Woman fired for flipping off Trump's motorcade gets nearly $60k in crowdfunding support


#1

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2017/11/13/woman-fired-for-flipping-off-t.html


#2

Trump tweet describing how she shouldn’t profit from being rude and disrespectful in 3…2…1…


#3

Therein lies the rub…she posted/shared it on her own social media and making it her profile pic may have crossed a line that is within her company’s policies giving them the right to fire her.

It shouldn’t be the case; however, this is the state of most at-will employment structures within the U.S.


#4

I’m a little surprised that they allowed a cyclist alongside the motorcade at all. That seems like a security issue.


#5

Was it on her personal Facebook page?

Was that facebook page an official outlet of her employer? Was she the official spkesperson for her employer, or using her facebook page in a capacity related to the business?

If all those are answered with “No”, whats the problem?

I think the only people that crossed a line was her employer. Screwed up US employment law clearly hasn’t helped either.

I sincerely hope Akima LLC lose more business than her salary over this


#6

You are entitled to that opinion; however, the reality is that at most US based corporations there are specific guidelines about conduct of associates in the social media space. You may disagree with these policies, but employers have them regardless and since it is at-will employment you accept those policies to work for that company. Certainly some employers are more relaxed than others.

This also applies to employment outside of the private sector as well. I watch a school principal be maligned by a disgruntled parent to the Superintendent and the School committee…the cardinal sin in this case was of a photo of her and her husband at a wedding in which wine glasses and bottles were on the table around them. The wedding was of course not during school hours, she was not drunk or committing a lewd act. It was just a nice photo of the two of them attending a wedding over the weekend and the background showed that alcohol had been consumed.

The parent posited that “Are we to allow a drunk and alcoholic who parties every weekend to educate our children and run our schools?!”

Most reasonable people would consider that to be a ridiculous conclusion and dismiss it…but the world is not filled with reasonable people any longer. The principal was taken to task. Reprimanded. Given a formal notice that if any “evidence” like this of conduct and behavior that is possibly threatening to the children of the school surfaced again she would be terminated.

Now, you can rail against this all you like. You can point out all that is wrong with it. But that is reality. It isn’t fake news, it isn’t alternative facts. This is the world we are living in today.


#7

The company in question seems inconsistent in applying those policies.

Briskman complained of an unfair standard: Akima did not fire a male coworker who, she said, called someone a “fucking Libtard asshole” on his Facebook page. He’d only received a warning after he deleted the post.


#8

Yeah, I saw that previously. Unfortunately if she decides to go after them on that, it may be difficult to prove unfair treatment.

I agree on the inconsistency which is also nearly always the case when enforcing these kinds of arbitrary policies.


#9

You’re right of course. So I’ll take a minute out of my day to say “it sucks”


#10

I concur wholeheartedly it does.


#11

So, if someone were to say, display their buttocks in the general direction of the TOTUS, that’d be…what, $130K, maybe? Asking for a friend.


#12

I don’t recall the part of the First Amendment says your ass can’t get fired.


#13

Which is why a better libel law is needed in US. Whoever asked that question should be (able to be) sued for reputational damages if a public retraction were not forthcoming


#14

Yes, because what we truly need is MORE litigation.


#15

I wonder who took the photo…


#16

More of some types and much less of other. What recourse does the headteacher in question have when maligned thus? Free speech is all very well but maligning people like this is not acceptable and there should be [ETA the possibility of] sanctions.


#17

They don’t need a reason to fire you.

Edited to add:

Still, it’s a tool for the powerless. I don’t think we should forget that.


#18

You really do not understand the point of “at-will” employment, do you.

No. Employers do not truly need a reason. And before it begins, I will not have a back and forth argument regarding this. It is a fact of working in Corporate America…they can terminate you and your role anytime they wish with very little recourse. If you are lucky enough to be in a union (which is NOT at will employment) then it is a different matter.


#19

Maybe they were hoping it would be a security issue that they could (belatedly) respond to…


#20

I do know it. I’ve been on the bad side of it. Don’t tell me that I don’t, because that is pure pretension on your part.

I have never been in a union. I have been working since I was 14, however, even during the few years I was in college.