Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Fired for Working While Gay

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Stingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:03 AM
Original message
Fired for Working While Gay
A case of discrimination in Tennessee, where a gay employee was fired because he was gay, despite what was written in the company’s employee manual, but the real story may be the stupidity of this conservative bigot, who has run the company into the ground since he bought it and is now firing productive employees.

http://allspinzone.com/wp/2009/01/10/fired-for-working-while-gay/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 07:56 AM
Response to Original message
1. without equal protection laws --
you can still be fired for someones bigotry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GentryDixon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. On my very first job interview
right out of high school I was asked if I was a member of the Mormon Church. When I told him I was not, he showed me the door. That was back in the 60's. Things have not changed much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. were you in utah? i've had friends that had that same experience in utah.
i was fired from a job because i was gay -- but it was a bartenders job -- and all the straight customers pitched such a hissy fit they hired me back.

many years ago now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GentryDixon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Yes. Salt Lake CIty.
Salt Lake proper is more diverse now, but you get out into the burbs and the homophobia is rampant. These poor souls have so much to worry about, what with these questions: are you a member of the "Church", are you Republican, are you gay? Their famous saying is "love it or leave it". My son was discriminated against by his peers during grade school because he was not Mormon. Terrible family values, if you ask me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baby Snooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. But some wanted marriage equality...
Some wanted marriage equality. And didn't care about equality that matters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. r-i-g-h-t. marriage equality doesn't matter.
go give o'reilly a nice long hot hug.
you'll feel better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. What a stupid comment.
We don't just want Marriage Equality. We want it ALL. FULL equality, in everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. And yet so typical of what this place has become. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baby Snooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. It isn't going to come from marriage equality...
Even if you get marriage equality that isn't going to grant equality under the law. At best you will have marriage equality in states that allow it. Read DOMA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Again, what?
Heterosexual marriages are recognized, not only in all 50 states, but in all other COUNTRIES as well. If our right to marriage equality is recognized, it would be recognized in all 50 states. I doubt Uganda would be excited about it, but, oh well.

Of course, DOMA would have to fall by the wayside.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baby Snooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. Just fall by the wayside?
I doubt DOMA is going to just fall by the wayside and everyone needs to be careful not to push the matter too much because it wouldn't take too much at this point to turn it into a constitutional amendment.

I support equality under the law. That includes marriage equality. But I don't know how you can have marriage equality when you don't have equality under the law. I have always felt this was a matter of putting the cart before the horse. And my concern is the horse tripped over the carriage in California and broke a leg and may not survive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamastiene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. You fail to comprehend the art of negotiation.
Even in simple deals with businessmen, you always bargain for more than you expect to get. If states like California and New York never advance as far as to allow marriage equality, and yes, FULL equality, the rest of us will never even get so much as a mention on the hate crimes laws for more conservative states.

Marriage equality is the next step to FULL equality. We are not going to get equality all at once. We will have to fight for it step by step law by law, state by state, until we do have FULL equality.

Marriage equality is something that is very important even to those of us in ultra conservative states. Nothing is more fundamental to our lives than our partners. The lives we build with our partners IS THE BASIS of our lives. It is no different than straight married couples. Until we have FULL equality, we are going to have to fight for marriage equality, adoption rights, visitation rights, estate rights, and every other right that so many take for granted.

Simply physics...gravity...you aim higher and throw the best you have at something, so you can actually hit the mark. Would you say women in the suffragette movement ONLY wanted the right to vote? Of course, you wouldn't. So, why are you saying it here? Can you see what we are trying to tell you now? Does that make more sense?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baby Snooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. Go bargain with someone else's rights, okay?
So we are real clear on this and someone doesn't accuse me of being a homophobe I was a member of the Federal Club of Human Rights Campaign when this started and this is why I will not ever support Human Rights Campaign again. I heard all the arguments. From "professional" gays and lesbians who either have never known what real discrimination is or have forgotten what it is and merely wanted it all. For themselves.

I watched ENDA in particular go out the window because of "Million for Marriage." ENDA was very close to finally passing. And then Human Rights Campaign announced "Million for Marriage."

How many have lost their jobs in states where "equality laws" don't exist? How many have lost their jobs in states where "equality laws" do exist but don't apply to "private" employers?

Go bargain with someone else's rights. And don't ever accuse me of not supporting equal rights. My money was where my mouth was. Where it always was and always will be. And it will never be with Human Rights Campaign again.

If the horse dies because it tripped over the cart and broke its leg in California I will blame Human Rights Campaign. For us losing the horse as well as the cart.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. "be careful not to push the matter too much"
so gay people need to shut their mouths and not push their luck?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #20
30. DOMA needs to go to the Supremes
after eight years of Obama appointments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ioo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #30
36. Well Obama said he wants it repealed... we will see if he ment it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #19
34. "Even if you get marriage equality that isn't going to grant equality under the law." -- wtf?
Yes, if marriage equality is achieved, it will de facto give equality under the law. That's just logical.

:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fearless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #34
38. No, if it is a law on the state level it would be trumped by DOMA if challenged in court.
I believe that's what they were alluding to. If not, I wash my hands of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #38
41. DOMA is pretty clearly unconstitutional
Congress cannot pass a statute and overturn the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution. That requires an Amendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #6
16. Like . . . what?
I can't even comprehend the idiocy of this comment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
21. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Ioo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
35. Ummm... can't we have both?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
32. not if the employee handbook gives you that protection
i agree that it's legal to fire someone on any basis, including homosexuality, except for certain specific protections such as race, sex, religion and national origin.

homosexuality is protections have been granted in a small number of states and cities as well.


however, if you distribute an employee handbook that says you will never fire anyone for reason x, y, or z, then you cannot fire an employee for any of those reasons. sound in this case like the employee handbook said homosexuality was permitted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
teenagebambam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
4. On the other hand...
...when my partner interviewed for his current job, he was asked, in the interview, "what does your wife do". He calmly explained that his "wife" was a man. They not only hired him, a year later they hired me too. This is in NE Florida, a Southern Baptist stronghold!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. Sounds like an illegal question, to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. not yet, they're still fighting the ENDA fight it seems n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Discrimination on the basis of marital status is illegal.
asking "what does your wife do" could be seen (legally) as a backhanded way of getting information about a person's marital status.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. I believe you are right. I don't have access to it right now, but at one time I was
given a list of questions that could not be asked at a job interview. Among them were any questions that concerned the marital status of the interviewee. I was under the impression that this list had been prepared by an attorney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #15
23. I've worked for some big companies that try to minimize their exposure to lawsuits
and they ALL have either coached their people who do interviews to stay away from questions that even HINT about marital status, or have a list of questions that don't include them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. In Tennessee
this likely won't matter. The only thing possible to sue over is the fact that the employee handbook says there will be no such discrimination, and the lawyer would argue that employees had a reasonable expectation that the handbook made promises to them. That suit will not win, but it will cost this guy some big money in lawyer fees, and that's a very good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
13. How Horrible
The situation is just wrong, and yet, this passage really bugs me:
"Hill said he used to be the human resources director and is shocked at the owner’s decision to dismiss him because of his sexual preference."

I didn't think it was a preference.

The problem is, this persistent idea that being gay is a preference or choice is what leads to discrimination. If people believe that it's a decision rather than an inherent part of some one's character they are more likely to be comfortable with discrimination. Of course, that's not totally true, there's still a lot of discrimination against African Americans, and no one believes they could change the color of their skin. However, many do unfairly attribute negative behaviors to minority groups and use that as justification. Even though I consider myself very progressive, I find myself falling into the stereotype trap sometimes, and have to remind myself of my folly.

So, in the quest for full rights and acceptance for gay people, do we try to communicate the idea that sexual orientation is not a choice (any more than skin color is), or do we say that you will never get people to believe that and communicate that it shouldn't matter if some one "chooses" to be gay. After all, religion is largely a choice and for the most part, we no longer allow discrimination on that basis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. That shouldn't matter
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. It matters greatly legally, preferences are NOT protected by law.
What makes being gay a legal acknowldeged minority is the Court's acceptance that being gay is an inherent quality or attribute, and as such, when faced with well known discrimination, laws passed regarding gays such as PropHate8, are subject to a special consideration by the Courts, such as review on the basis of either:

1.) rational basis
2.) intermeidate scrutiny
3.) strict scrutiny

If you accept that it is a preference, then, when you claim a violation of civil rights, the answer will be, "But it's your choice. So change and you will not be discriminated against."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. Except for:
religious preferences.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #24
29. Even that might be OK, legally
in Tennessee. Of course, the guy who did this discriminating is Hindu. Not a good old boy by any means.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #24
37. Or no preferences:
"In the United States, freedom of religion is a constitutionally guaranteed right provided in the religion clauses of the First Amendment. Freedom of religion is also closely associated with separation of church and state, a concept which was written of by Thomas Jefferson." -wiki

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #18
40. Well, We're In Agreement
I said it shouldn't matter if it was a choice, not that it doesn't to some people.

It seems like a straw man argument to me, but sadly it doesn't to other people. That is, while I don't believe it's a choice, some do. While I don't believe it should matter even if it was a choice, others disagree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbackjon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
17. Will our Leadership make ENDA a priority?
Doubt it - fucking idiots don't care enough to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. No spine for it, methinks. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
31. Quick, sweep this to the back so we can bitch about Obama some more!
Can't have any tangible issues to worry about, don'cha know. Can't let actual assaults and crimes against gay men and women get in the way of our three-month whine about how badly Obama hurt our feelings!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fearless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
39. Sounds like acoholism...
"working while gay" :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #39
42. Bad analogy
Still, if the owner had been able to say the guy's work performance was hindered by his being gay, he'd have had a leg to stand on. Heck, in TN he may be able to get away with this, but his lawyer bills are going to be steep, and he'll lose as a result of his ugly discrimination, even if he wins the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC