• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Woman Fired For AAR Bumper Sticker

ManOfTrueTruth said:
This is true. One could attempt to sue for wrongful termination, but such suits are difficult to prove in a US court of law. It is also true, that threatening an employee's job is an excellent way of directing or controlling their political activity. If a over-priced, greedy, expensive lawyer was involved (one in which the average employee cannot afford), perhaps he could prove that this was an attempt to violate this woman's First Amendment rights, but again, wrongful termination is difficult to PROVE in court but not so difficult to COMMIT in the work place. The only that matters is what you can prove in the courtroom. If you have enough money to feed the greed machine, you would be amazed at what a person can do in the courtroom or in society.
What also isn't mentioned is something that usually happens in cases like these where a termination happened...

Was the last action taken the WHOLE reason for a termination or was the last action just the last straw?...

Somebody could do something in the office and get away with it because they has a good relationship with management and does there job well.

Somebody else could be less than exemplary and management wants them out anyway and the last action could just be the last 2% of what was inevitable...
 
cnredd said:
What also isn't mentioned is something that usually happens in cases like these where a termination happened...

Was the last action taken the WHOLE reason for a termination or was the last action just the last straw?...

Somebody could do something in the office and get away with it because they has a good relationship with management and does there job well.

Somebody else could be less than exemplary and management wants them out anyway and the last action could just be the last 2% of what was inevitable...

I see what you mean. She could have been a terrible worker and management wanted her out. However, it is also true that very good workers that make their companies alot of money get railroaded out of job due to office politics. This, in my mind, is wrongful termination, but proving it is another issue.
 
Carl said:
He apparently did not attempt to control or direct her activities. She is free to act as she chooses, just not be employed at that company.

Most states are "at will" with regard to employment, you can be fired for no reason at all. Not sure if that's the case in California, but have no reason to think otherwise. I would have done the exact same thing, without an ounce of shame.

As a private employer, I see no reason to employ those who are sympathetic to anti-capitalist, anti-corporate philosophies.

It certainly would hurt your own personal pocketbook if you did employ such people. And in capitalism, it's all about number 1 and not about putting yourself out on a limb for somebody else heh heh. Just only look after yourself and **** everybody else. Collective responsibility is not part of the capitalist mindset. I think both individual and collective responsibilities are important, but in American society, their is little collective responsibility. That's the system we live under. My economic convictions is a mixture of both capitalism and socialism, a mixed economy.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom