Man who burned Koran at Ground Zero fired from job as NJ Transit employee

[Swede]

In response to questions from NewsCore Tuesday, NJ Transit released a statement saying: “Derek Fenton was terminated on September 13, 2010 from his employment at NJ TRANSIT. An at-will employee, Mr. Fenton’s public actions violated New Jersey Transit’s code of ethics."

It continued: "NJ TRANSIT concluded that Mr. Fenton violated his trust as a state employee and therefore was dismissed.”



Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/employee_who_burned_koran_transit_bHqhL0TOUgS4UNOO95ry4H#ixzz0zc07SsPe

[Erose999]

1. Did he burn the Quran while he was on the job? nt

[UndertheOcean]

3. Good question .

[virginia mountainman]

7. NO....He was off duty.. NT

[PVnRT]

2. OMG RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION!!!!

I'm sure that's what the wingnuts will be shouting about. Even though they love at-will employment, since you can fire anyone for anything. Except, of course, for things like this.

[Brickbat]

4. I'd like to see that code of ethics.

[ehrnst]

35. Here is a link to NJ DOT code of ethics:

http://nj.gov/ethics/docs/ethics/dotcode.pdf

Dunno if this covers NJTransit employees.

[bullwinkle428]

5. Dollars to donuts this fucker is a tea-bagger, yet his paycheck

comes...ERRRRRRRRRRRRRR, CAME, directly from the state government of NJ!

WHEEL!! OF!! RIGHT-WING HYPOCRITES!!!

[LostinVA]

36. And, since it is NJ, he's in a union and has a huge pension

Even with getting fired he'll have a amount from his pension, and also got one to two raises a year.

[Poll_Blind]

6. It is not uncommon for State/County/Federal employees to have some kind of code of conduct they...

...are required to follow, even when not on the job. You read about things like this mostly when it's off-duty police doing something heinous but it's not just limited to them. From what I recall, which is fuzzy at best, people who really come under the gun on this are usually folks who have anything to do with public safety/transporation/health.

I think the reasoning behind this is, for instance, if you have a paramedic burning the cross at Klan meetings on weekends, he's probably not the best choice to be a paramedic in an ambulance which might be charged with keeping an African American alive until they get to the hospital.

PB

[virginia mountainman]

8. He works for the railroad..

I BELIEVE his job is to decides how many cars to add or take away from commuter trains.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. Would you hire him?

How about somebody who burns crosses on the weekends?

[virginia mountainman]

12. "hire" is one thing..

"FIRE" is altogether another..

Cross Burning, is not free speech, the courts decided that one a few years ago... So yea, you could fire a cross burner in many state rather easily.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

13. Cross burning is free speech.

The courts decided that a few years ago.

Just how low do your standards go?

[virginia mountainman]

16. *GROAN* why are you saying that?!

I clearly stated that it was NOT free speech...

Cross Burning, is not free speech, the courts decided that one a few years ago...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. I know that's what you said.

You're wrong.

[virginia mountainman]

25. Virginia v. Black

In Virginia v. Black et al. the Court found that Virginia's statute against cross burning is unconstitutional, but cross burning done with an attempt to intimidate can be limited because such expression has a long and pernicious history as a signal of impending violence. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor delivered the opinion stating, "a state, consistent with the First Amendment, may ban cross burning carried out with the attempt to intimidate." In so doing, the Court created a new area of constitutionally unprotected speech for "true threats." Under that carve-out, "a State may choose to prohibit only those forms of intimidation that are most likely to inspire fear of bodily harm."

The Court did, however, strike down the provision in Virginia's statute which stated "Any such burning of a cross shall be prima facie evidence of an intent to intimidate a person or group of persons," holding that the provision was facially unconstitutional because of its "indiscriminate coverage." The state, therefore, must prove intent to intimidate.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

27. "statute against cross burning is unconstitutional"

Well there you go. Cross burning is protected speech.

Has literacy always been an issue for you?

[virginia mountainman]

30. Read more...

cross burning done with an attempt to intimidate can be limited because such expression has a long and pernicious history as a signal of impending violence

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

31. Threatening people is not free speech, burning crosses is.

If this guy who you're apologizing for wanted to burn crosses on the weekend on his own property, that would be free speech.

Burning a cross on the lawn of the new black family in the neighborhood would not be legal. And since it's illegal, you believe you'd might have a reason not to hire him.

:crazy:

[virginia mountainman]

39. Actually, that happened about 10 miles from my house..

He was burning crosses on PRIVATE property...He had permission to do it..

And still got busted.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

41. I'm sure there are lots of cross burnings all over your neighbohood.

But it's still free speech.

[virginia mountainman]

44. What makes you so certain??

This is the ONLY ONE I have ever heard of in my lifetime... And those that did, came over here from a neighboring state...

You appear to be the only one here holding bigoted views.

[mrcheerful]

26. I actually got into blog battles with a paramedic who was racist to the core, he hated minorities,

he hated disabled, he hated everyone who wasn't exactly lie him. Then he was fired for voicing his hate around his boss, who had been getting word from people who worked with him about his hate problem. Last I heard was he still was hating and it is worse now because he blames his loss of employment on insensitive minorities who didn't like his pleasent personality.

[Poll_Blind]

34. Yeah, it's kind of scary sometimes how high-functioning screwed-up minds can be.

I was never really able to reconcile my understanding of humanity, empathy and intelligence with that reality.

PB

[virginia mountainman]

10. This will be a quick win for just about any good attorney..

Clearly what he did is constitutionally protected free speech..

They will be writing him a rather large check in the near future...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

14. What he did is protected speech.

That does not mean his job did not have a right to fire him over it.

[virginia mountainman]

18. Would you support the firing protesters too??

Careful what you wish for...

When you say its OK to fire someone for exercising their constituently protected right. You are inviting other companies to do the same..

The argument could be made if he was EMS, Police, or a Doctor it would be justified. But this dude, is responsible for coupling passenger cars together, for rush hour service..

He is not endangering anyones life because of their religion.

Dangerous president would be set if this mans firing is allowed to stand.

It would OK, employer's firing people that go protest, .."just because"...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

21. Do you think protestors are bigots like this guy?

Again, how low are your standards?

[virginia mountainman]

23. My standards are evidently..

Much higher than yours...

I am a firm believer in the Bill of Rights.. Even for people I find disgusting.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

24. You say you're a firm believer in the Bill of Rights...

but you obviously do not understand it very well.

The Bill of Rights gives me the right to march into my boss's committee meeting and tell them to all suck my fat, veiny cock.

The Bill of Rights does not protect me from getting fired over it.

[virginia mountainman]

28. your very correct...

He did not walk into the office, he was on a public street...He was OFF DUTY... What he did has ZERO to do with his job..

Doing what you did could be couched in many "easy termination" terms, like "sexual harassment", and "gross insubordanation"...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

29. Ah.

So you're saying if I tell my bosses to suck my big fat cock while I'm on a public street, it's OK.

:crazy:

[virginia mountainman]

32. LOL yep.. It would be..

But remember.. He is your boss, and if it gets back to him... their will be consequences.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

33. Right. Firing.

The Bill of Rights does not protect somebody getting fired over stupid shit that they say.

[virginia mountainman]

38. No it doesn't..

But the water gets muddied..

When what you did, in no way, effects your job...

Cussing your boss is one thing, burning a book on a public street is another..

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

40. Just how low do your standards go, VM?

You keep dodging that question.

Would you hire a cross burner?

How about a holocaust denier?

[uppityperson]

42. Depends on if your boss wants to keep liars at work or not. eom

[Poll_Blind]

15. Oh I wouldn't be too sure of that. Lighting things on fire like that in public is...

...against the law. If they want they could also get him for littering. The only stretch, and it's not really a stretch at all (it depends on if the DA wants to go after him for it or not) is incitement to riot.

The fact that he broke the law by lighting things on fire in public like (a criminal act) is the bedrock they'll fall back on if they get any heat over the firing.

PB

[Bitwit1234]

11. BUT a lot of states have the provision in their hiring practice

about stuff like that. So they were probably within their rights to fire him. Some states and companies, say you can't be caught drinking off the job, for example. So when you sign your employment papers that was probably one of the provisions.

[Saphire]

17. "at will employee" says it all. They can fire at anytime for any reason.

[virginia mountainman]

19. Is NJ an "At will" state??

That is a very different situation.

[virginia mountainman]

22. Hmmm, NJ is an "At Will" state...this could stop any lawsuit..

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5u455_a-new-jersey-employment-lawyer-expl_news

[robcon]

37. This is totally wrong.

Would he have been fired if he burned the U.S. flag? Speech is protected.

[TroglodyteScholar]

45. Reflecting poorly on your employer is, however, not necessarily protected.

[Oldtimeralso]

43. If He Worked For the Railroad Side of NJT

Under the Railway Labor Act he cannot be disciplined without a "fair and impartial investigation". But at this investigation the company is the prosecutor,judge,jury and the executioner. At this investigation the person under charge can only have a union representative from a union that he belongs to or be self-represented.


Edited for clarification

[ProgressiveProfessor]

46. Its clear there will be legal action, and I expect the RR to lose

[Swede]

47. A New Jersey Employment Lawyer Explains At-Will Employment

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5u455_a-new-jersey-employment-lawyer-expl_news

[Oldtimeralso]

48. The Railway Labor Act...

is a federal law enacted by Congress in 1926. It covers all railroad labor relations including all discipline up to and included termination. It supersedes all state labor laws and is applicable if the person worked for the rail side of NJT.