U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-08-2016, 01:24 PM
 
24,235 posts, read 17,823,374 times
Reputation: 12962

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SHABAZZ310 View Post
Well my interpretation of racism is consistent to what should be considered common knowledge of unmistakable actions. If an employer doesn't agree it says more about them than it does about what took place.
what should be considered 'common knowledge'? and what does it say about the employer if they fail to agree with what you consider to be 'common knowledge'?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SHABAZZ310 View Post
Yes, you are correct...
of course. it's all you ever care about.

 
Old 01-08-2016, 01:25 PM
 
16,724 posts, read 13,862,278 times
Reputation: 41017
Quote:
Originally Posted by marigolds6 View Post
Very few people saw her post. Again, it was not even a Twitter post. She was circulated because the owner's post was _widely_ circulated on Twitter. (Talking mechanism here, not reason.)
If the owner had never tweeted out what she wrote, we would not be discussing her and she would still have her job.

If she had not acted like a twatwaffle in public, none of this would have happened in the first place. It all goes back to personal responsibility.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 01:25 PM
 
4,827 posts, read 2,720,506 times
Reputation: 4324
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh View Post
Exactly. Apparently some people think this is the USSR and we're supposed to be "good little comrades." Hence you have people clamoring for a teacher to be fired because she was spotted in a photo wearing a bikini or enjoying a margarita on her vacation. Don't they know how badly that reflects on her character that she'd choose to enjoy the Bahamas wearing something other than a burka and drinking something other than Kool-Aid? I mean, doesn't she understand how bad that looks and compromises her ability to teach 18 divided by 3 equals 6? I wouldn't want someone like that teaching my children! {sarcasm off}
The difference is that in the past you had people with alcohol problems, drug problems, political ideologies, and so on, but it was kept within the confines of one's house or neighborhood. Now it's shared with the world.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Pacific Northwest
1,709 posts, read 1,524,578 times
Reputation: 3362
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh View Post
Exactly. This whole "we supply your check so play along with the 'rules' we've established" nonsense--let's just say, spoken like a true "massa." I guess I'm Uncle Tom and they're Simon Legree?

As the one person said, if you're talking about something that is DIRECTLY WORK RELATED and you're showing people's credit card slips and names, OK. However, if you work at an office in the back filing papers or typing letters and post about how you hate slow old drivers getting in the way--big deal. You're not Lee Iacocca or Tim Cook, and this idea that everyday filing clerks etc are 24/7 representatives of their company is a bunch of nonsense. Outside of illegal activities etc, we're supposed to be free people here, not comrades living in the USSR.

As for "the world doesn't need to know about it"--who cares what they think? It's MY page and MY time and MY camera and MY life, and if I want to post about every time I took a dump behind a stump, I will--and if you're a half-decent boss, you won't be STUPID enough to think any of that has any bearing on how well I can do my job, even a nice job. Some bosses (or "clients") have the good sense to realize there's this thing called a time clock and it doesn't occupy the wall of an employee's house, it's as his job where it belongs. When I clock-in, I'm yours, I am exactly what you have every right to expect me to be. When I clock out, now it's MY life, and if that involves hiking in places where it's legal to be nude out in public (there are such places) and I end up in a photo, so what. I was CLOCKED OUT at the time, so even if it's on a public page, it's not an employer's business. Period.

Either employers need to be this way, or the law needs to step in and MAKE THEM be this way, yes MAKE THEM--or seize their companies from them by legislative fiat.
Thank you, and I agree with you on this one. We've disagreed other times on dog issues, but is one where you are dead on balls accurate.

It's scary the amount of people (younger and easily malleable people usually) who bleat the "you always represent your company" BS. Honestly these people come across as easily programmed and unthinking and will be taking over the world as us older free thinkers (who aren't as easily brainwashed) die off.

For example there's a thread going around FB right now, which I'm surprised hasn't made it here yet, that is basically about a minority woman who acted like a total B on the highway and triggered road rage in the guy just behind her. He honked, she flipped him the finger and continued to drive like a dick, he pulled up alongside her and started hurling insults...she pulled out her phone and filmed him, taunting him on all the while, video ends up on YouTube and her gang (I mean "friends") find out where he works and get him fired. Why did he get fired ? Not for yelling at her. He was fired because she was from the middle east and got all offended when he went off on her. This was one of those bosses who considered it their absolute right to eff up somebodies life for choices they made in their downtime.

Anyhoo, you wouldn't believe (well, maybe you would lol) the comments from FBers going for this guys throat. It is like a modern day witchhunt with the (mostly young and not all that smart) FBers bleating "You ALWAYS represent your company, blah blah blah....".

I don't know. I'm about ready to quit the net altogether. It's too depressing the amount of people that have given up their minds and can no longer think for themselves.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 01:34 PM
 
Location: Pacific Northwest
1,709 posts, read 1,524,578 times
Reputation: 3362
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPowering1 View Post
With all due respect, some of you are being naive. This isn't something that's new. Twenty years ago, if you bad mouthed your boss or said you hated your job, and it got back to management, there were consequences. I already cited one instance where a guy lost his job for making a statement in a restaurant to his girlfriend, not knowing someone in management was within earshot. So this is nothing new.

The only thing that has changed is, it's now easier for such things to get back to management. All anyone has to do is look you up and find you on social media. And as a VP, I can tell you that it's not always a manager who goes looking for dirt, it's often a co-worker who then runs to the manager.

Here's the bottom line - now that everyone knows what risky business it is to publicly post your disgust with your job, boss, customers or clients, or post photos or discuss behavior that raises the eyebrows, then it's your call as to whether you want to take that risk. If you're independently wealthy and don't care about losing your job - good for you. Those who need a job but take that risk anyway are put in the 'not too bright' category. And let's face it - most managers don't go out of their way to hire or retain people who aren't too bright.

Actually that's EXACTLY the type of people they want ! I've noticed as the years go by companies seem to prefer dumb and malleable (IE easily controlled) over brainy and quick witted. Because smart people ask "why ?" and dumb & malleable never question a thing no matter how effed up it is.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 01:40 PM
 
2,079 posts, read 2,500,317 times
Reputation: 3947
i don't condone badmouthing employers on social media. but generally, what people want to post on their off hours is their business. i get the feeling most people on here are just whistleblowing vindictive corporate drones that just want to see certain people gone for their own gain in the rat-race up the corporate ladder because they don't wanna actually work for it. it is already an employer's market with stagnating wages and a general cutthroat attitude. let the employees express themselves outside of work and don't invade their privacy. we are not slaves. we have lives outside of work. some people want to share some aspects of their lives although not everyone may care and some of it may not be rated G. and for the most part, our lives aren't an episode of leave it to beaver. do employers expect people to post pictures of them going to church and having tea and crumpets? wtf?? i am not the president or oprah.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 01:44 PM
 
16,785 posts, read 19,820,935 times
Reputation: 33239
Quote:
Originally Posted by marigolds6 View Post
Very few people saw her post. Again, it was not even a Twitter post. She was circulated because the owner's post was _widely_ circulated on Twitter. (Talking mechanism here, not reason.)
If the owner had never tweeted out what she wrote, we would not be discussing her and she would still have her job.
No, if she had never written it in the first place there would have been nothing to broadcast. It used to be if something bad happened to you, you told a few people that were close to you, not put it online.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MPowering1 View Post
With all due respect, some of you are being naive. This isn't something that's new. Twenty years ago, if you bad mouthed your boss or said you hated your job, and it got back to management, there were consequences. I already cited one instance where a guy lost his job for making a statement in a restaurant to his girlfriend, not knowing someone in management was within earshot. So this is nothing new.

The only thing that has changed is, it's now easier for such things to get back to management. All anyone has to do is look you up and find you on social media. And as a VP, I can tell you that it's not always a manager who goes looking for dirt, it's often a co-worker who then runs to the manager.

Here's the bottom line - now that everyone knows what risky business it is to publicly post your disgust with your job, boss, customers or clients, or post photos or discuss behavior that raises the eyebrows, then it's your call as to whether you want to take that risk. If you're independently wealthy and don't care about losing your job - good for you. Those who need a job but take that risk anyway are put in the 'not too bright' category. And let's face it - most managers don't go out of their way to hire or retain people who aren't too bright.

Not quite the same. I agree it was never a good idea to badmouth the boss to anyone who could repeat it back to the boss.

But you can always deny it(yes lie....LOL), nowadays they put it online. Once it's out there it is out there.

There is still a difference between saying something in person that can later be denied, than posting it online.

One is like being a suspect in a murder, the other is still standing over the body with the gun in your hand with the police present.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 01:48 PM
 
Location: St Louis, MO
4,677 posts, read 4,636,990 times
Reputation: 2966
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPowering1 View Post
This is confusing, but both were on Facebook.

You seem to want to make the restaurant owner the bad guy. Once she bashed the restaurant, he had a right to respond to her criticism. Perhaps she should have looked at how many followers the restaurant had before she posted and realized that the story would gain traction, and possibly press, if he responded.

Not too bright all the way around.
The post and reply were on facebook (actually not sure if it was public or private on both posts, since both are gone). What got them both widely circulated was screenshots the owner posted to twitter.

I'm not trying to make him a bad guy. There was nothing inherently wrong with what he did.
My point is that _her_ post is not what got the massive attention. His reply is what got the attention. Since it was his reply, and he was willing to publicly circulate that reply, I don't think it mattered at all how she voiced her opinion, just that she voiced it at all.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 01:49 PM
 
3,279 posts, read 3,811,974 times
Reputation: 6149
Quote:
Originally Posted by markjames68 View Post
The difference is that in the past you had people with alcohol problems, drug problems, political ideologies, and so on, but it was kept within the confines of one's house or neighborhood. Now it's shared with the world.
So what if it is?

Heck, I remember when Dennis Rodman played for the Chicago Bulls. People KNEW how crazy he was, he went out of his way to let them know. Even so, the idea was "as long as you contort yourself properly ON THE BASKETBALL COURT that's all that matters." Now, I realize that sometimes different professions have different expectations (I would imagine music artists are expected to be "colorful" and such vs, say, an accountant) yet even so I've heard of players now being told "your off-court behavior is just as important as your on-court behavior, you represent us anytime you do anything in public."

No, in his case, people KNEW he was nutty, and he was, but he delivered where it mattered, come playing time, so it was not a problem, as well it shouldn't have been. He did this even while being teammates with Michael Jordan, who was all about image.

People's views have changed, that's the issue I think. Go back and look at older movies. "Thank God It's Friday" with Donna Summer comes to mind--people went to that disco club and acted nutty as all get-out, including that accountant's wife who was trying to get him to realize that he's not required to behave like an accountant outside the office. BINGO.

Again--CEOs of Ford, especially high-profile ones who appear in commercials, I can see it. However, even if it's public knowledge, everyday people even in prestigious jobs have the right to be themselves when they're off the clock--and post all about it. It's their life, on their time.

A big shout-out to Stackhouse as well. Spot on.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 01:51 PM
 
Location: St Louis, MO
4,677 posts, read 4,636,990 times
Reputation: 2966
Quote:
Originally Posted by markjames68 View Post
Looking at it from the other side, wouldn't the person posting on Facebook nasty comments about people be at risk for a libel suit from individuals?
Every facebook comment is at risk for a libel suit, no matter how nasty or nice. But the comment has to be knowingly false and defamatory to actually win (and you need damages, which in most cases will be small and hard to prove).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top