Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

wrongful constructive discharge

Read a random definition: yield spread

A quick definition of wrongful constructive discharge:

Wrongful constructive discharge is when an employer makes working conditions so bad that an employee feels like they have no choice but to quit. This can happen if the employer treats the employee unfairly, like insulting them or demoting them for no good reason. The employer has to break the rules of the employment contract or the law to be guilty of wrongful constructive discharge.

A more thorough explanation:

Wrongful constructive discharge is a type of claim where an employee is forced to resign due to intolerable working conditions created by the employer. This is different from wrongful termination, where the employee is fired. The employer may create intolerable working conditions through insults, humiliation, demotion, or other forms of discrimination against the employee. In order for this claim to be valid, the employer must have violated the employment contract or public law by targeting the employee.

Example 1: An employee is constantly subjected to racial slurs and discriminatory behavior by their supervisor. Despite reporting the behavior to HR, nothing is done to address the issue. The employee feels they have no choice but to resign due to the intolerable working conditions.

Example 2: An employee is demoted and given a significant pay cut without any explanation or justification. The employer refuses to provide any reasoning for the demotion or pay cut, and the employee feels they have no choice but to resign due to the unfair treatment.

These examples illustrate how an employer can create intolerable working conditions that force an employee to resign. In both cases, the employer violated the employment contract or public law by engaging in discriminatory behavior or unjustified demotion and pay cut. This type of behavior is not only unethical but also illegal, and employees have the right to pursue legal action in such cases.

write-off | wrongful death

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
yeah duke ed 2 is in jan, i think if i don't get in berk ed i'll do that assuming that i haven't gotten a decision from them by that point
12:43
haha i said "like," my local school is like 300-500th depending on year and they usually have 5+ 170+ scorers
2big2fail
12:44
i cant imagine it hurts your application if you demonstrate purpose and direction. the problem with some kjds is they dont really know what they want with life yet
the usnews rankings don't even go down that far
12:44
Duke is pretty gpa sensitive. The most sub 3 gpa friendly T14s are gulc, uva, and now cornell
babycat
12:44
@EvolBunny: there are 198 ABA accredited schools in the US
the vast majority of 170+ are enrolling at T20's--that's the only way they keep a 170 median lmao
HopefullyInLawSchool
12:44
just claim what you want in life in applications and then it can change in law school as ur exposed to stuff
@babycat: I don't think so, assuming that you have a cohesive why law and actually did stuff in undergrad. I mean ofc your application will always be stronger given work experience, but I don't think KJD status on its own "hurts" your application.
12:45
best thing you can do as a sub 3 is clear Wash U's median and go there, which I'm going to try to do in January if I don't hear from UGA before the deadline to sign up (Dec 3)
babycat
12:45
I'm just saying this as a hypothetical. people say urm boost is the equivalent of x LSAT point increase. was just wondering if there was an equivalent kJD decrease
I think you guys think about yourselves too much. All you can do is put together a well rounded application and simply wait!
@EvolBunny: I think you just proved yourself wrong lmao. It is showing 50 percent of people with those stats getting into WashU.
"@JumpySubsequentDolphin: you know schools that are like 350th ranked have people with 170+ lsats, right? GPA and all that does play a role and bruce is likely not getting what he wants"
WorthlessAttractiveZombie
12:46
I’m gonna drink a bottle of Jack for every rejection
babycat
12:47
call me curious George the way I be asking questions
babycat
12:47
actually the opposite of thinking about myself I just want to see what other people think
12:48
@texaslawhopefully: is washu the entire t20? Or notorious for letting applicants redact gpa or lsat? Like okay i guess washu, what about the rest? Buddy literally said he is a nothing candidate except high lsat. No EC, WE, minority status, right skin color, military, in state, etc. That means he will be fucked by the t20, except maybe washu
12:49
I also never said I only wanted to go to a T20
@EvolBunny: You're stupid af. Did you read what he said. He said fucking WashU.
And, yes, most people with a 170+ will go to the T20 because at the very least since the T20 pretty much all has a 170+ LSAT median they need at least 3k people a year with a 170+ to maintain those medians (given about 6k people enroll in the T20).
And there's only 4k people a year with a 170+.
BulbasaurNoLikeCardio
12:50
@babycat: That KJD question is a legit one, I wonder if there is enough data out there to show it as there is data that makes people think URM is a point boost
HopefullyInLawSchool
12:52
I just got my second decision of the day (:
12:52
you are a fucking idiot, Do you think every 170+ is in the t20? Some people want to inherit daddy's judge position and local connections and only needed a 155 but shit out a 173. Okay, go look at the schools yourself. Surely you will find ONLY 170s in the t20 and nowhere else! fucking tool. Also, there are only 4400ish people in the t14 and the median is like 171 lmfao they do not want ONLY 170+s
starfishies
12:52
unless you participated in a million clubs or had legit internships idk how kjds do so well honestly
starfishies
12:53
nothing against kjds just heard a ton of advice that you should work before applying
@EvolBunny: I said the vast majority dumbass. There's only 4k people with a 170+ and 6k people in the T20. The lowest LSAT median in the T20 is 169, so yes the vast majority of people (as in 70ish percent) with a 170+ are going to the T14.
babycat
12:53
I think some of that comes from a feeling that law school is a major commitment and you should be sure about it moreso than the value of the work experience
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.