Man who called police on black woman at North Carolina pool no longer has job

[Lord Tammerlain]

That he lost his pool supervisor job is understandable, but his regular job? He may be a racially insensitive fool but I am not sure about him being fired for something that should usually not interfere with his professional career. Companies should not fire people with a permanent contract and a good employee history just like that for something that has nothing to do with his job.

The reason he was fired was his identity went public and so did where he worked. I expect his employee was sent a lot of emails and phone call about him.

Chances are that in a month or two he would be back at work. That is what happened to a person in Canada ranting at Afghani Canadians. She was fired and rehired a month after

 

[phattonez]

Yes I am sure he recognizes everyone in the community by sight. That is it, not that she was potentially visibly different than other people in the pool

Probably. Teachers can remember hundreds of faces. Why do you jump straight to racism?

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[UtahBill]

Probably. Teachers can remember hundreds of faces. Why do you jump straight to racism?

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Teachers see those kids a lot, usually 5 days a week. My wife was like that. But me, if I don't see some people often enough, I forget the name and the face.

 

[Peter King]

The reason he was fired was his identity went public and so did where he worked. I expect his employee was sent a lot of emails and phone call about him.

Chances are that in a month or two he would be back at work. That is what happened to a person in Canada ranting at Afghani Canadians. She was fired and rehired a month after

I hope his employer does that because nobody should have their lives destroyed from one incident like this.

 

[ttwtt78640]

That he lost his pool supervisor job is understandable, but his regular job? He may be a racially insensitive fool but I am not sure about him being fired for something that should usually not interfere with his professional career. Companies should not fire people with a permanent contract and a good employee history just like that for something that has nothing to do with his job.

Perhaps his 'regular job' involved providing input for other company employees' promotions/raises. Would having a 'well known racist', who was fired by his other employer, in such a position not be likely cause potential (expensive legal?) problems in the future for that employer? Would you, as the owner of that company, rather have a news story about immediately firing a 'known racist' or a news story about keeping a 'known racist' employed be associated with your company?

 

[phattonez]

Teachers see those kids a lot, usually 5 days a week. My wife was like that. But me, if I don't see some people often enough, I forget the name and the face.

Including your neighbors?

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[phattonez]

Perhaps his 'regular job' involved providing input for other company employees' promotions/raises. Would having a 'well known racist', who was fired by his other employer, in such a position not be likely cause potential (expensive legal?) problems in the future for that employer? Would you, as the owner of that company, rather have a news story about immediately firing a 'known racist' or a news story about keeping a 'known racist' employed be associated with your company?

Does this incident prove that he's a racist? It seems that there are plenty of extenuating circumstances.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[veritas1]

You can call the cops on a black woman and get fired. You can try to stop one candidate from winning a presidential election and keep your FBI paycheck coming. What a country!:doh

 

[ttwtt78640]

Does this incident prove that he's a racist? It seems that there are plenty of extenuating circumstances.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

I'm not sure that a single incident proves anything definitively but the press (right or wrong) has portrayed it as a slam dunk example of how not to treat strangers of a different race. In this case the man's employers are free to do one of two things: try to explain the man's behvior away using your alleged 'extenuating circumstamces' or fire him immediately.

The safe bet is on immediate termination, especially when lawyers abound that would love to have a go at civil action accusing these employers of condoning racism when any other perceived racial slight might come up (or be invented?) by others and, when coupled with this back story, show a 'pattern of racism'. Is that course of action fair or just? Probably not, but it is a sound business decision with current racial tensions and a press (and lawyers) eager to exploit them.

 

[phattonez]

I'm not sure that a single incident proves anything definitively but the press (right or wrong) has portrayed it as a slam dunk example of how not to treat strangers of a different race. In this case the man's employers are free to do one of two things: try to explain the man's behvior away using your alleged 'extenuating circumstamces' or fire him immediately.

The safe bet is on immediate termination, especially when lawyers abound that would love to have a go at civil action accusing these employers of condoning racism when any other perceived racial slight might come up (or be invented?) by others and, when coupled with this back story, show a 'pattern of racism'. Is that course of action fair or just? Probably not, but it is a sound business decision with current racial tensions and a press eager to exploit them.

Sounds like a miserable situation. I'd rather our society didn't put up with this nonsense.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[ttwtt78640]

Sounds like a miserable situation. I'd rather our society didn't put up with this nonsense.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Yep, best to go through life with these two simple rules:

#1 Don't sweat the small stuff. (like a stranger is *gasp* in the community swimming pool)

#2 It's all small stuff. (unless it poses risk of injury or death)

 

[phattonez]

Yep, best to go through life with these two simple rules:

#1 Don't sweat the small stuff. (like a stranger is *gasp* in the community swimming pool)

#2 It's all small stuff. (unless it poses risk of injury or death)

I don't know if I'd think it's small when she's refusing to leave and causing a scene.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Perhaps his 'regular job' involved providing input for other company employees' promotions/raises. Would having a 'well known racist', who was fired by his other employer, in such a position not be likely cause potential (expensive legal?) problems in the future for that employer? Would you, as the owner of that company, rather have a news story about immediately firing a 'known racist' or a news story about keeping a 'known racist' employed be associated with your company?

I don't know if I'd think it's small when she's refusing to leave and causing a scene.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

And I would not think it is small if I see myself getting IDed followed or questioned far more often than others despite doing to extra same thing they are

 

[justabubba]

I don't know if I'd think it's small when she's refusing to leave and causing a scene.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

can't let that darkie sit in the front of the bus kind of scene i take it

 

[Kobie]

I don't know if I'd think it's small when she's refusing to leave and causing a scene.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Why should she "refuse to leave" if there was no reason for her to leave?

I know this is hard for you to grasp, but the white guy was wrong here.

 

[Kobie]

Does this incident prove that he's a racist? It seems that there are plenty of extenuating circumstances.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Like what?

 

[phattonez]

Like what?

Like the fact she allegedly gave the wrong address. Like the fact she refused to leave, causing a scene. Like the fact that he's asked whites to show identification.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[phattonez]

Why should she "refuse to leave" if there was no reason for her to leave?

I know this is hard for you to grasp, but the white guy was wrong here.

Why couldn't she go home to get her ID and end it at that? It's what I would have done.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[phattonez]

And I would not think it is small if I see myself getting IDed followed or questioned far more often than others despite doing to extra same thing they are

How awful. 21st century racism is such a burden! If only the media was on her side and society would sympathize with her!

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[Kobie]

Why couldn't she go home to get her ID and end it at that? It's what I would have done.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

She had an access card to the pool that worked, once the cops showed up and actually let her use it.

You seem unwilling to give a black person the benefit of the doubt -- they must go out of their way to prove their worth to a white guy. I wonder why that is.

 

[Excon]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/man-who-called-police-black-woman-north-carolina-pool-no-n889371

The man's employer, packing company Sonoco, said in a tweet Friday that it was made "aware of a terrible incident" at a private community pool.

A white man who called North Carolina police on a black woman who was using a private community pool with her child no longer has a job because of the "terrible incident," his company said Friday.

Global packaging firm Sonoco Products said in a statement that although the Fourth of July incident involving Adam Bloom occurred outside of work, the company does "not condone discrimination of any kind."
===============================================
It was not clear if he was fired or resigned. But on the bright side, he can now spend a lot more time at that pool.

This is by definition a discrimination case.
One in which it was not known if the woman had access. Had she not had contractual access then she would have been appropriately discriminated against.
Trying to ascertain whether the woman had contractual access is not discriminatory and the Company jumped the gun calling it such.
I hope none of its Board of Directors/Staff belong to a Country Club, as that certainly is a discriminatory organization which they should not be tolerating according to their letter.

The Company jumped the gun on this and are in the wrong.

---

THAT was racist as hell and he deserved to lose his job.

How in the wold to you come to such a conclusion when he has asked others to identify?
There is no indication this was based on race. So how?

---

Well, according to the article:

1. Key cards can be lost, loaned (many communities don't allow this for unaccompanied guests), or stolen.

2. She allegedly gave an incorrect address the first time, and a completely different address (which was the true one) the second time.

It is also clear, from the dispatcher recording, that Mr. Bloom simply wanted proper ID, nothing more.

Seems a reasonable person might think more identification was needed. IMO anyway. :shrug:

Some folks do not understand private community pools and the extent that others will try and wrongly gain access to them.

---

Perhaps not, yet she offered what she had available as ID and also offered her name and address. If he was a perfect gentleman, as I said earlier, he would have thanked her for the information, explained that was his (ridiculous?) job and told her to enjoy her swim.

For ****s sake no.
Had the moron given a correct address to begin with there likely would have been no problem, but she didn't.
Had the moron complied with and provided an ID after that, there likely would not have been any escalation.

---

That he lost his pool supervisor job is understandable,

Not given the information provided.
He acted properly.
She didn't.

---

She had an access card to the pool that worked, once the cops showed up and actually let her use it.

You seem unwilling to give a black person the benefit of the doubt -- they must go out of their way to prove their worth to a white guy. I wonder why that is.

WTF?
She gave a non-existent address. That suggests a possibility of lying. Refusing to ID after that is all on her and caused the escalation.

 

[phattonez]

She had an access card to the pool that worked, once the cops showed up and actually let her use it.

You seem unwilling to give a black person the benefit of the doubt -- they must go out of their way to prove their worth to a white guy. I wonder why that is.

This whole affair disappears if she doesn't make a scene. You and I both know it.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[Peter King]

This is by definition a discrimination case.
One in which it was not known if the woman had access. Had she not had contractual access then she would have been appropriately discriminated against.
Trying to ascertain whether the woman had contractual access is not discriminatory and the Company jumped the gun calling it such.
I hope none of its Board of Directors/Staff belong to a Country Club, as that certainly is a discriminatory organization which they should not be tolerating according to their letter.

The Company jumped the gun on this and are in the wrong.

As I have been informed previously US companies can fire people for just about any reason other than discrimination. This was not a discrimination case, he made the company look bad so they are not in the wrong. They are also not in the right but your claims that they are wrong is not correct.

 

[Excon]

As I have been informed previously US companies can fire people for just about any reason other than discrimination. This was not a discrimination case, he made the company look bad so they are not in the wrong. They are also not in the right but your claims that they are wrong is not correct.

You failed to respond to the comment directed at what you previously said.
Doh!

Well you are wrong this time as well.
He did not make them look bad. Nothign he did made them look bad.
The CEO jumped the gun and made a false assumption about his behavior and libeled him by saying he discriminated when he did not.

 

[Peter King]

Not given the information provided.
He acted properly.
She didn't.

She had a key card. She did live where she said she lived (according to news sources) and had a right to own that key card.

And he did not act properly, he has no right to demand ID's as that is not required at the pool. Because that is not a requirement, only signing in is a requirement so he had no legal right to ask her for her ID. She had the card, so she was allowed to enter the pool.