It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Man loses job, after attending Charlottesvile Rally Went Viral.

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: kurthall

I think it should be up to the business owner. It's a slippery slope however, because the opposite could be true. Should a Catholic business owner be able to fire an employee he finds out is a Satanist? Is gay? Had an abortion? Is living with his/her significant other without being married?

I've never heard a follow up but was the college professor that was outed hitting people with a bike chain at an Anti-fa rally get fired?




posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: kurthall

Well, it's Berkeley, sooooo...

But I'm like you--I'm on the fence as to whether I think that this is appropriate or not. Is there evidence that he espouses white-supremacist ideology? Was he involved in the violence that occurred?

If he was just there practicing his first-amendment rights to peacefully assembly and protest the removal of a statue, then I think that this is over-the-top. If he is a Nazi and was inflicting violence on people, I'd fire him, too.

Right-to-work for the win!



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Echo007
Let me guess most of you agree with schools suspending kids for things they say or do off school grounds, including comments they make on facebook etc. Did that person express his views while working or on the business property, no he didn't. Did he say the business he works for has the same views as he does, no he didn't.

Where's the which hunt for all the Black Lives Matters protesters who burned down private property. Where are all the SJW trying to find out if they have a job or not to shame them.






Let me guess, you're a nazi sympathizer?



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: kurthall

What a dumbass. LOL. I could care less about him getting fired.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: TobyFlenderson
a reply to: kurthall

I think it should be up to the business owner. It's a slippery slope however, because the opposite could be true. Should a Catholic business owner be able to fire an employee he finds out is a Satanist? Is gay? Had an abortion? Is living with his/her significant other without being married?

I've never heard a follow up but was the college professor that was outed hitting people with a bike chain at an Anti-fa rally get fired?


According to the law:

Should a catholic business owner be able to fire an employee he finds out is a Satanist? No. That would be discrimination on the basis of religion.

Should a catholic business owner be able to fire an employee he finds out is gay? Morally, no. But legally, in about 30 states, you can get fired for being gay.

Had an abortion? No. I believe it would be considered discrimination on the basis of sex. But I'm uncertain of this scenario.

Living with a significant other without being married? I have no idea on the legality of this. If the person is doing his job, it would be a stupid reason to fire him, though.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: icanteven




Living with a significant other without being married? I have no idea on the legality of this. If the person is doing his job, it would be a stupid reason to fire him, though.


That's the point though, isn't it? Who gets to decide what is stupid? A white supremacist's views are antithetical to mine, so I fire him. No problem. But a Catholic is forced to retain an employee who literally worships evil? I know religion is a protected class but it seems incongruent to me. The man in question wasn't being fired for any criminal activity but for the political beliefs he holds (and I guess scientific and moral beliefs as well). It was during the exercise of Constitutionally protected rights that the business owner learned of these beliefs. It is legal to have an abortion (under certain circumstances) and is a constitutionally protected right. If a business owner thinks that abortion is morally wrong, shouldn't that person be able to fire someone who holds the alternative belief? Even if that knowledge came about because the employer learned of the employee's belief because that employee had an abortion?



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jefferton

originally posted by: Butterfinger
Firing someone because of morals is akin to firing gayfolk, or single mothers.


That was a pretty scumbag comment. You equate nazi's with single mothers(not always a choice), and gays(not a choice).

Pretty telling on *your* morals.


Baloney, dont equate making parallel examples as a moral guidepost of someone who used it.

Mothers that are single by choice do exist, maybe I should have prefaced my analogy with it.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 05:31 PM
link   
I don't know what rights employers have in the states but on principle I don't think somebody should be fired for standing up for their political views outside of work even if they are abhorrent.

Rights are rights, we shouldn't just recognise them for people we agree with.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Isn't it workplace discrimination to fire someone based on their religious, racial , cultural, or political beliefs, especially if said beliefs are not directly being promoted in the workplace, I think there is a Federal law against this. I think this Employer may be looking at a large legal struggle if the Employee decides to pursue charges of racial discrimination.
edit on 14-8-2017 by chopperswolf because: because.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: kurthall

Being fired at a hot dog joint I doubt will affect his career. It’s not something one puts on a resume.

Of course he should and could be fired since it could seriously affect a business having a rabid racist on your staff. But like I said its probably not a job you need a college degree



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 08:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: chopperswolf
Isn't it workplace discrimination to fire someone based on their religious, racial , cultural, or political beliefs, especially if said beliefs are not directly being promoted in the workplace, I think there is a Federal law against this. I think this Employer may be looking at a large legal struggle if the Employee decides to pursue charges of racial discrimination.


No, it violates federal law to discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability. Political belief is not a protected class. Sexual orientation is not a federally protected class, although there are some regs that give limited protection relating to the military and employees of federal contractors. If a constitutionally or statutorily protected classification is not involved, and of the state is an ?employment at will" state, you ca be fired for any reason or for no reason at all.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 10:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Echo007
Let me guess most of you agree with schools suspending kids for things they say or do off school grounds, including comments they make on facebook etc. Did that person express his views while working or on the business property, no he didn't. Did he say the business he works for has the same views as he does, no he didn't.

Where's the which hunt for all the Black Lives Matters protesters who burned down private property. Where are all the SJW trying to find out if they have a job or not to shame them.


ZZZZZZ

Good ole right wing false equivalencies. But what about this! What about that? Ridiculous. The world doesn't work like that.

You go to a rally of any sort and work for my business, I have every right to fire you if I feel you make my business look bad. Period. Anyone who goes to a rally like this is putting themselves out there in public, where photos are being taken, media coverage etc. That means you leave yourself open to whomever disagrees with you to expose you, whether its a "White Nationalist", "Nazi", "NAMBLA", "BLM", or whatever other stance you're taking. You're perfectly allowed to do so in that you can't be prosecuted for believing in an extreme philosophy or taking to the streets to voice that, but you're not protected by the First Amendment when you are essentially under contract when you take a job. You make the business look bad, that's legal grounds for dismissal. It's your own fault putting yourself out there supporting toxic philosophies.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 10:43 PM
link   
The only scary thought is he was already one of those "my race is being persecuted" groups and he just lost his job over his right to protest. I hope he doesn't become more radicalized but I can see how he could.

There is a double standard here because I don't recall any Antifa members losing their jobs. I don't recall any BLM members being outed and losing theirs. We just added another welfare recipient that we have to pay for now.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 10:44 PM
link   
Fired is correct, it shouldn't be the owners prerogative to employee a racist. He's welcome to apply to other jobs, but other employees also have the right not to be associated with someone part of a group that is about to be labeled terrorists by the government.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 10:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Echo007
Let me guess most of you agree with schools suspending kids for things they say or do off school grounds, including comments they make on facebook etc. Did that person express his views while working or on the business property, no he didn't. Did he say the business he works for has the same views as he does, no he didn't.

Where's the which hunt for all the Black Lives Matters protesters who burned down private property. Where are all the SJW trying to find out if they have a job or not to shame them.



I'll be that guy. BLM members don't have jobs .
edit on 14-8-2017 by Anathros because: Tongue in Cheek Post.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 10:47 PM
link   
It should be left up to the employer who they want representing them, if they don't want a white supremacist as an employee, that should be their choice. Of course I also believe if an employer doesn't want to a hire an African American, or a homosexual, that should be their choice as well. Government only allows freedom and the free market to go one way in this day and age though.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 08:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: MagnaCarta2015
I don't know what rights employers have in the states but on principle I don't think somebody should be fired for standing up for their political views outside of work even if they are abhorrent.

Rights are rights, we shouldn't just recognise them for people we agree with.


You said it better than I



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: kurthall
Slippery slope here. If the individual was neither on the job nor identified with his employer in any way, it's none of the boss's business. Especially since the person was (presumably) not breaking any laws at the time.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:21 AM
link   
So this hot dog cooker flew from Berkley to Virginia to show his support for the white race and it got him fired?



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: kurthall

He resigned. But, had he been fired, he probably would have been able to file a wrongful termination lawsuit (Tameny Claim), in California. If he was strongly urged to resign or face retaliation on the job, he may still have a claim.


WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY

California is an “at will” employment state. Although an at will employee may generally be demoted or terminated for no reason, or even an arbitrary or irrational reason, there is no right to punish an employee for an unlawful reason or a purpose that contravenes fundamental public policy. [Silo v. CHW Med Found. (2002) 27 Ca1.4th 1097, 1104.] According to the court which rendered the decision in Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co., an employer’s traditional authority to terminate an employee at will may be limited by statute or by considerations of public policy. [Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (1980) 27 Ca1.3d 167, 172.] Therefore, this cause of action has also been widely referred to as a “Tameny claim.”

To establish a claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, each of the following must be provided:

An employer-employee relationship existed;
The employer terminated the employee (or took other adverse employment actions);
The termination was a violation of public policy;
The termination was a legal cause of the employee’s injury; and
The employee suffered damages as a result of having been terminated.
[Holmes v. General Dynamics Corp. (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 1418, 1426.]


AND:


A Causal Link Must Exist Between the Termination and the Employee’s Legally Protected Activity.

There must be a causal link between the employee’s protected activity and the termination. A causal link may be established by the employer’s knowledge that the employee engaged in protected activities, and the proximity in time between the protected action and the allegedly retaliatory employment decision. [Jordan v. Clark (9th Cir. 1988) 847 F.2d 1368, 1376; Morgan v. Regents of Univ. of Calif. (2000) 88 Cal.App.4th 52, 69.] When adverse employment decisions are taken within a reasonable period of time after complaints of discrimination have been made, retaliatory intent may be inferred. [Passantino v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Products, Inc. (99th Cir. 2000) 212 F.3d 493, 506; Mulhall v. Ashcroft (6th Cir. 2002) 287 F.3d 543, 551.] This proximity in time will establish “legal causation” between the termination, and the protected activity.

Legally protected activities includes, but are not limited to, complaining against, or reporting that the employer violated policy that benefits the public at large, such as:

Employment discrimination;
Violation of family or medical leave laws;
Unsafe workplace;
Refusing to sign covenants not to compete;
Terminating an employee for breaching a noncompete agreement with a former employer;
Refusing to release employer from liability for intentional acts;
Prompt payment of earned wages;
Whistleblowing regarding the misappropriation of public funds;
Disclosing improper practices affecting the public at large;
Testifying at a hearing;
Advocating appropriate medical care for a patient;
Discussing wages with co-workers;
Political activity;
Right to receive earned wages;
Right to overtime pay;
Right to workplace free of violence or credible threats of violence;
Right to apply for unemployment benefits;
Right to take family leave; or
Terminations for refusing to engage in unlawful conduct.

Link

The right to peaceful assembly is beyond mere fundamental public policy. It is a Constitutionally protected right.

Unless there is evidence he was not peacefully assembling, then his employer has no right to fire him for participating in a political protest.

I don't support supremacist groups, but I do support their right to peacefully assemble.

**

ETA: And in response to Top Dog's statement that they support freedom of association for their other employees...there is no protected right to work at Top Dog. If the other employees don't want to work with Cole White, they are free to quit and find other jobs.
edit on 8/15/2017 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join