Not sure why you’d assume that, I was very clear in the post you’d replied to earlier
I was asking for a scenario because I’m looking for one in which this is actually a problem.
People can get actually arrested for all kinds of things that can lead to firing (public nudity, smoking weed, etc.).
I defined a very, very clear line and I’m asking you to define a situation in which somebody could cross that line and not
reasonably explain to their employer that it was a bad day and it won’t happen again, or
be an asshole who can’t behave like an adult who doesn’t deserve the same respect as somebody who can spend their day not pissing in other people’s cheerios.
So basically, I think this statement
Is a slippery slope that’s ignoring the content of the post you’re replying to (or you haven’t seen the video, in which he clearly crosses several lines and harasses peaceful people)
And this statement
… ignores the situation itself. This is in NO WAY comparable to somebody supporting marriage equality and I have no idea why you’re conflating the two. Again, I bolded the criteria, it obviously doesn’t meet it.
Why do right-wingers always assume that protesters don’t have jobs? If you have a GOOD job, you can take some time off.
Unless THEY are the ones protesting, of course. They can run around all day yelling with teabags on their heads, and no one asks why THEY aren’t at work
I’m strongly in the “outside of work it’s none of the company’s fucking business” camp, but given the Hobby Lobby SCOTUS decision the current power structure clearly disagrees with me.
as for your concluding thought, if we can’t protect the rights of the assholes among us we won’t be able to protect our own rights either.
Where did it turn into a right to be employed at the company he worked for?
His rights are protected, he is free to say any distasteful shit he wants. He is not free to directly harass, verbally assault and intimidate an individual or group of individuals.
I think all these are good questions, which I don’t know if I have the right answers too. I do think that the employer was likely thinking of the bottom line in firing this tool, as if that behavior manifested in the workplace, it can lead to lawsuits, etc.
I don’t agree that all activities we do should be scrutinized outside the workplace, but this is a case of a viral video… so… ?
I don’t suggest these are easy questions, just that I think this guy went beyond practicing his free speech into the realm of borderline harassment.
I don’t mind lobbing shells on behalf of people unfortunate enought to find themselves in a front-line trench. But I won’t waste ammo on idiots of any political view who decide to wander out into No Man’s Land and dance around naked screaming “Lookame!”
Rule of law has already been eroded in this regard thanks to “right to work”/at-will employment and 30 years of Reaganism and the general blurring of the lines between work and home. All that’s left is to try to preserve what’s left of private personal spaces, and that will increasingly be the privilege of the wealthy and/or the technically adept.
Everyone else may end up feeling the maddening, low-level stress you describe, but I’m not going to have sympathy for those who respond by being proud exhibitionists of their own generally despised beliefs.
I will have even less sympathy for the subset of that group who’ve contributed to the erosion by opposing unions, by supporting every new surveillance measure in the name of “law-n-order”, and generally voting against their own interests at every turn.
These need the suppressive fire the most. By demonstrating your commitment, you’re minimizing the chances the enemy will decide to go storming your side’s trenches.
I don’t particularly care about this guy. So I support him in the fight in order to keep the ones I care about more out of the heat.
It’s an “at-will” state and legal, yes, but any corporate employment attorney will tell you that you should have documented evidence of the employee’s poor work.
Employer can still be sued for unfair termination, and then it’s left to a panel of 12 jurors to determine whether or not the employees should receive damages. I personally know of three lawsuits involving at-will employees at a newspaper and the newspaper lost two, won one.
hello : )
first of all i am new… this is my first post… i am sure it is obvious…
but i dont have time just yet to figure all that out cuz i just want to say something about this topic…
yes i abhor ignorance and racism…
yes i do not like confrontation and antagonism…
yes this situation must have been fraught with emotion…
but…
but but but…
it was soo evident to me that this guy was absolutely yearning for information… he so wanted to dialogue… so wanted to know the reasons why so many decent looking nice folks were so against fracking…
but no one engaged him… no one discussed it with him…
no one answered his question when he asked what it was about…
watch again… towards the end he does ask…
what are these poor guys supposed to do? where do they get their info?
they have not had a decent education in school or in the home…
doubtless their first 5 years of life were devoid of meaningful imput…
the people he approached at this demo had such an amazing opportunity to talk about the issue… the very real reasons why fracking is so wrong…
but they didnt… their emotions got in the way and they couldnt… they actually fought him in their passive way… it made me kinda mad…
really… to go out and demonstrate one needs to prepare for The Encounter… the Verbal Encounter… with people desperate to understand but ill equipped to get the info on their own…
have a heart… treat these folks with compassion… no matter how hateful you perceive them to be…
they are victims too
I know you’re new, but surely you know that you should comment on the same video (and thus the same guy) that everyone else is commenting on. The guy I saw had ZERO interest in what the protesters had to say about fracking, or about anything else.
I could easily imagine this going the other way, in a “I’m not locked up with you, you are locked up with me” kinda way. They could probably make him want to quit no problem.
I also doubt that someone who behaves this obnoxiously about it is keeping it hidden. They would probably know already what he’s like.
I share the concerns of many here wrt to ‘at will’ employment, however, I think his employer would be able to discipline him even if they were subject to much more strict rules. This guy was using ‘fighting words’ and acting in a way designed to inflame and incite others. To use an example from a US free speech case, it’s the difference between shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre or getting up during intermission and giving a short speech about how the fire exits are too few and not marked well enough. He’s not just someone spouting off vile racism, he’s someone set out to hurt others through verbal harassment. If I were his boss, I would also fire him.
Aren’t there countless states where you can be fired for your sexual orientation, in other words, for being gay? Surely then it’s fair that you can be fired for being such an outrageous bigot that you’re likely to cost your employer a whole lot of money. They’re a business, and they have little to gain by standing up for his First Amendment rights.
