Massachusetts Man Says He Was Fired for Telling Colleague Her Gay Marriage Is Wrong

Originally posted by ecoparity
reply to post by HotSauce

 

That's why you try to treat "them" just like anyone else. Smile, say great and ask how long they've been together.

You don't have to like it but if your claim they are looking to shock people is true you've handled it correctly and if they crave "acceptance" you've been a decent person and given it to them.

You don't have to like Gay people or even feel comfortable around them but you do have to be tolerant. Do you go around making sure you tell everyone exactly how you feel or think about them?

I know I sure don't. Then again I can't stand people in general so I've learned to just keep my mouth shut. That's what forums are for, to say all those things you can't say in real life.

I can tolerate it but it doesn't mean I have to give my acceptance. Sometimes when you disagree with something the best you can do is to keep your mouth shut.

I am not going to say something positive about something I think is wrong. Don't get me wrong. People can be gay as the day is long in my book, but I don't think we should make marriage redifinable just for the sake of every minority group.

So if someone comes up to me talking about their gay marriage the best they can expect from me is to hold my tounge and tolerate it.

One less bible thumping lunatic in the workplace! I'm sure the Lord will provide for him so why is he even worried, it was obviously God's will for him to be fired, can't have it both ways.

reply to post by OldDragger


They were at the airport so I would assume that was outside of business. Also, what if her constant talk of her gay marriage made him less productive, would you fire her?

reply to post by OldDragger


Hmm, interesting take.

Are you an employer by chance?

I am, and to tell you the truth I have figured out a much more effective way of dealing with this without terminating either party.

I had this situation arrise a few years ago with a couple of my employees. One was a Roman Catholic, the other an Islamist. You can see where the problem was as they worked very closely together.

Arguments arose, it came to my desk. I called both of them into a conference room put on a cup of coffee and told them to work it out. So they argued back and forth for a few hours.

After both got a bit fed up with attempting to debunk one another, I taped my pen on the table and when they both looked up at me I asked a simple question:

"Are we ready to agree to disagree for the sake of both your happiness and future employment within this company?"

Never had a problem since.

~Keeper

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Wow you are brilliant. Nice move. That seems like a real way to handle disagreements. Just let them have it out for a bit and then tell them to get over it or both of the gets fired. Seems fair to me.

Originally posted by OldDragger

It's a simple as respecting others beliefs.

He informed the woman of his beliefs after she kept talking about marrying her partner 4 times. He told her so that maybe she would respect his beliefs.

Instead it got him fired.

If you agree with that then I sure am glad I don't work for you and you should be too.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


That is the approach I would take, but I do reserve the right to fire people. That is, if they are worth keeping.
I've had people absolutly heap piles of personal stuff in their work areas, I've had people insist it's their "right' to listen to music all day, dress anyway they wanted, be late constantly, surf the web, you name it.
All in the name of "respecting' them. They need to respect the person who signs their paycheck. My employees do not determine the scope of my business.


[edit on 7-11-2009 by OldDragger]

reply to post by ecoparity


You said:

The minute you feel like you can speak a certain way to a group of people just because of who or what they are you might just be acting like a bigot.

I say:

The minute you feel like you cannot speak a certain way to a group of people just because of who or what they are you might just be acting like a slave. Your right to free speech is nulled by people sensibilities.

Of course there are extremes, however this particular case seems to be that he was asked his opinion, howver many times, and gave it. When she did not like it, his employer punished him.

reply to post by OldDragger


I dunno it seems we have very different styles of management. I strive on the "personal" in my work place.

I provide free day care, free cafeteria lunches and slew of other things my employees get to take advantage of. I don't hire people who are looking for "work". I hire people who are looking for a career.

I treat my employees like I do family. And yes I reserve the right to fire people and have done so on many occasions, but only after exhausting every possible option.

I am what you call a One Minute Manager I guess. Great book from the 80's I believe.

In any case, every environment is different. I own 3 call centers and work primarily out of one of them and I find when visiting the other two I have to consistently remind folks that this is a workplace but there is room for fun as well whenever possible.

~Keeper

Asked why he felt the need to comment on the woman's personal life, Vidala, who has since left the Boston area, said he felt compelled to do so.

"I see, like all real Christians, homosexuals as people who, like me, are sinners and need to be told the truth in a loving way," he said. "In this situation, I took issue with the behavior. I think it's lunacy to call that type of behavior marriage in any kind of form. I had to express that I'm intolerant of that behavior. It's a love-the-sinner, hate-the-sin kind of deal."

Read the above! He was compelled to do so?
This guy is a bad manager and, I would guess feels compelled often. He could have said his opinion was irrelevant, that since they had a work relationship it was not appropriate. Instead he felt compelled?
I also might suggest that the source story is biased. in my experience FOX likes to tell only what fits their agenda.
Two of my employees are on a mission to "disprove" evolution. they asked my opinion, I told them my opinion is don't do it on company time. That ended that.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Most of our employees have been with us over twenty years. we have paid regular salary for months to sick employees so they wouldn't need disability. we have loaned ( at no interest) thousands for family emergencies, even so family members could go to school.
We mentor ghetto kids, provide free services to people. i think we treat them very well. My problems have been with people 30 and under. Most have been spoiled brats!

reply to post by OldDragger


Well good for you friend, and yes I can certainly relate to the 20's crowd. All idea and no work ethic.

Well mostly no work ethic.

It's nice to see another decent employer these days they are few and far between.

~Keeper

reply to post by HotSauce


Yep. I sure would. it doesn't matter if I agree with a given opinion, it's a matter of degree and respecting workplace rules. I of course would give warnings, after that it's an employees decision to comply or not.

He should have done what I have done many times when bosses and managers cannot be trusted. Get a witness and then ask, "Are you asking for my opinion, even if it's not what you wish to hear.." Then if she said yes, I would just say I believe it is a sinful act and be done with it. Otherwise, it's her word against his and the manager always gets the nod and the poor worker gets screwed out of a job for his opinion, that was solicited in the first place.

My guess is that she was fishing for a compliment along the lines of congratulations on your upcoming marriage or something of the sort. But the article also changes tense so it is hard to tell if she was getting married or had already married.

Once while being introduced to everyone at a new job, a fairly attractive and vivacious woman did not wait to be introduce and instead introduced herself by saying "And I am Leslie and I am getting married next weekend." The way she said it, I was left wondering if I had inadvertently asked her out.

Sure the guy in the article was a bit insensitive in his words and actions. However she was equally insensitive to him as well. Ultimately, discussions of sexual orientation will, however small, give a sexual impression or mental image. She was guilty of sexual harassment regardless of her intent.

Honestly, they both should be fired (or at least reprimanded) because if they can not keep offensive topics of conversation from themselves, management should have doubts of them being able to keep such topics from customers. Offending customers is bad business practice.

Time of employment is also in consideration as well, he was a new hire and she had probably been employed for some time longer.

All that said, I have worked with an open lesbian before and the conversations and exchanges we had would and should have had both of us fired. No other guy could have said half the things I did and got away with it and she even said as much. The difference being, we developed a fast friendship and nothing said was serious or meant to hurt.

Having been a manager, I would say that both are in the wrong.
The only reason for the manager to maybe mention it once, is if it is to schedule time off (I am getting married to my partner) or if she was a customer and looking to purchase a gift, and he as the sale associate there, did not listen to her or pay attention to what she was saying. But in casual conversation, it is not something that you bring up. Kind of like the 3 things you never mention in polite conversation (Politics, Religion and Sex) If it was casual conversation, he could have stated, I am not comfortable with this conversation, and then walked off, thus ending it and if she continued, then she would have been in violation of the hostile work environment policies.
I also think that more was stated there, then what is mentioned in the article.

reply to post by ecoparity


This is really the correct answer in my opinion.

The woman was really out of line by bringing up her "marriage" several times the way she did and she knew that she was probably offending the guy, since he wasn't heaping praise on her about her new arrangement.

The correct thing for him to have done would have been to simply say something pleasant ("Well, isn't that special.") and let it go. If he was really offended by her behavior, he could have filed a complaint about her with human resources.

Ultimately, traditionalists are being set upon by those who seek the remake the world and God help you if you say the wrong thing.

He's a young man. He's learned a good lesson and will probably do well in a different position with a company that treats their employees better.


[edit on 2009/11/7 by GradyPhilpott]

reply to post by Ahabstar


Sure the guy in the article was a bit insensitive in his words and actions. However she was equally insensitive


Ahhh! But here is the trouble. They were NOT EQUAL! one is a manager, one an employee. He was potentialy in a position to discriminate, she was not. Legally, and practically that's an important distinction.

reply to post by OldDragger

Peter Vidala, 24, told FoxNews.com he was terminated in August from his position as second deputy manager at a Brookstone store at Boston's Logan Airport after a conversation he had with a manager from another Brookstone store who was visiting the location.

Both were managers of sorts. My guess that they are actually both employees in "manager in training" work environment were everyone is a manage or "associate" of some sort. Just a title and not an actual position as I am sure they both run the vacuum from time to time at closing.

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by Ahabstar

 

Sure the guy in the article was a bit insensitive in his words and actions. However she was equally insensitive


Ahhh! But here is the trouble. They were NOT EQUAL! one is a manager, one an employee. He was potentialy in a position to discriminate, she was not. Legally, and practically that's an important distinction.

That doesn't make any sense IMHO... She was in the position of authority and by asking for opinions from underlings she was violating the sexual discrimination law, IMO... and possible harassment laws as well.