Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 04-24-2016, 04:40 PM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,268 posts, read 23,751,941 times
Reputation: 38689

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Where was this outrage from righties when the guy got fired for posting a you tube video of him yelling at a Chik fil a drive through worker? He was not at work at the time, and he got fired.
Never heard of it.

Having said that:

//www.city-data.com/forum/43817987-post240.html

Happy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-24-2016, 04:41 PM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,268 posts, read 23,751,941 times
Reputation: 38689
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
Yes. Once on the internet, nothing is private thought any more.

Increasingly, employers are looking prospective employees over on the net before hiring them, and that includes what they say on social forums like this. What a person says here is as much an indication of their personality and their life attitudes as much as politics, and politics these days is a very good indicator to an employer as to whether he can expect a new hire to get along well with others or could be a problem on the job.

Facebook is particularly valuable for them, as everyone is easy to access there, and so many people are on it. An employer can find many sites that offer psychological profiles they can use on selecting new hires. based on what they post to the internet.

It's not what a person says that rings most of the alarm bells. It's how they say it, and when they say it. An employer may not care at all what an employee's politics are, but he may sure want to know if a person is going to spend more time arguing with someone than doing the job, or how the person's personality here on the net may affect his business in dozens of other ways.

It doesn't do a company much good to hire a sales rep, for example, who will irritate customers rather than bring in the business he was hired to go get.

Or hire a guy in a machine shop who will make everyone around him irritated. Anger and irritation when a person's mind has to be concentrated on his job can lose a boss a lot of money, and sometimes can result in serious injury as well.

Do not believe what anyone says here is private. It is not. Someone with a bit of internet savvy can easily discover anyone's net address and server and find out just as much as they want to know about any of us as they want. The only protection any of us has is encryption, and much of the encryption is not hard to hack.

What you say here can be tracked right back to you at any time. Think twice before you post once.
VPNs prevent that garbage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2016, 04:48 PM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,268 posts, read 23,751,941 times
Reputation: 38689
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
I posited possibilities.

Like I said, the actual wording of Schilling's contract is what matters, NOT the fact that ESPN is embracing a position with which 77% of those age 30+ disagree.
Holy hell. I'm very Conservative and even I get this. How is it that you cannot comprehend that it doesn't flippin' matter if 77% of those age 30+ disagree, THAT IS NOT THE POINT.

If ESPN doesn't want to be dragged through the mud by SJWs screeching about one of their guys talking about transgenders in bathrooms, then ESPN has the right to fire the guy.

It does not matter what you think. It does not matter what I think. It does not matter what any other poster on here thinks. It doesn't matter what 77% of the population thinks about transgender bathrooms. It doesn't even matter what transgenders think.

You are hung up on the issue of transgenders, and completely and totally missing the point that when you **** your employer off, for WHATEVER REASON, no matter how justified you think you are, you're going to lose your job.

That's it. How are you not getting this?

If you decide one day to post on your Facebook, (pretend you have one), and say: Everyone who is voting for Hillary is a complete and utter nutbag moron who wants this country to go down in flames, they make me sick, I can't stand to even be around them.

GUESS WHAT? If that pisses off your employer, you can lose your job.

You're advocating for companies not having rights to get rid of people who they feel are NO LONGER GOOD FITS for their company. That alarms me that you would be okay with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2016, 04:56 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,122,688 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
Holy hell. I'm very Conservative and even I get this. How is it that you cannot comprehend that it doesn't flippin' matter if 77% of those age 30+ disagree, THAT IS NOT THE POINT.

If ESPN doesn't want to be dragged through the mud by SJWs screeching about one of their guys talking about transgenders in bathrooms, then ESPN has the right to fire the guy.

It does not matter what you think. It does not matter what I think. It does not matter what any other poster on here thinks. It doesn't matter what 77% of the population thinks about transgender bathrooms. It doesn't even matter what transgenders think.

You are hung up on the issue of transgenders, and completely and totally missing the point that when you **** your employer off, for WHATEVER REASON, no matter how justified you think you are, you're going to lose your job.

That's it. How are you not getting this?

If you decide one day to post on your Facebook, (pretend you have one), and say: Everyone who is voting for Hillary is a complete and utter nutbag moron who wants this country to go down in flames, they make me sick, I can't stand to even be around them.

GUESS WHAT? If that pisses off your employer, you can lose your job.

You're advocating for companies not having rights to get rid of people who they feel are NO LONGER GOOD FITS for their company. That alarms me that you would be okay with that.
Thank you. I think this whole bathroom debate and drawing lines in the sand on both side is very dumb.

If Curt Schilling directed his comments at a co worker who was transgendered then InformedConsent would a leg to stand on as transgendered aren't a federally protected class. But that's not what happened.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2016, 04:58 PM
 
34,066 posts, read 17,096,341 times
Reputation: 17215
CS did ESPN a favor, as it allowed them to correct the horrid decision they made in hiring him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2016, 05:08 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,061 posts, read 44,866,510 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
And how many of these folks are entertainers? How many of them worked for the media?
Why does it matter? Is there a clause in Schilling's contract that specifically states that he can't offend entertainers or those who work for the media? I sincerely doubt it.

The bottom line is that Schilling has 33 States' and the Federal Government's laws and public opinion on his side on this issue. How in the hell is ESPN going to be able to defend firing him against those odds?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2016, 05:10 PM
 
34,066 posts, read 17,096,341 times
Reputation: 17215
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
The bottom line is that Schilling has 33 States' and the Federal Government's laws and public opinion on his side on this issue. How in the hell is ESPN going to be able to defend firing him against those odds?
They don't have to. Polls are not used in court.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2016, 05:12 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,122,688 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Why does it matter? Is there a clause in Schilling's contract that specifically states that he can't offend entertainers or those who work for the media? I sincerely doubt it.
Christ... Lol. He is an entertainer... Do you even know what ESPN does? Do you even know what Schilling's job is at ESPN?

I'll let you do some googling since you seem awfully ignorant on the matter.

Quote:
The bottom line is that Schilling has 33 States' and the Federal Government's laws and public opinion on his side on this issue. How in the hell is ESPN going to be able to defend firing him against those odds?
The bottomline is he broke his contract. If you are going to invoke public opinion, how many people here on CD agree with your legal claim?

You are wrong, move on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2016, 05:19 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,061 posts, read 44,866,510 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
Holy hell. I'm very Conservative and even I get this. How is it that you cannot comprehend that it doesn't flippin' matter if 77% of those age 30+ disagree, THAT IS NOT THE POINT.
Actually, that is EXACTLY the point of a "morals clause."

http://www.loeb.com/~/media/files/pu...20magazine.pdf

Like I said, Schilling has the laws of 33 States and the Federal government AND public opinion on his side on this issue. ESPN is going to have a HELL of a time defending violating the terms of Schilling's contract for this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2016, 05:52 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,122,688 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Actually, that is EXACTLY the point of a "morals clause."

http://www.loeb.com/~/media/files/pu...20magazine.pdf

Like I said, Schilling has the laws of 33 States and the Federal government AND public opinion on his side on this issue. ESPN is going to have a HELL of a time defending violating the terms of Schilling's contract for this.
You didn't read your own link did you....? Schilling broke his contract.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:17 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top