Title kind of sums it up.
Title kind of sums it up.
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.”
― Stephen R. Covey
Edit: The German has reminded me that various state and federal civil rights laws prohibit discrimination. I should say that I agree with these laws. Hard to enforce, but no one should be fired for being gay, pregnant, black, Muslim, etc.
Someone who fires a pregnant woman because she is pregnant should be prevented from doing so by the law.
That's an incredibly bad idea.
As an employer,I say no.
I consider employment to involve a certain social contract that works in both directions rather than just one.
"you're better off on Stormfront discussing how evil brown men are taking innocent white flowers." Infinite Chaos
As far as hiring I figure than an employer should be able to hire whoever they want to. I'm less inclined to make firing as simple because a simple clash of personalities can be used to really screw an employee.
Someone mentioned pregnancy and while I couldn't condone the firing of an employee just because they were pregnant there is still a job that needs to get done and if that employee can't do the job due to her condition then there needs to be a little leeway. If she needs a couple of weeks off to have the baby and get her feet back under her that's one thing but if I start getting a call 3 times a week that she can't make it in because of this, that or the other it screws things up.
Outside of instances where it can be clearly demonstrated that it's discrimination based on a protecetd class, no.
HOWEVER, like I said, it needs to be clear.
You can't fire someone for being christian. You should be able to fire them however if they say something religious that offends a customer and can potentially cause your business damage. Why? Because you're not firing them for being christian, you're firing them due to the potential damage they're doing to your business.
You can't fire someone for being Gay. You should be able to fire them however if they came to work in completley socially inappropriate clothing that causes a customer to complain and potentially doing your business harm. Why? Same as the above, yo'ure firing them not becuase they're gay but because of their ACTIONS.
Basically, look at the reason for firing and ask yourself "if the same thing happened, but they weren't [protected group] would it still be reasonable to fire someone".
This is why I didn't have an issue legally with A&E suspending the Duck Dynasty guy. It's why I don't have an issue with the guy dressing up as the straight jacketed Obama being fired. Or the editor for writing an anti-obama headline. Or the Applebees lady who posted a receipt online from a pastor who left a complaint. Or the woman fired from a catholic school for getting invitro fertilization. Or conversely, why I had no problem with Wegman's setting up a sign to ask people not to bring pork or alcohol down an aisle with a muslim teen cashier.
Now, granted...I think you need some solid and legitimate documentation if you're firing someone of those particularly protected groups to demonstrate that the firing is not BECAUSE they're gay, or black, or pregnant, etc. But as long as there is a solid and legitimate reasoning that would be sound if the person wasn't that protected group, then to me that shows the firing is NOT because of their protected status but rather becuase of their chosen ACTIONS that directly relate to business and/or their contract in some fashion.
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
Building block or stumbling block.... choose.