That’s a shame. The only way to justify firing someone only months away from obtaining full benefits would be if they had become too dangerous or too much a negative force to keep on staff in any way. I suspect it was not that.
For every hero, there is someone in the shadows, who sympathizes with the villain.
I’m conflicted on this one. On one hand why should any place of employment be forced to retain someone if they are unable to perform the job’s functions? If they are eliminating the desk job role it is as it is.
OTOH he suffers from PTSD which is a recognized disorder which I would think entitles him to some level of possible disability, long term disability pay, etc.
Conflicted for sure
Speaking as someone who barely survived a critical date for my modest pension and retiree medical options back in 2012, this pains me.
Delgado also said the police department terminated him just
six months shy of reaching his 10th year on the job, which
would have vested him in the pension system and allowed him
to collect 64% of his $38,500 salary for life.
Delgado will now only receive 42% of his salary starting when
he turns 55. Delgado, a married father of three, is currently 45.
In my City, it is a well known scam that whenever a policeman is involved in a shooting, he will claim PTSD and take early retirement (with as much pay as possible). They say that they cannot even hold or look at a gun again, so they must leave the Department. Some of the people who have done it were in their 30’s.
A few years ago, the local newspaper decided to look at what happened to those who took early retirement because of PTSD. A few were working as police officers in neighboring states (and obviously carrying guns). Some were in private security (some with guns). Most of the others had hunting permits and/or concealed carry permits.
The City forced those who had employment involving guns to choose between their new job or their early retirement. It was a scam to get a steady income and get another full time job.