Gay worker claims Facebook 'like' got him fired

EagleAye said:

In the article, I only see the part where "when his boss found out he was gay..." So exactly "how" did the boss find this out? Was it through facebook? This isn't specifically stated. If he shared his login name with his boss, that's already a bad move. His fault. If the boss snooped on his facebook without permission, that's a definite privacy violation. At work, people should protect themselves by keeping their facebook info private. Or better yet, not use work time to fiddle around in facebook where someone might see.

But man, 37 days missed at work? I'm surprised he kept his job as long as he did! The employer will lean on this detail heavily, and I think that alone might derail this guy's case.

Click to expand...

1 whole month, OMG the horror. God forbid someone don't work for one whole month.

Connery said:

Nope I said sexual views.

Click to expand...

Yes, but you've not explained exactly what you mean by "sexual views" or how they're relevant to the discussion.

StillBallin75 said:

I agree. If he has a case, by all means he should release the e-mails.

Click to expand...

He shouldn't be releasing anything, let alone private e-mails. He should (and presumably has/will) present all of his evidence to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, who will also take evidence from the employer and any other relevant parties. They should then make a balanced assessment of all the evidence in the light of an understanding of all the relevant laws and regulations to come to a conclusion.

Incidentally, it's possible that, assuming such e-mails exist, they were sent on the work system and so the ex-employee doesn't have direct access to them any more.

HonestJoe said:

Yes, but you've not explained exactly what you mean by "sexual views" or how they're relevant to the discussion.

Click to expand...

Anything having to do with the word “sex” peeks co-worker's interest and then takes on a life of it’s own within a professional setting. People’s perception of what a person may disclose on the internet can, and in this case, did turn into a “cause célèbre” and created what appears to a situation so invasive and oppressive that a “hostile environment“ has been established. Whether or not the internet is involved is of no consequence. My experience leads to me believe the best policy is that common sense should prevail and people should keep their personal business; personal. Where there is no expectation of privacy do not expect things to be private.

Office politics and gossip will take a great employee who has expressed a view and create the image that the individual is somehow not suited for the employer or does not share the employer’s mission or some other agenda together with actions which have devastating effects on all concerned.

I do not think anyone is this situation made wise choices, nor do I care what the former employee’s position is. His “boss” who attempted to “educate” him was negligently supervised, created a “hostile environment” which compelled the former employee to take a number of days off and thereafter he was fired. That is what I am interested in. The possible legal ramification within the employer/employee relationship.

Connery said:

Anything having to do with the word “sex” peeks co-worker's interest and then takes on a life of it’s own within a professional setting.

Click to expand...

Nothing in this case has anything to do with sex though. Everyone involved could be entirely celibate and the key facts would be unchanged.

Connery said:

My experience leads to me believe the best policy is that common sense should prevail and people should keep their personal business; personal. Where there is no expectation of privacy do not expect things to be private.

Click to expand...

I don't believe the employee in this case did expect anything to be private. He clearly wasn't flaunting his sexuality since the manager needed to "find out" in some unspecified way. If anything, that demonstrates that keeping such things secret from people who spend so much time with is impractical at best (I still feel the liking "Two Dads" on Facebook is a distraction, and is irrelevant to the aledged abuse anyway).

The logical extension of your position would be that nobody in the workplace would refer to husband/wife, girlfriend/boyfriend or children/grandchildren (which could make maternity leave a little difficult to arrange). Of course, the suspicion is that the only thing you really think should be kept secret is being gay, a dirty secret to be embarrassed and ashamed about. I do hope that's not the case.

HonestJoe said:

He shouldn't be releasing anything, let alone private e-mails. He should (and presumably has/will) present all of his evidence to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, who will also take evidence from the employer and any other relevant parties. They should then make a balanced assessment of all the evidence in the light of an understanding of all the relevant laws and regulations to come to a conclusion.

Incidentally, it's possible that, assuming such e-mails exist, they were sent on the work system and so the ex-employee doesn't have direct access to them any more.

Click to expand...

If he, like he did, is making this claim to the public, and telling the public about these emails, then he should release these emails or get the hell off out of the news. It is not right to publically attack his employer and claim to have proof and not produce.

As much as these emails were apparently affecting him, to the point of needing therapy like he claims, then he would have printed or saved them. Anyone with any shred of intelligence would have saved those. Furthermore, almost every major business keeps emails archived on thier servers in case the information is needed. If those emails ever existed, they still do.

HonestJoe said:

Nothing in this case has anything to do with sex though. Everyone involved could be entirely celibate and the key facts would be unchanged.

I don't believe the employee in this case did expect anything to be private. He clearly wasn't flaunting his sexuality since the manager needed to "find out" in some unspecified way. If anything, that demonstrates that keeping such things secret from people who spend so much time with is impractical at best (I still feel the liking "Two Dads" on Facebook is a distraction, and is irrelevant to the aledged abuse anyway).

The logical extension of your position would be that nobody in the workplace would refer to husband/wife, girlfriend/boyfriend or children/grandchildren (which could make maternity leave a little difficult to arrange). Of course, the suspicion is that the only thing you really think should be kept secret is being gay, a dirty secret to be embarrassed and ashamed about. I do hope that's not the case.

Click to expand...

I offered my opinion. Take it or leave it....I am talking about situations that are similar to the OP that I have dealt with many times...

Facebook has ruined so many lives. LOL

Why people insist on being a part of that drivel is beyond me.

muciti said:

If he, like he did, is making this claim to the public, and telling the public about these emails, then he should release these emails or get the hell off out of the news. It is not right to publically attack his employer and claim to have proof and not produce.

Click to expand...

A fair point, though the details have come from the formally filed complaint which were apparently "obtained" by a media organisation. I agree that he shouldn't speak to the media at all though, certainly before the case has concluded.

Of course, if your media is anything like ours, if he refused an interview, they'd just make something worse up instead.

muciti said:

If he, like he did, is making this claim to the public, and telling the public about these emails, then he should release these emails or get the hell off out of the news. It is not right to publically attack his employer and claim to have proof and not produce.

As much as these emails were apparently affecting him, to the point of needing therapy like he claims, then he would have printed or saved them. Anyone with any shred of intelligence would have saved those. Furthermore, almost every major business keeps emails archived on thier servers in case the information is needed. If those emails ever existed, they still do.

Click to expand...

There's only two reasons I can really think of that he doesn't release the email:

#1: They don't exist (Or the context is not easily proven)
#2: He might be hoping for a settlement with the company for a large dollar amount.

TheNextEra said:

There's only two reasons I can really think of that he doesn't release the email:

#1: They don't exist (Or the context is not easily proven)
#2: He might be hoping for a settlement with the company for a large dollar amount.

Click to expand...

#3: He doesn't have access to them.
#4: His lawyers have advised not giving away any details of the direction they'll be taking in the case.
#5: He has them but can't legally publish them without the senders permission (who isn't likely to give it).
#6: The laws or rules of the Commission don't allow evidence to be published.

All perfectly possible.