to recover from the toxic effects of alcohol and the patient can become sober. this is something that is best done in a medical setting where the patient can be closely monitored and have his or her medical condition evaluated. detoxification can last anywhere from two to seven days. inpatient treatment   this consists of a formal, residential program which may include detox at the beginning. typically an inpatient program would include education about the disease; medical treatment for related medical conditions and nutritional stabilization; counseling, including individual and group therapy sessions; an introduction to a 12 step program; and monitoring of the patient including drug and/or alcohol testing to ensure compliance with the program. inpatient programs last anywhere from one to six weeks, typically 3 4 weeks. some are connected with hospitals while others are not. there are some programs called "day treatment" in which patients spend the entire day at the treatment center but go home at night or on weekends. inpatient treatment is very expensive and can easily cost $5,000 to $10,000. outpatient treatment   this consists of counseling and treatment on a daily or weekly basis in an office or clinic setting. outpatient treatment is often a follow up to an inpatient or detox program. in some cases, the severity of the addiction is such that inpatient care is not needed, and the client undergoes only outpatient treatment. it may include education about the disease, individual or group therapy, or follow up counseling. outpatient treatment is not as expensive as inpatient treatment and may last anywhere from one month to a year. quite often, treatment will consist of a combination of all of the above, depending on such factors as the severity of the problem, the individual’s insurance coverage, whether detox is needed, and the availability of programs. the cost of treatment is the employee’s responsibility. all federal employee health benefit plans have some kind of coverage; however, that coverage is limited. the eap counselor and the employee benefits representative will have information on health benefits coverage. employees should direct any questions to one of these resources. after the initial treatment program, the employee may be in follow up counseling and treatment for an extended period of time, possibly up to a year. this will most likely consist of outpatient counseling, aa meetings, and follow up sessions with the eap counselor. it can be very beneficial for the eap counselor to schedule a back to work conference with the employee, the supervisor, and other interested parties such as an employee relations specialist or a counselor from the treatment program. the purpose of this meeting is to discuss the employee’s treatment, the expectations in terms of the employee’s performance and conduct, scheduling concerns in terms of follow up counseling and aa meetings, and to help get the employee back into the regular work routine. an important and frustrating facet of treating alcoholism is relapse or a return to drinking. an alcoholic often relapses due to a variety of factors including: inadequate treatment or follow up, cravings for alcohol that are difficult to control, failure by the alcoholic to follow treatment instructions, failure to change lifestyle, use of other mood altering drugs, and other untreated mental or physical illnesses. relapses are not always a return to constant drinking and may only be a one time occurrence. however, relapses must be dealt with and seen as a sign to the alcoholic that there are areas of his or her treatment and recovery that need work. relapse prevention is an area in the treatment field that is receiving increased attention and research. a basic part of any effective treatment program will include relapse prevention activities. good coordination between the eap counselor and the treatment program can help the employee deal with and prevent relapse. back to top

home / expert articles / ages & stages / adult children if you listen to the news or read the paper, you know that more and more kids are living at home for longer periods of time. we often hear from parents of adult children who want to know how they can set guidelines down with their older kids, and when they should ask them to leave. if you’re the parent of an adult child who is living at home you are probably trying to figure out what your role is and what rules your child needs to adhere to while living in your home   because after all, your kid is grown up now and that changes things. you may be wondering when or if you should ask them to leave. i can’t help but think about my father as i write this. he grew up in italy, and around the age of 17 he came home one day to find his bags packed. he was told by his parents that he needed to leave and that a train ticket had been purchased for him. he would arrive, he was told, at a destination where he could find employment. for me, it is sobering to discover that the reality for him was that those decisions were made for him by his parents. back in those days, the whole affair transpired more like a business transaction than a sending off. i gather that my grandparents held the belief that their job was finished, and that it was time for my father to lead his own life. that was the way it had to be   no discussion. i also think it’s fair to say that in no way did it make them uncomfortable to approach my dad’s coming of age that way. their view was that life was tough for them and now it was going to be tough for my dad   and they didn’t feel compelled to soften or lessen that message. i hope i can have half as much resolve and strength when it comes time for my kids to make that transition. i definitely would like to deliver that same message of “hey, it’s time to make it on your own,” although certainly in a different way! most of the parents i talk to in this situation are extremely afraid for their kids. as a result, some of them accept abuse and other inappropriate behaviors in exchange for the relief they experience as a result of knowing that their kids are safe and have a roof over their heads. just remember, there is no excuse for abuse   from younger or older kids. and in the end it won’t help your child take on life and all of its challenges. in addition, the longer parents are trapped in that situation, the more hostility mounts between the parents and the child   until everybody may be feeling like they never want to see or talk to one another ever again! i say “trapped” because many parents feel compelled by obligation to get their child on their own two feet, even in the face of destructive and abusive behavior. yet, most parents in that situation are tired of living that way. and the child may desperately want to be independent, but probably doesn’t have the skills to live on his or her own. it’s especially hard for the parents of acting out teens because they lack the security of feeling confident about their child’s ability to thrive in the world. sometimes these parents will ask the question “how do i save my child?” followed by “or do i even save them?” james lehman’s article series on living with an adult child offers such great insight on how to make the situation work for everyone. james encourages parents to view their adult child as a guest in their home and to express that openly with your child. when you do that, you send this message: “you’ve had 18 years to learn how to make it on your own. now’s the time to put it into practice.” please share your experiences about what it was like when your teenager or young adult left home or what it’s like trying to get your child to leave home. does anybody have words of encouragement for parents that are struggling with their own fears and concerns? if you’ve asked your child to leave home, what helped you to decide that it was time? as a parent coach, tina wakefield coached parents on techniques from the total transformation, as well as empowering parents' other programs, for over 8 years. tina is also a mother and stepmother. you must log in to leave a comment. don't have an account? create one for free! i am sorry you are going through this with your adult son. i can understand your frustration and can assure you that once your son turned 18, he was an adult and you were no longer responsible for providing for him. with that said, your situation is a bit outside the scope of what we are able to offer coaching or advice on due to your son’s age i encourage you to see what types of support services are available in your area. if you live in the us or canada, the 211 national helpline is a referral service available 24 hours a day, nationwide. they can give you information on the types of support services available in your area such as counselors, therapists, support groups/kinship services as well as various other resources. you can reach the helpline by calling 1 800 273 6222 or by logging onto 211.org (211.ca in canada.) we wish you and your family all the best moving forward. take care. pt 1   fed up i'm in a different situation; i want my son to leave! he is nearly 18 and i feel 80% ready for him to leave. i've raised him mostly alone and commmited to it even though it meant sacrificing a lot. it was worth it, but that stage of nurturing has passed and he's a pre young adult. i've had to grieve the loss of the dependent child and being together a lot. i accept he doesn't need me to the level he once did, though he does still need my help at times and it means we're both preparing to do our own thing which is strange at first, but normal! this past year he's gotten more independent, working and driving, it helps with maturity plus gives me more time and energy and kind of have parts of my old life back! we discussed him wanting more freedom and i gave it, but i gave a bit too much, lol! i had to pull back control as i realised i was getting so resentful and hating his behaviour; it was abysmal. once i could admit it was largely my parenting style; i tried to tweak the errors on my part. it was hard putting in boundaries, but i did it and it calmed things down, as he was slacking off in things like basic house care and self care. but now i am just plain tired. tired of setting boundaries and asking for completion of things or home help. he's capable of doing more but isn't proactive; not without a big reward or a big threat to motivate him. it's so draining. i know i'm only ever talking about chores and shouldn't need to ask for simple things to be done 5 times! i have to change my attitude and expectations in dealing with it. but also there are his choices and his consequences. i'm at the point i'm not prepared to take his attitude or demeanour. i'm tired of him blaming me, not taking respsonsibility and acting like his life is so hard. as you can probably tell by the tone of this message i'm over it. i don't often enjoy our time together and i don't bother initiating much, as he moans so much. i don't have the energy to keep adjusting myself, trying to be positive or encouraging, when he doesn't deserve it or i simply don't mean it. it can be hard to relax when he's home and there are other things i want to do without having someone in my space. especially who doesn't respect the house is a shared home. he is so resistant to helping out that i can't be bothered asking anymore. it's time for both of us to have space, lots of it. pt 2 i'm not worried at all about him in the 'real world'; i've prepared him where i can, with regular life skills   like cooking, laundry, banking, car maintenance, job advice. but the rest he will be learning the hard way; he even said that himself recently   that i don't need to hold his hand, for that very reason. he knows enough to earn income and lots of friends he can lean on. not many family members but enough. i told him i'm tired of the resistant reluctance... and i really really am. i don't need to put up with it and it's not helping him mature. i feel it's almost time for him to go and it will suit us both. i spent enough years living with people i don't like and trying to fit what they need and want, so my tolerance level is very low. it may sound harsh but i'm not prepared to do that again from here on, even if he's my son, we're also people. and he soon reaches the age where he's technically an adult. this certainly doesn't apply to every situation or family, but i think it will be best for ours. i'm exhausted and unhappy. he's unhappy too. my ability has run out! welcome to empowering parents. i can understand your frustration and concern. the transition from minor child to adult can be a challenging one for both parents and older teens. we hear from many parents of adult children experiencing similar issues. we have a few articles (including a free living agreement) that you may find helpful here: https://www.empoweringparents.com/article categories/ages and stages/adult children/ we are not able to answer questions regarding legal matters. i encourage you to speak with a legal professional about what your options are as they would be more familiar with the laws in your area. we appreciate you reaching out. take care. sought out this article because i feel guilty. in 2 weeks my (new) wife and i are moving to an apartment, leaving my twin daughters (20) to fend for themselves in the home of my late wife. my wife of 25 years died of cancer in 2013. it wasn't a particularly loving marriage; my wife ran the house and raised our daughters. having little say so in the relationship, i maintained a low profile in the basement. i would emerge only to work or perform whatever task kept me out of hot water. most of those tasks consisted of chauffeuring the girls to and from their various appointments. the minute i was informed of my wife passing i immediately knew i had a problem on my hands. i understood that my years of "going along to get along" rendered me ineffective as a parent. to make matters worse i developed sciatica just prior to my wife passing. to make matters worse still, my eldest daughter committed suicide several months after my wife died. so i'm left with 2 17 yr. olds and a 13 yr old. at first it wasn't so bad. the twins took the money they received from insurance (approximately $60,000 each) and went away to college. i got a therapist for the youngest daughter, put her money away in a trust fund, and proceeded to raise her as best i could. fortunately, physical therapy got rid of the sciatica. i thought things were going well. the thought the youngest daughter and i got on quite well. i knew she had difficulties coping with losing her mother and big sister, but she seemed to be in relatively good spirits. she was even invited to accompany a group of students on a week long trip to europe. it was even nicer to receive occasional visits from the twins, though i later learned those visits weren't particularly helpful. fast forward 2 years and the twins money is gone. it's my fault because i didn't sign paperwork authorizing student loans. so the twins return home bitter, angry and verbal. they complain about me not supporting them in college. they complain that the youngest daughter's needs aren't being met. they begin cursing me and trying to provoke me to hit them. in short, the nightmare i anticipated had arrived. i think worst of all, for them, was bringing another woman into their mother's house. i began dating again in 2014 and remarried in 2016. so, now i have company in the basement while my daughters take control of the rest of the house. making far less than my late wife, i couldn't afford the house we shared for over 25 years, but i sought to hold onto it as long as i could for my daughters. i was delaying the inevitable. when i got a call from the high school that the youngest had verbalized committing suicide i knew my household was not a healthy environment for her. as she had already expressed not wanting to move with me anywhere, i began making arrangements to have my wife's neice assume custody... a whole different nightmare. but the twins, now 20, seem quite content to remain here to frequently remind me of what a terrible father i am. after one particularly nasty episode of doors slamming and tongue lashing, my wife and i decided it best to leave. despite all this, i feel guilty because i have doubts about how the twins will survive. sure, they have close relatives from their mom's side of the family but i don't know what assistance will be available to them. i told them last year i intended to move and reminded them several weeks ago. they've made no effort to find suitable living arrangements. i know i've done the best i could, but i can't help feeling bad about leaving them. google here is a great weblog you may find interesting that we encourage you to visit. my son is 27, this past september. he carried on with an online sexual relationship for almost 8 months, on our home. we asked him to move out or stop...he moved out, found out she was still married, after months, returned home...he had started drinking, she was doing pain meds legally, smoking, and drinking. she was 48. .. months later they move in together again, as we refused disrepect, and online relationship in our home. he was paying 100$ a month towards utilities. my son at 17 went through the system for a burglary charge at 17...his friend left him adderall when leaving for the army ..key was moved so my son broke in the window,.the rest is .history.(drug related friendship) so by 1 year on parole, my son cleaned up....4 years doing well..then this...she is unstable. we did not agree with the skyping....the age differences, lies...now he is respecting the boundaries. why is he with a basically 50 year old woman?..she has 2 sons in their early 20 s. we have told him it is unnatural. she had 5 online sexual relationships before my son. he says we all make mistakes and loves her. she wants to marry him. he is our only child...granted adult child.. ï am sad for him, i sense fully she is immature, both have extreme sexual abuse in childhood..what can you say to help me...with acceptance, boundaries, ..i am angry, but have it under control. i feel she is a full force predator. my son went through 7 rehabs by 20 years old, addictions, as well as going through the final rehab...treatment, d.o.c my youngest daughter is 17 but turns 18 in dec. her mom and i are going thru a divorce and is working out great for all. as the dad i was told i was the problem in our marriage from my daughter. it's been a year of separation and found out the problems are between my wife and my daughter. since christmas this has occurred with daughter:   pot found in dau car on school grounds   spended for rest of year but able to finish 11th grade thru on line courses   she is so far being with the online classes she may be doing summer school   gone from home, no one knew, sheriff office called in. next day made joke about her phone not charging   her mom took her car away until she gets caught up with classes   today i found out she is at a friends house but hasn't returned txt or calls right or wrong, i'm wanting to prepare her move out of the house when she is 18. i will drop her txt and internet abilities on her phone. i will ensure she has the ability to call especially for emergency. i've always told my kids if going to school u are welcome at home but it can be a party pad. i offer to help with their first month rent and deposit (1 time) only if they are leaving on a happy note. if not, they are on their own. i know there's no magic parenting book. i'm open for any suggestions, complaints, ideas. this is my first post..bare with me. thanks for taking time to read my post. normaltown you’re right. kids don’t come with instruction books. things would be so much easier if they did. as it is, it can be challenging to know what steps to take when you have a child who acts out and doesn’t meet even basic expectations like completing school work or coming home when she’s supposed to. from what you have written, it sounds like your daughter has been trying to blame you and/or her mother for the choices she has been making. truth be told, your daughter really is the only one responsible for her choices. as parents, you can help her develop necessary skills and give her the tools and opportunities to be successful. what she does with those things really are up to her. it seems as though you have clear rules and boundaries around what your children need to do to continue receiving support from you once they turn 18. that will definitely be a benefit when your daughter does finally become an adult. until that time, i would encourage you and her mom to have well defined parameters for expected behavior with specific consequences if those parameters are not respected. you might even consider developing a written living agreement, as discussed in the article ground rules for living with an adult child (plus free living agreement). even though your daughter is not yet an adult, this may give you an idea of what types of rules you would like to put in place while she is still living in your home. we appreciate you writing in and sharing your story. be sure to check back and let us know how things are going. take care. wendysdunn parenting adult children does offer some unique challenges. this isespecially true when there are mental health issues present. one thing i thinkis important to keep in mind is how our role changes when our children becomeadults. all of your children are adults and allowing them to continue living inyourmore home is a choice you make. once your child turns 18, any support you offeris a privilege. this is true regardless of any underlying issue that maybe present. it may be of benefit to look into available community supports, suchas assisted living placements, job coaches, or family support groups. manycommunities have housing and job support for people with physical disabilitiesor mental health disorders. the 211 helpline, a nationwide health and humanservices referral resource, would be able to give you information on availablecommunity services. you can reach the helpline 24 hours a day by calling1 800 273 6222 or by logging onto http://www.211.org/.they may also be able to offer information on financial services that may beable to help you figure out what steps you can take regarding the car paymentand your credit. i appreciate you reaching out to empowering parents for whatsounds like a truly challenging situation. good luck to you and your familymoving forward. take care. anothermother i want to print out your post as well...it's like you are writing down everything i have been going through and thinking. i have a 19 year old son that has become very disrespectful not mention selfish with 2 babies that have been in my place for months. i am the bad person but yet he will not leave. not trying hard enough to find a job just completely stopped doing that and does not have a high school diploma. reading your post anothermother along with this article has really opened my eyes to what i need to do and that is live my own life. thank you so much for posting. to desperate mom: it’s very difficult as a parent to watch your child make destructive decisions with his life when you know that you have raised him with different values. it is completely understandable that you would feel overwhelmed and exhausted after dealing with this escalating behavior over the last 6 years. james lehman reminds us that anything we give our kids once they become adults is a privilege, including living at home. we support you in asking him to leave your home since he is engaging in destructive and illegal activities, and we understand that this is a highly emotional decision for many parents. we recommend trying to look at this situation with your son in an objective way, and what we find can help is imagining how you would handle this if it were someone other than your son doing these things. how would you handle another employee who did not come in to work on time, if at all? what would your response be if a neighbor came into your home and stole cash or personal checks? we encourage you to let your son experience the natural consequences of his actions, because ultimately these are his choices. you cannot control what your son does; you can control how you respond. i am including links to some other articles you might find helpful as you continue to work through this difficult situation. we wish you the best; we know this isn’t easy. my child is using drugs or drinking alcohol what should i do? is it time to call the police on your child? assaultive behavior, verbal or physical abuse, drugs and crime hi our daughter is almost 26. she was a handful from 14. handful is a polite way of describing her. foul mouthed, answer for everything, trouble at school, drinking, all the things you associate with acting up teens. we went to a counseller to see if that would help. in the end she turned 18 we found a room in a persons house who were short of cash and we paid the rent on a room for her. it was painful to do but a relief too. after that she got a job and her own bedsit. lived like a slob but that was up to her. our relationship was better. she could do what she liked and then deal with the consequences. when she was 19 she moved in with her boyfriend. they also did a bit of travelling in europe and worked and played hard in the summer at different music festivals. we live in uk. the boyfriend was finishing his degree. when they split up she was heartbroken and came home for a few months. not very enjoyable to be honest! she has had quite a few jobs over the years in fashion retail and at 21 decided to do a degree in london. she got onto the best degree in the world for her subject,fashion management we were sooo proud of her. we have no money so she was given a government loan and bursary but we still helped out with the cost of transport and the deopsit on a room in a flat. anyway to cut a long story short she has now jacked in the degree four years later! should only have taken 3 years but she has had to redo two years because the lecturers and course were crap, not her on no always someone elses fault as usual !!(£30.000 in debt government loan not a lot to show for it) however this summer we again had to practice tough love even though she is 25!..... she decided to give up the room in london for the summer and basically travel, go to festivals and sleep at friends houses.(we didnt know at this point that uni was over!) we didnt think this was a good idea but its her life! we are festival caterers so the summer is totally full on for us. she did a few shifts with us and a few barshifts to tide her over, just. in september she was at ours and had been for a couple of weeks. she was getting mouthy and taking things for granted, not doing her dishes, loosing her key... we pointed out that she was 25 and we didnt expect her to act like that her reply was that she was only 25!!! any way in the end we said if you dont like living here why are you? then we went a step further and said she could stay for 3 weeks to sort out her return to london (not to take advantage and party) then in future we would love to see her but for no longer than a week at a time because we couldnt get on for longer. well she didnt stay for 3 weeks to sort out her return to london! she didnt talk to us for about a month but we are friends on facebook so i always know where she is! she stayed in her grannys vacant house for 10 days and i saw her briefly, she said she needed some time to get over the situation! i wish i had said "you need time what about us!!" but |i wasnt quick enough. she is in love and has decided to move in with her boyfriend in leeds (city up north from us).she came around the other day to collect some bits and peaces and we got a hug   she had a stinking cold and was feeling sorry for herself! plus which we are off to asia for 3 months over xmas and shant see her so maybe it was a genuine hug! she is still abit frosty but she is happy to get a house and move in with her fella. if shes happy than what more can i ask!? she has always had a chip on her shoulder about us moving her out back at the beginning and that she no longer had a bedroom at home. she has been gone for almost 8 years im sure shell get over it but time will sort it and i think until she has her own family she wont understand. hope that helps! hi, i do not like my 23 year old son's girlfriend. he has been with her for 6 years. although they both work and make good money, they both live at home. in my heart i feel she is not the right person for my son, he has gone from a fun loving individual to dull and boring, just like her. she's stiff and moody and not many people like her. i just can't see why he stays with her. he was always popular and a great athlete, everyone likes him. he deserves better, but can't seem to see it. he knows the way his dad, his older sister and i feel, but doesn't seem to value our opinion. i can't believe that this girl will probably some day be the mother of my grandchildren. ugh.......help, i am making myself sick over this. hello everyone! read through all the coments made, found some parents are more aware of the problems of adult children failing to launch. some of you start to address this matter from children age 17. we have a 35 year old who just wont budge. when i first met my wife she had bothe kids living with her age 27 daughter and 29 year old son. unfortunately what was presented to me was a lie, i was told they lived with her but were self suficient (paid their own expenses) the truth was her ex husband still gave her support money for the kids even though he had left home 10 years ago. six years have gone by and sure enough the daughter found a job, went to live with the boyfriend, married for one year then boomeranged back home. again out of the house and earning well. the son, however, never left and is now 35. refuses to get a menial job because he has a degree in journalism. doesn't write i am the stressed parent of a 19 year old young woman. living with her has been a lot like riding a roller coaster for the past two years. she is attending a local university as a commuter student. her grades are excellent, and she holds down a job to cover her gas costs. our issues are strictly related to the home environment. when she opted to live at home, we told her that she was no longer a child, but was an adult guest in our home. while we would help her with school, we expected her to assist with responsibilities at home and to abide by certain behavior guidelines that reflected our family values with respect to the fact that there are younger children living in the home. we agreed on certain chores in return for room and board, and we told her that we expected the respect of knowing her plans and what time she expected to be home at night. we expressed that there would be times that we expected an earlier return due to our work schedules and need for sleep, and that if her plans changed she needed to advise us so that we would not worry. we did not want underage drinking. we did not want overnight guests without our okay, and we did not want overnight guests of the opposite sex unless we were hosting a late night party for several young people with prior approval. our daughter follows our requests for a period of time. then she backslides, and we revisit the guidelines. there is always tremendous drama and the proverbial "i am an adult and i should be able to do what i want when i want. i am trapped here by you, and you shouldn't be controlling me. i am a good student and i deserve to make my own decisions and come home or not come home as i want." we fight about this for a few days, it settles down for a few weeks, then it starts again. in may we had a huge explosion, and she left home. she called about 48 hours later wanting to return, and we sat down and told her she could come back with conditions. no more ranting and raving at us. same guidelines apply. she was to see a physician for evaluation and take steps to get counseling. (we have a history of mental health issues, and many of her arguments/demands seemed irrational.) she agreed to our terms, and we welcomed her home. things went well for a month. for the past two weeks, she has been backsliding again. last evening she refused to tell us when she would be home, and we told her to not be too late. she came home around 2am. we confronted her, and got the same response as previously noted. we told her it was time to leave. we let her stay the night, and she is supposed to leave this morning. i don't know where she will go or how she will manage, and it scares me to death. but we can't keep doing this over and over again either. it's not good for anyone. i guess my biggest struggle has been with setting these guidelines for a young adult. are we expecting too much? it is very hard to be in this situation. i have a 20 year old son who went off to college this fall on a full athletic scholarship. got arrested thrown off the team and is now home. he has been verbally threatening to me has stolen small amounts of money and is engaged in off and on drug use. he was recently diagnosed with depression and an attachment disorder(he was adopted as an older child) hes bright and talented was a star in both in high school but the son i had seems to have gotten lost someplace. we have had to start to treat him as if he were 12 refuse to pay for his cell phone ect. lately he has just been taking off at various hours and then showing up 12   18 hours later just wasted. he has threatened to punch me in the face one to many times. we feel like we have to ask him to go but its also clear he has some severe mental health issues. he refuses to get treatment . time to let him go? we are so scared as to what will happen to him you people are obviously not into history. you see, history tends to repeat itself. it used to be that way back in the stone age, families stuck together in order to survive. a son would marry a girl and bring her to live with his parents. the dwelling was enlarged, and things were added on to. this type of co habitation lasted for thousands of years, beginning to decline in the later half of the 17th century. that is not to say that certain individuals never left home, many did, but the norm was to take over your parents home once they passed away. in roman times, housing became very expensive and children tended to live with their parents out of sheer necessity. this trend is returning now, despite the fact that people these days prefer a quiet, personal space type of house to live in. if you own your home, i am not encouraging you to keep an adult child that quite clearly sponges and mooches off of your kindness, but do keep in mind that in times gone by, living at home was the norm. my husband and i married in may last year. when we married it was just us and my 13 year old son living together, and while we had our “moments” for the most part we were doing great as a blended family. my husband is on a disability pension and i work. in october last year my husband’s 20 year old son and his wife moved in with us “to get on their feet”, and i was an advocate of this. his son (who was raised by his mother) had not finished high school, had been in and out of jobs   either because he got mad about something and quit, or because he was fired   and he and his new wife were couch surfing from house to house with no place of their own. i wanted to help give them a chance at life. the plan was that his son would get his ged, find work, and that they would save money to establish their own place. it has nearly been six months, and he finally got his ged done last week. the whole time they have lived with us, his son has worked 6 days, at the end of which he quit because he got mad at a co worker. in addition to not working outside of the home, they have also not worked inside the home. sure, there is the very odd time where they have cooked a dinner (usually because they don’t like the healthy meals i prepare), and the odd occasion they have done dishes, cleaned their room etc, but really in the overall scheme of things, they do nothing. they stay up all night playing games, sleep all day, hole up in their room from the time i come home til the time i go to bed, we barely speak to each other when we do see each other (partly my fault because i have nothing to say to them that they are going to like), when they have had food stamps, or some small amounts of money come through their hands, they use it to take off to friend’s places for the weekend rather than contribute to the house. now i am all for tough love   i also have a 19 year old daughter and had to apply a lot of tough love principles with her when she was 17, and as a result she moved out, and has become a very independent, responsible young lady   i’m proud of her! so, it is no skin off my nose to lay down my rules in my house with my step kids. it doesn’t bother me one bit whether they leave the house today or not just because they don’t like it. in fact, i want them to move out, because i don’t believe that it is going to get any better. my problem is that my husband does not agree with the tough love principle when it comes to his kids. he has all kinds of excuses and guilty reasoning for their behavior. while he does not like what they do, and actually gets depression about it all, he believes that they are adults and that we cannot tell them what to do. he also is afraid of them leaving home. this has caused terrible strain on our marriage as my husband now believes that i am the one with the problem because i get angry with the status quo and want it dealt with. on the other hand, he does apply the “tough love” principle to my own son with the reasoning that he is 13 years old and not an adult. when i try and broach the issue of double standards and not being consistent with the rules and display of respect required, then i’m told that i’m comparing “apples with oranges”. it has gotten so bad between my husband and i that he has mentioned divorce on a number of occasions   rather than dealing with the problem of his children. i never wanted to be the wicked step mother, but it looks like i am going to have to stand up against the whole house, including my husband on this issue even to the point of losing my marriage, a prospect i find quite daunting. but for me, i rather not feel like a stranger with no voice, or control, in my own home, than live like this. i also don’t want my son raised with double standards. i’d love to hear if anyone else has dealt with a similar “step” situation, and how you handled it. hey there, i am living with a 17 year old daughter who reminds me that in 3 months 1 week and 1 day she'll be 18 and she can do whatever she wants. i say that is absolutely true, she can do whatever she wants, but not in my house. i share with her that while she has this idea that her 18th birthday is her independence day, it is also mine! while she hasn't broken any of the house rules, she seems to think that when she is 18, there is nothing more i can say about anything. on the contrary, i share with her, the rules will suddenly change. when you are 17 and break the rules, i can ground you and take things away. but...when you are 18 and decide to be free, i can pack up your stuff and set it outside. now...while i really don't want to do this and want compliance, i have to be ready to follow through. that is the tough part. i find this article extremely interesting. at 17, i bought my first place just a few weeks after graduating from high school. notice i said "i"? my parents co signed the note, but i did it on my own. i never returned to my parent's home no matter how tough it was. i married at 21 and started my own family at 24. now i'm a single father of 3. my oldest is 18 and although she has not been in a whole lot of trouble outside the home (apart from extremely poor performance in school), she has been rotten at home for years. i've had enough. if she is still living in my home at high school graduation in may 2012, it will be a miracle for her. i look around and watch in horror at how my friends coddle their kids (some until they are well into their 20s) and i cannot understand what these parents think they are doing to help their kids. do they seriously think their kids are ever going to learn how to stand on their own two feet if they "keep" them? that's how i see it. children today are "kept" not raised. as a society each generation has gotten progressively more focused on instant gratification and thus, spoiled the next generation. kids are being taught that "as long as i feel good, we're 'tight'". so they learn to buy themselves happy. wake up america! dear lola, my heart breaks when i read that you are housing not one, but two grown adults that are mutually disrespecting not to mention taking complete advantage of what appears to be persons whom love and care very much. and not to add to your feeling less productive in your rearing of "adult kids", i will say , "yes" "enabling", you are. i'm terribly sorry! but, i feel you really already know this, otherwise you would not have not included it in your statement. my son is 28 and living with me all the while attending a methadone clinic every am and i might add he's very punctual at a early am of 0430 0630 am. "but, it's helping him to get off the other stuff!" ok! what!? whatever! my 24 year old son is in jail as we speak. he was in a intensive program to improve his life through rehab. nope! didn't work! not the programs fault. not my fault! although, we are so clever at finding ways to conjoin what's happening to them is some how connected to us? somewhere...along the way..we found a way to become guilty in our actions and what we do or what we did with our children. the bottom line is..that time has passed and we are done raising them. grizzly bears will bite and rip away at the young bears trying to get food from thier mother. they chase them off! young birds learn to fly and fetch for themselves and leave the nest. wild nature is sooo much kinder. i feel we have allowed a toxic society of brat kids to prevail. after the heart break of my kids and questioning whether i was a good enough parent?i raised my two boys by myself. held down two jobs and went to school. became a firefighter/paramedic and yes..my kids at times raised themselves. i'm not proud. but...i'm now 51 and ya know....if they want to hold a grudge...they hadfood on the table and the best of everything. i love them. but...i have my own life and they need theirs!!!! love to all! hello. your site is very helpful. thanks. we have an adult son (32)who has made some bad choices. late high school and college, he began drinking excessively. when he completed college, he had a difficult time holding jobs, drank more, and ended up in alcohol rehab (which we paid for.) when he left rehab, he moved back home (has a written behavioral contract) and we helped him with some of his bills. he was able to land a great job. he is now sliding somwhat again. we had imposed a curfew of 1:00 to keep him off the streets. gradually, he began coming home later and later. now, he spends some weekend nights out and comes and goes as he pleases during those times. are we being unreasonable? we are trying to get him on his feet again. but he now seems to be taking advantage of the situation. incidentally, he pays no rent. our 30 year old daughter also lives with us, works, and pays no rent. she is anticipating an engagement. as i write this, i feel that we have really enabled our adult children! my abusive dad kicked me out of the home so early! as i look back, it probably was for the best. though, at the time, it was so hurtful! thanks. lola dear mimitobrendan: if you want your son to live with you, it is reasonable that he should be allowed to come home as long as he is following the house rules and contributing to the household. your family has gone through a lot of hardships lately and there must have been a lot of demands made on everyone. it can be really hard to give both your kids attention when there is one child that is very ill and needy. there’s nothing wrong with asking your son to help out but it’s probably too hard for a 17 year old to think only of others and not his own needs. and if he has been “the baby” as you say, he may not be used to a leadership role in the household and has felt overwhelmed or resentful. that doesn’t mean he should not be helping the family. just acknowledge that it is stressful and can be difficult for him just as it is for everyone in the family. we wish your family the best. i have a 17 year old son. he decided two weeks ago that he wanted to move out. this was after i confronted him about something serious (i won't go into details). he got upset, walked out and i didn't see him again until a week ago. he texted me when he got to his girlfriend's house & said "i know you're going to be mad at me, but i am (girfriend's name) house. he said he's been wanting to leave for a while anyway. we had some family issues in the spring of this year. my daughter (who is his older sister) was diagnosed with fungal meningitis and we almost lost her. he missed the last 2 months of school because of that, he took it very hard, they were best friends. she came home from the hospital at the end of sept. she has no use of her legs, limited use of her arms. i know this has some to do with it, and she has an 18 mo. old son who he helped take care of while my husband & i worked. this is all we asked him to do, since he isn't in school nor does he have a job. it breaks my heart my baby isn't living with us & his sister misses him terribly, but what do i do? he says he's going to come back, but i don't know if i should let him. should i use tough love & tell him, you made your decision so stay? or should i give him one more chance & consider this his "break" from all the stress we've been through this year? he's a pretty good kid for the most part, it's just that we have enough on us right now taking care of our daughter who is bedridden to taking care of her son & both working full time. my partner (bob) and i (we are a gay couple) have lived together 12 years, and his 32 year old married daughter (and her large dog) moved in several months ago. she is going through a divorce, and we offered her a place to stay until she gets back onto her feet. she is employed (actually has a well paid job). we are trying to navigate the difficult path of taking care of ourselves and our relationship, and at the same time providing support for her. at one point we tried to make her comfortable by saying that our home was her home (not a good idea!) we soon ended up walking her dog, taking the dog to the vet etc, tidying up fafter her, moving her car out of the driveway so we could get our cars out, etc. now we have decided to change tack. we are treating her as a guest in our house (rather than saying it is her home). we are also trying to bring up the awkward topic of when it is she plans on leaving. we brought it up for the first time yesterday, and there has been a lot of tension in the house since. can a 32 year old become a teenager? i told her, in as kind a way as i could, that we needed to know this. i suggested that she might consider february or march as a deadline (she has been here two months). she can certainly find her own place between now and then. hopefully i can set a more specific deadline (say end of feb), and stick to it. this is a great web site. thanks you. dear atwhatage: you ask a great question, but there really isn’t a specific age that a child should move out of your house. it’s up to your family to decide what’s best for your child and you. some families choose to continue to live together because the child respects the rights of the parent to set standards in the home  and follows those standards  the parent respects the child’s right to live as an independent adult, and the child shares in the cost and work of maintaining the home. if you feel it’s time to discuss with your child his plans for moving toward becoming more self sufficient and independent, there is some help on this web site. james lehman has written a set of three articles on how to talk to older kids who are still living at home. these articles can be found by searching under ‘older children’ in the ‘global search’ box on empowering parents. they are entitled: ‘rules, boundaries and older children part i’; ‘rules, boundaries and older children part ii: in response to questions about older children living at home’; and ‘rules, boundaries and older children part iii: is it ever too late to set up a living agreement?’ we wish your family the best. let us know if we can answer any other questions. sunbeam79, we see many parents welcoming back adult children to live at home with them temporarily. it can turn out to be a very stressful arrangement for everyone involved. you sound hesitant to voice your concerns or to talk about how the situation is affecting you. it sounds like it's important to you to support your partner in helping his son, yet you are finding it to be a source of conflict. you have to determine whether or not you are comfortable sharing with your partner what your experience has been with this issue. those kinds of conversations can certainly be difficult! it might be helpful to know what you are trying to accomplish by having the conversation. would it be to get support from your partner or would it be to see what might be helpful to your partner in dealing with his son, for instance. ultimately, it is a personal decision. i will include some articles about older children who are living at home. they may give you some ideas about what the discussion could center around. i wish you well in figuring out what makes the most sense for you in approaching this dilemma. http://www.empoweringparents.com/rules boundaries and older children.php http://www.empoweringparents.com/rules boundaries and older children late to set up living agreement.php i am 48 with two children who have graduated from college, however; my daughter has moved back in with me in order to find a job. i am dating a man, whose 25 year old son lives with him. the son does not work, sleeps all day and is not living a productive lifestyle. he has not gone to college and does not know what to do with his life. this is a source of stress for me in this dating relationship. what should i do? i dare not comment on anything unless to offer support. thanks, laomelai: there is no question that when you have an adult child who also has a child, that can really complicate the whole situation especially emotionally for you. i talk to a lot of grandparents who would do anything to ensure that their grandchild is being cared for properly. i don’t know how long you’ve been dealing with your daughter coming and going, but it sounds like you are ready to take this huge step of allowing her to take on more responsibility. you can still offer her support; it will just look different than your prior arrangement. please let us know how it goes. tough love: i think this is such a great illustration of taking the risk as a parent that your child will be okay on their own. i would say that it’s probably extremely uncomfortable for both sides at first, but it sounds like in your situation it really paid off!! perhaps your son was forced to make better choices because he wasn’t in the comfort of your home. i think it’s also important to note here that you still have a relationship with your son    and it sounds like he enjoys sharing what success he’s having. thanks for your comment. responses to questions posted on empoweringparents.com are not intended to replace qualified medical or mental health assessments. we cannot diagnose disorders or offer recommendations on which treatment plan is best for your family. please seek the support of local resources as needed. if you need immediate assistance, or if you and your family are in crisis, please contact a qualified mental health provider in your area, or contact your statewide crisis hotline. we value your opinions and encourage you to add your comments to this discussion. we ask that you refrain from discussing topics of a political or religious nature. unfortunately, it's not possible for us to respond to every question posted on our website. disrespect... defiance... backtalk... lack of motivation... frustrated and exhausted by your child's behavior? get your free personal parenting plan today. does your child exhibit angry outbursts, such as tantrums, lashing out, punching walls, and throwing things? would you like to learn about how to use consequences more effectively? backtalk... complaints... arguments... attitude... just plain ignoring you do you struggle with disrespect or verbal abuse from your child? has your child been diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder (odd)? or does your child exhibit a consistent and severe pattern of anger, irritability, arguing, defiance, and vindictiveness toward you or other authority figures? intimidation... aggression... physical abuse and violence... are you concerned that your child may physically hurt you or others? you must select at least one category to create your personal parenting plan: we're just about finished! create a secure account with empowering parents to access your personal parenting plan.
supported by the team has spent months trying to determine what is wrong with its underperforming car. the search continues. by phillip horton the once all conquering mercedes amg petronas f1 team is in a rut. it is a distant fourth in formula 1’s constructors’ championship, and most of its race results this year have been in the lower half of the top 10. “we have to accept that we are the fourth fastest team at the moment,” george russell, one of the team’s drivers, said earlier this month in a media session after the miami grand prix. “the lap times don’t lie, the championship doesn’t lie, this is where we are. we’re fighting for the p5 to p8 region week in, week out right now.” mercedes won a record eight successive constructors’ championships from 2014 through 2021. mercedes and ferrari battled for best of the rest honors in 2022 and 2023. ferrari beat mercedes to second position in 2022, before mercedes narrowly repaid the favor in 2023. the last time it won a grand prix was in brazil in 2022. but 2024 has been mercedes’s worst start to a season since 2011. mercedes retained faith in its 2022 spec design concept into 2023 before recognizing at last year’s first race that it had erred, but the team has still not fixed the car. mercedes did not expect to catch the dominant red bull, but it has fallen away from ferrari, and an ever improving mclaren is third. the three leading teams have already won races this year, and mclaren’s turnaround from also rans to winners has further amplified mercedes’s stagnation because it supplies mclaren with its power units.

 recent and archived work by phillip horton for the new york times kevin magnussen, a longtime driver for haas, was grabbed by bmw and will be competing at daytona. by phillip horton from street circuits like monaco to challenging courses like suzuka international, some tracks stand out. by phillip horton the team finished last in 2023, but it has risen in the standings and has plans for next season, including new drivers. by phillip horton formula 1 is mostly a european sport, and contenders must climb the racing ladder through events there. that is difficult for americans.