One place I worked at had an actual legal issue with this, as they hired a white supremecist who wouldn't listen to his black, female boss, and threatened to sue if he was terminated for discrimination
2006-12-04 06:07:58 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
poor choice of words--it should read "sue for discrimination if he was terminated"
2006-12-04 06:09:03 · update #1
for those of you wondering how this was resolved, he had an attendance problem as well--as soon as he'd missed three days he was terminated, documented and uncontestable
2006-12-04 06:16:30 · update #2
If he was hired to do a job and did not do it, regardless of the reason, he should be terminated. (Listening to his boss IS part of the job). What really happened with this? I'm curious...
2006-12-04 06:12:25 · answer #1 · answered by CrankyYankee 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, i doubt there is any legal precedent that would help him win that case...
BUt then again, people have the right to be idiots.
On the other (third) hand, in a capitalist society, an employer should be allowed to fire anyone for not getting their job done.
You're in a pickle, there. If the man is getting his work done, then firing him WOULD be discrimination, and he probably could sue. If not, then there really should be no case (not that there wouldn't be).
2006-12-04 14:12:11 · answer #2 · answered by spewing_originality 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It IS, technically, although he wouldn't have a case if he tried to sue. Because they wouldn't be firing him due to discrimination, but rather due to the fact that he wouldn't listen to his boss. If he was a white supremecist whose personal beliefs--however screwed up they are--did NOT, in fact, interfere with his job, and they fired him, THEN he'd have a case. But if he's not listening to his boss, then he's out the door for insubordination anyway.
2006-12-04 14:12:27 · answer #3 · answered by Sarah 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well it is his perogative to be bigoted. But it is illegal for him to discriminate. So while he may have his feeling he cannot legally act on them in the workplace, as in not listening to his supervisor if they are black or female, and I doubt if his lawsuite would get him very far. He (and his lawyer) is just trying to twist things around.
2006-12-04 14:13:28 · answer #4 · answered by Sage Bluestorm 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He should be fired if he didn't want to listen to his boss. Boss shouldn't matter about sex, race, or color. Boss means superior, supervisor, one who delegates work assignments in the work place.
Simply put, this man doesn't have a legal issue. He is denying his duties.
2006-12-04 14:15:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, because a bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own. If you are intolerant of a bigot you can be labeled as a bigot as well.
2006-12-04 14:11:40 · answer #6 · answered by Casey D 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Great question. I guess it can be viewed as such...
Reminds me of that South Park episode where Stan got dumped by Wendy, so he went Goth.... He asked the "non-conformist" kids "So, what do I have to do to join you?" Response: "Just dress like us and listen to our music."
Funny....wanna be a non-conformist? Just conform!
2006-12-04 14:11:44 · answer #7 · answered by YDoncha_Blowme 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
By definition yes
2006-12-04 14:10:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If yorue bigoted agianst a bigot you get labeled a bigot
2006-12-04 14:15:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'm prejudiced against bigots who are prejudiced against bigots.
2006-12-04 14:11:09 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋