Mayor of Boston to Chick-Fil-A: Get Lost!!!!

Don't think I'll be eating there anymore. Firing that Muslim guy for not praying is a sick thing to do.
--Its like, depending on what time of the day it is, he may have already prayed up to three times!!

reply to post by resoe26


lol.....

Originally posted by kaylaluv
That business has never once discriminated against anyone, they hire people from all races religions and creeds, sexual orientation and so forth...

they have never once been charged with discrimination

Well, they have been sued for religious discrimination. You'll appreciate this, OpinionatedB -- it was by a Muslim who claimed he was fired because he refused to participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program.

Chick-fil-A, the corporate parent, has been sued at least 12 times since 1988 on charges of employment discrimination, according to records in U.S. District Courts. Aziz Latif, a former Chick-fil-A restaurant manager in Houston, sued the company in 2002 after Latif, a Muslim, says he was fired a day after he didn't participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program in 2000. The suit was settled on undisclosed terms

.

www.forbes.com...

12 times in 24 years with a 1,614 stores in 39 states eh? To be honest, that's pretty good for an organization of that size.I'm sure there are more lawsuits, even so, I would wager they have less lawsuits per unit then other fast food venues. There are always going to be lawsuits filed where's there's money to be had. Back in the day when I was a Restaurant Manager, we had the same person have a slip and fall at TWO different stores in a month. The parent company paid out money rather than go to court....crazy. Exactly how many times have they lost those lawsuits? Just because you get sued, doesn't mean it's for good reason. One settlement does not make for a reason to ban a restaurant. If you held to that standard, well lets just say you'd be eating at home a whole lot.

reply to post by pavil


Thats kind of what I was thinking, it certainly does not sound like any widespread discrimination, at least from the lawsuit standpoint.

and I did speak to a non christian who works for the company who said they were thrilled working for them.

Its kind of one of those things, people do sue for money, and it might certainly take a bit more looking into to determine whether or not they have a policy to discriminate within the company.

It doesnt sound like a whole lot though, not sure.

reply to post by OpinionatedB


If it were widespread..... the Feds would be all over them. I have yet to hear of that.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Thank you for posting the Mayor's duties and job description. The people supporting Chick-Fil-A will no doubt thank you as well. You point out that his job description requires him:

8. To participate in establishing policies and ensure that such policies are implemented and observed in an objective and consistent manner.

If he does anything officially to even slow down that companiy's entry into Boston, he is failing on this point.

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Chai_An

As a Mayor his personal beliefs are suppose to be on the backburner. There's nothing wrong with principles but you must keep your personal principles in check in a public office, in your own business you can be as principled as one can stand to be. Yes I do agree at election time this issue will be a thorn in his side or a winning point.

edit on 26-7-2012 by Chai_An because: (no reason given)

Perhaps this Mayor should use the example the CEO of Chic-fil-a set when he put his personal beliefs on the backburner

The CEO is representing the company not a public official, there's a difference. Yes I think the CEO should've kept his personal opinions to himself or within his social arena but him do otherwise is not wrong. What would be wrong is for him to deny Civil Rights to another person because of his opinions. The Mayor is representing the general public and he's suppose to keep their best in mind. Not liking what a CEO of a corporation think about "gay marriage" personally is fine. However to speak on behalf of the city that the corp can bypass their city he didn't have the well being of the citizens of his city in mind.

edit on 26-7-2012 by Chai_An because: (no reason given)

Id be abit worried if my elected Mayor had no political opinions or interest in politics. If anything,

A Mayor is suppose is have a political opinion, a CEO representing a company is not

Exactly Mayor's a suppose to have political opinions but they're not suppose to be governed by their personal feelings on the jobs. CEO can have whatever kind of opinions they want, political, social, or religious. Whether or not their opinions will be upheld by the corporation they're employed with is another story. I would be worried when I discover my Mayor is running the city based on his or her person views and not legalities.

This doesn't make any sense. They elected the Mayor because of his beliefs. All politicians campaign on their beliefs. What do you expect?

Why are you siding with a company that publicly supports discrimination? I would be concerned if my representative supported discrimination (of course where I live they probably do).

I've been trying to get you to point out the exact wrongdoing of this company and you keep replying with "they support discrimination". To discriminate implies action, did this company avoid hiring people based on their orientation? Did the company prevent married gay employees from utilizing the same benefits available to other married employees?

reply to post by kaylaluv


Any company that has only been sued 12 times in 24 years is doing pretty good

reply to post by CynicalWabbit



Ahh, i see that now discrimination has been proven, posters have resorted to playing down the fact that it has indeed happened.

Yeah, only 12 times in 24 years, CFA are absolute angels of course! /Casually moving the goal posts.

reply to post by SearchLightsInc

Id be abit worried if my elected Mayor had no political opinions or interest in politics. If anything, A Mayor is suppose is have a political opinion, a CEO representing a company is not

Hmmm so who gives politicians those big campaign checks then if not CEO's of corporations ??????? I guess they just fall from the sky

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Sorry BH, but within the laws that protect from discrimination - intimidation is illegal.

Of course the irony is not lost on me, that Chik-Fil-A (a private company with no history of discrimination against homosexuals despite the owners stated beliefs) may have a case of religious discrimination against an American city that prides itself on freedom (as the letter stated) and tolerance.

Originally posted by CynicalWabbit
reply to post by SearchLightsInc

 

Id be abit worried if my elected Mayor had no political opinions or interest in politics. If anything, A Mayor is suppose is have a political opinion, a CEO representing a company is not

Hmmm so who gives politicians those big campaign checks then if not CEO's of corporations ??????? I guess they just fall from the sky

And that is what im getting at - Corps with political opinions have done literally a world of damage, lets get smart and break this cycle eh?

reply to post by CynicalWabbit

Ahh, i see that now discrimination has been proven, posters have resorted to playing down the fact that it has indeed happened.

Yeah, only 12 times in 24 years, CFA are absolute angels of course! /Casually moving the goal posts.

Was the Muslim man gay? Was he fired for being gay? If not, it's really not even relevant to the discussion at hand. Nice try to declare victory.

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by CynicalWabbit
reply to post by SearchLightsInc

 

Id be abit worried if my elected Mayor had no political opinions or interest in politics. If anything, A Mayor is suppose is have a political opinion, a CEO representing a company is not

Hmmm so who gives politicians those big campaign checks then if not CEO's of corporations ??????? I guess they just fall from the sky

And that is what im getting at - Corps with political opinions have done literally a world of damage, lets get smart and break this cycle eh?

Corporations aren't the ones garnering the public's trust in this instance, it's the politicians and they should be held accountable.

reply to post by SearchLightsInc


Well, consider this... Say Boston has high morals against any business who regularly is sued for discrimination...

logical stance, perhaps being sued means you break the law... and no such business that have ever been sued for discrimination are allowed in Boston.

This sounds find to me, I would think.


So why are there two Hooters in Boston? www.yellowpages.com...:restaurants&gclid=CPOgmof_t7ECFSMCQAodQEA AEw#utm_campaign=SEMPS_GGL_Search_acct=Branding_Dynamicads__cat:restaurants&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=hooters%20in%20boston

They are sued very regularly for weight discrimination, looks discrimination, and sexual discrimination....
www.wordonemploymentlaw.com...



Or does Boston discriminate against only certain types of companies who have been in the past sued for discrimination?

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by CynicalWabbit
reply to post by SearchLightsInc

 

Id be abit worried if my elected Mayor had no political opinions or interest in politics. If anything, A Mayor is suppose is have a political opinion, a CEO representing a company is not

Hmmm so who gives politicians those big campaign checks then if not CEO's of corporations ??????? I guess they just fall from the sky

And that is what im getting at - Corps with political opinions have done literally a world of damage, lets get smart and break this cycle eh?

Corporations aren't the ones garnering the public's trust in this instance, it's the politicians and they should be held accountable.

I say leave the politics for the politicians and the money making for businessmen.

Just another example of how the current democratic administration bullies the American people. I say get lost and quit stepping on my constitutional rights.

What this mayor is stepping on is the very thing the gay community used to become equally heard.

Double Standard Democrats.

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by SearchLightsInc

 

Well, consider this... Say Boston has high morals against any business who regularly is sued for discrimination...

logical stance, perhaps being sued means you break the law... and no such business that have ever been sued for discrimination are allowed in Boston.

This sounds find to me, I would think.


So why are there two Hooters in Boston? www.yellowpages.com...:restaurants&gclid=CPOgmof_t7ECFSMCQAodQEA AEw#utm_campaign=SEMPS_GGL_Search_acct=Branding_Dynamicads__cat:restaurants&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=hooters%20in%20boston

They are sued very regularly for weight discrimination, looks discrimination, and sexual discrimination....
www.wordonemploymentlaw.com...



Or does Boston discriminate against only certain types of companies who have been in the past sued for discrimination?

Your grasping straws trying to cast a great light on a company that has dragged itself through the mud by stepping into the political arena. CFA should just learn their lesson and take the hint that they are not wanted in Boston - Or Chicago for that matter.

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by CynicalWabbit
reply to post by SearchLightsInc

 

Id be abit worried if my elected Mayor had no political opinions or interest in politics. If anything, A Mayor is suppose is have a political opinion, a CEO representing a company is not

Hmmm so who gives politicians those big campaign checks then if not CEO's of corporations ??????? I guess they just fall from the sky

And that is what im getting at - Corps with political opinions have done literally a world of damage, lets get smart and break this cycle eh?

Corporations aren't the ones garnering the public's trust in this instance, it's the politicians and they should be held accountable.

I say leave the politics for the politicians and the money making for businessmen.

I agree but unfortunately that's not what's really going on.

reply to post by SearchLightsInc


Actually, no I am not.

Is Boston against business who have been sued for discrimination or not?

They are or they are not.... they cannot pick and choose what kind of discrimination they endorse!