• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Atlanta Ousts Fire Chief Who Has Antigay Views

tacomancer said:
I think its a matter of interpretation. I see a manager distributing such literature to his subordinates as creating an implicit command to read the material. That is precisely where I see the issue.
Click to expand...

and if we found that he in any way compelled the reading/discussion of his book in the workplace, i will abdicate my position and adopt yours
 
OrphanSlug said:
How about an agreement signed by the employee. And BTW, there are state HR regulations as well just as there are industry specific HR regulations.
Click to expand...

Agent J didn't mention anything about an employment agreement. Here's what he said:

if i go to work tomorrow and give some co workers copies of a book I wrote and in the book it says that i hate a gender, race, religion etc or that i think women, blacks or christians are vile dirty people guess what . . . . im getting fired LMAO
 
justabubba said:
and if we found that he in any way compelled the reading/discussion of his book in the workplace, i will abdicate my position and adopt yours
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but I see that compulsion is implicit even if not otherwise stated. Generally when my boss gives me something to read, it means he wants me to read it.
 
AGENT J said:
first nobody was fired for soley "writing a book" or stating "views people disagree with" thats just dishonesty

and if so id say your company sucks and needs to have its HR department seriously revamp before your company is sued for violating laws and rights. Im also a manager and this is the second time I also do recruiting and have had to do some low level HR being a manager.

its not "views one disagrees with" or a "book" that was written nobody educated and objective would take that claim seriously

in fact a friend of mine was fired because he made some joke about me that got out (it was a top ten list) and it was taken to HR by a third party that didnt know they were friendly jokes. I defended him and he was fired anyway because HR said its to much of a liability, while "i" wasn't directly insulted, it was done at work, others could be offended and that creates a hostile work place for them.

so far based on the INFO WE HAVE, its a direct insults of coworkers and thier own religions, sexual orientations etc which can get someone easily fired for insulting coworkers, verbal assault, verbal discrimination, creating a hostile work environment, employee conduct etc

are you honestly telling me if i work for your company and come in to work and tell people all fags are dirty sinners and should burn in hell nothing happens? or better yet I hate all jews and all niggers are dirty nothing will happen because im just "expressing a view others disagree with?" :lamo

please stop, unless theres new info that the mayor lied your rewording of what actually happened is not true.
Click to expand...

This was your post:

if i go to work tomorrow and give some co workers copies of a book I wrote and in the book it says that i hate a gender, race, religion etc or that i think women, blacks or christians are vile dirty people guess what . . . . im getting fired LMAO

Please cite the HR rule that would enable your employer to fire you for giving your coworkers a copy of a book you wrote that disparages someone.
 
tacomancer said:
I used the phrase scary gay muslims, thats pretty obviously sarcasm.
Click to expand...

there is no such thing as obvious sarcasm on the internet
many of us have a form of autism when reading which inhibits our grasping of it
i experience it in real life too, when i fail to pick up on things that are obvious clues to others, maybe because i read everything literally
if i were a woman i would have been a blonde ... probably gonna get in trouble for that comment
was that sarcasm.jpg
 
tacomancer said:
Odd, I've seen multiple people get in trouble for violating things like nondisclosure agreements (first amendment), government secrets clearance (first amendment), posting signs for local things like bake sales in an employee breakroom (first amendment).

It seems the courts would disagree with you.
Click to expand...

that has nothing to do with religious rights or free speech.
prove he signed any of these things.

also I dug a bit further into this. It seems that he made the book for his bible study class. The chapter in question that people are up in arms about
is on sexual morality in the bible.

In the same chapter he also mentions sex outside of marriage.
the whole reason this came up is that someone went and got the book then took it to one of the openly gay council members.

the people that he passed it out to at the fire station were people that he had a person relationship with.

this city is in deep trouble if he chooses to pursue a law suit. religion is a protect class and the state just violated it.

so it seems once again the liberal media doesn't have half the facts that they think they do.
he was fired for being a Christian and expressing a religious belief outside of work. that is a violation of not only the 1st amendment but
it is also religious discrimination.
 
tacomancer said:
Fair enough, but I see that compulsion is implicit even if not otherwise stated. Generally when my boss gives me something to read, it means he wants me to read it.
Click to expand...

but if he only passed the book out as gifts to his friends at work, and not comprehensively, then i would gauge that as those texts being gifts rather than compulsory reading
 
tres borrachos said:
This was your post:

if i go to work tomorrow and give some co workers copies of a book I wrote and in the book it says that i hate a gender, race, religion etc or that i think women, blacks or christians are vile dirty people guess what . . . . im getting fired LMAO

Please cite the HR rule that would enable your employer to fire you for giving your coworkers a copy of a book you wrote that disparages someone.
Click to expand...

butting in, but here's the one from my employee handbook

[company] is committed to maintaining a workplace free of harassment and discrimination based on a person's protected status such as sex, race, age, color, religion, disability, national origin, military status, genetic information or sexual orientation. The conduct described below may not in every case be illegal, but is against our policy. The Company promptly investigates and takes appropriate action on reports of such conduct.
As a [company] associate, you should not harass any person, member, associate, or customer. All associates should be respectful of each other's rights, opinions and beliefs. If you are a victim of improper discrimination or harassment, or observe such conduct whether by another associate or manager, a vendor, or customer, please report it immediately. The Company will take appropriate steps if deliberately false accusations are made.



Other Harassment
The Company will not tolerate harassment based on a person's sex, race, age, religion, disability, ancestry, national origin, military status, genetic information or sexual orientation. Examples of such conduct include offensive epithets, slang terms, and jokes about these characteristics.
Click to expand...
 
tacomancer said:
I probably wouldn't either, but rules are rules. If the organization did not feel the rules were needed, then they wouldn't have been written (at least this is a reasonable assumption). if there is selective enforcement, then this person has a good EEOC case.
Click to expand...

I understand. It is a case by case basis. I don't know if the Atlanta FD has an employee agreement that specifically prohibits employees from bringing in literature that they themselves write, regardless of the content or topic.
 
justabubba said:
but if he only passed the book out as gifts to his friends at work, and not comprehensively, then i would gauge that as those texts being gifts rather than compulsory reading
Click to expand...

like I said, its a matter of interpretation, we are both making assumptions about the context.
 
justabubba said:
but if he only passed the book out as gifts to his friends at work, and not comprehensively, then i would gauge that as those texts being gifts rather than compulsory reading
Click to expand...

the only people that he handed it out to at work were people that he had personal relationships with. he didn't hand it out to everyone.
the city screwed up big time and I hope he sues them for a major lawsuit.

other Christian organizations around the city are already planning protests.
 
tacomancer said:
butting in, but here's the one from my employee handbook
Click to expand...

That blurb from your handbook is part of the federal rules.

I think what you're thinking is that the content of his book contained content that would be considered harassing content.
 
tacomancer said:
like I said, its a matter of interpretation, we are both making assumptions about the context.
Click to expand...

no it is a matter of you distorting what was done to push an agenda.
you can't fire someone for passing a book out to his friends.

more so a book that he made for a bible study group at his church on his own time away from work.
you can't fire someone over their religious beliefs we have laws that prevent that sort of thing.
 
WCH said:
I still haven't seen where he did it at work and who actually received them. I seriously doubt he would pass them out to people he thought would be offended.

BTW: the mayor office isn't talking about the details of the investigation.
Click to expand...

We know:

1. When he was suspended by the city council he was told that he may not handout the book at work or on public property. That appears to be an issue and is likely related to the action taken by the city.

2. We know employees, Cochran's subordinates complained about the distribution of the books. How many people complained? We don't know. But if he handed books out only to people he thought would not be offended he was obviously wrong. Employees DID in fact complain.

3. It is standard operating procedure not to discuss this type of thing publicly until an investigation is complete and all factors are taken into consideration. It happens everyday, all the time. It is standard operating procedure when someone is suspended and in many cases when someone is fired.

Believe it or not the policy of not speaking publicly while the investigation is ongoing is to protect the person being investigated as much as anything. It is a sound policy that works even though it is often difficult for all involved.
 
tres borrachos said:
That blurb from your handbook is part of the federal rules.

I think what you're thinking is that the content of his book contained content that would be considered harassing content.
Click to expand...

it equates gay sex with beastiality ... that is well within my company's policy at least and i've seen people fired here for less.

One lady got fired for calling another ugly for instance.
 
matchlight said:
That begs the question whether the rule his employer relied on in terminating him violated any right guaranteed by the Constitution. Do you think, for example, that state governments, and through them the governments of their municipalities, could prohibit employees from, say, engaging in silent prayer in their break room? Could a government employee who was a Black Muslim be fired for commenting loudly to someone at work that "I think we should get rid of every last damn Jew in this country"?
Click to expand...

For silent prayer probably not. For yelling "we should get rid of every last damn Jew" certainly. That creates a hostile work environment. The fact is, as lot of rights are not given to employees. There are a lot of limitations on what is appropriate at the workplace. The Constitution protects you from the government as a citizen. The guy in the article worked for the government but it was an employer/employee relationship.
 
tres borrachos said:
That blurb from your handbook is part of the federal rules.

I think what you're thinking is that the content of his book contained content that would be considered harassing content.
Click to expand...

plenty of books contain harassing content. you can't be fired over it. more so it if it part of it is religious in nature.
2nd this guy didn't hand it out to everyone but only to people that he had personal relationships with that probably wanted copy of it.
 
ludin said:
no it is a matter of you distorting what was done to push an agenda.
you can't fire someone for passing a book out to his friends.

more so a book that he made for a bible study group at his church on his own time away from work.
you can't fire someone over their religious beliefs we have laws that prevent that sort of thing.
Click to expand...

I have cited multiple things to you and all you do is whine and insist, do you have an actual argument?
 
iliveonramen said:
For silent prayer probably not. For yelling "we should get rid of every last damn Jew" certainly. That creates a hostile work environment. The fact is, as lot of rights are not given to employees. There are a lot of limitations on what is appropriate at the workplace. The Constitution protects you from the government as a citizen. The guy in the article worked for the government but it was an employer/employee relationship.
Click to expand...

which has nothing to do with what happened. the city screwed up big time and discriminated against his religious beliefs.
 
ludin said:
that has nothing to do with religious rights or free speech.
prove he signed any of these things.

also I dug a bit further into this. It seems that he made the book for his bible study class. The chapter in question that people are up in arms about
is on sexual morality in the bible.

In the same chapter he also mentions sex outside of marriage.
the whole reason this came up is that someone went and got the book then took it to one of the openly gay council members.

the people that he passed it out to at the fire station were people that he had a person relationship with.

this city is in deep trouble if he chooses to pursue a law suit. religion is a protect class and the state just violated it.

so it seems once again the liberal media doesn't have half the facts that they think they do.
he was fired for being a Christian and expressing a religious belief outside of work. that is a violation of not only the 1st amendment but
it is also religious discrimination.
Click to expand...

Prove that someone employed by a governmental organization signed a common hr policy? This is a very reasonable assumption and proof is not required. This is like asking to prove whether the sky is blue...

I am going to ignore this stupid attempt at an argument from you and and just assume you never had an actual job at this point because that was just asinine.
 
Zyphlin said:
You keep saying co-worker.

Wasn't this a BOSS, not a co-worker?
Click to expand...

So I could be fired if I wrote a book that was published and I gave copies of it to my team? Not as far as I know, without an employment agreement specifically prohibiting it.
 
tacomancer said:
If he is working for a government department he shouldn't be advocating *any* point of view while on the clock.
Click to expand...

So you don't think the Mayor advocated a point of view by firing him?
 
tres borrachos said:
Agent J didn't mention anything about an employment agreement. Here's what he said:

if i go to work tomorrow and give some co workers copies of a book I wrote and in the book it says that i hate a gender, race, religion etc or that i think women, blacks or christians are vile dirty people guess what . . . . im getting fired LMAO
Click to expand...

But it has to, the employment agreement is what happened in this case. To Agent J's point though, it is still a fair assessment that the outcome would be as described.
 
jmotivator said:
So you don't think the Mayor advocated a point of view by firing him?
Click to expand...

Its possible, sure, but it opens up a can of worms in terms of a lawsuit and it would be incredibly stupid of him. In an organization where I am sure they have access to HR experts and lawyers, he would have likely been strongly advised against running afoul of easy to accommodate employment laws and EEOC regulations. This is basic stuff front line supervisors are expected to adhere to.
 
tacomancer said:
I have cited multiple things to you and all you do is whine and insist, do you have an actual argument?
Click to expand...

you have presented your opinion. I have presented facts.

you can't fire someone over their religious beliefs. this is a protected class.
which his exactly what happened.

the book he made outside of work on his own time for a bible study for his church.
the 1 page that drew critizism was a chapter on sexual mortality. in which the bible is clear on sexual morality.
in the same chapter he talked about sex outside of marriage and other things the bible says on sexual morality.

he didn't target just gays.

he book he passed out he gave to friends that he had a personal relationship with.

the city violated the law and I hope that he sues them for millions of dollars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom