My question involves labor and employment law for the state of: North Dakota
I filed, claimed NDCC. 34-03-06, employer claimed, 34-03-05. Nor did we dispute, whats bothering me, employee for the state, claims, her "line of reasoning", defnes, "we feel the company has met the definition", thereby denying me benifits, on what "we", has defined, as a "line of arguement" in order to fit into, 52-06-02. I feel is discriminating, due to arguement being, torn mesh in body due over exertion. Not "excessive absenteeism", as state would claim? Provided dr claim: needing a 2nd surgery".
I filed, claimed NDCC. 34-03-06, employer claimed, 34-03-05. Nor did we dispute, whats bothering me, employee for the state, claims, her "line of reasoning", defnes, "we feel the company has met the definition", thereby denying me benifits, on what "we", has defined, as a "line of arguement" in order to fit into, 52-06-02. I feel is discriminating, due to arguement being, torn mesh in body due over exertion. Not "excessive absenteeism", as state would claim? Provided dr claim: needing a 2nd surgery".
Discrimination, State Employee
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire