Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

**papachaz** · (This post was last modified: 01-25-2011 10:21 PM by papachaz.)

ok the packers are not an ethnic group, a religious group, a specific race, so i just don't see where any of what you bolded applies.

fandom to a sports team does not fall into any of those categories. the only word you bolded that applies is 'group' and that group doesn't fall into any of the categories described.

in all my years in management, DOZENS of seminars on the topic of harassment or discrimination not one time EVER has the fandom of a sports team been brought up.
i'm done with this thread until either someone shows me something from a court case that shows someone won a suit for any discrimination suit that was clearly described as other than race, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age disability or the other things spelled out in the EEOC documentation.

and actually, if you go strictly on harassment, wearing something that someone else finds offensive can qualify as harassment. the owner of this dealership was definitely concerned that some of his business relationships partners might be offended by that tie, so he was within his right to ask him to change it. again, for the employee not to do so is insubordination. seems pretty cut and dry to me.

***Peyton*** · 01-25-2011, 10:23 PM

(01-25-2011 10:04 PM)ATLBound Wrote: read the post above yours.
Denying employment because of "association with"
He denied employment because he associates with the Packers.
It's clear as day. If during anytime of his employment he was told you can't be a fan of any other team except for the Bear while you are AT work and he accepted that, then for that he can be fired.

It's his business and he can make up the rules. That's IF he owns the business himself. If he being a manager is just an employee of someone who owns the business then lawsuit it is.

Dude, you are way out there. Telling someone not to wear a tie is not denying employment.

So...let's just run with this a little bit. Say I am working my job at...oh...i don't know, the Jewish center. Now....at the Jewish center, I am required to wear a T-shirt, but it doesn't specify what t-shirts I can wear.

But there isn't a specific rule against wearing a Nazi T-shirt.

So I wear my Nazi T-Shirt.

Can I then sue the Jewish center for asking me to take the T-shirt off or be fired?

monoxide · 01-25-2011, 10:26 PM

(01-25-2011 10:23 PM)Peyton Wrote: Dude, you are way out there. Telling someone not to wear a tie is not denying employment.

So...let's just run with this a little bit. Say I am working my job at...oh...i don't know, the Jewish center. Now....at the Jewish center, I am required to wear a T-shirt, but it doesn't specify what t-shirts I can wear.

But there isn't a specific rule against wearing a Nazi T-shirt.

So I wear my Nazi T-Shirt.

Can I then sue the Jewish center for asking me to take the T-shirt off or be fired?

you can't compare somebody's favored football team to a Nazi t-shirt at the Jewish center (great places by the way, cheap food!). Also, something that needs to be noted is the manager's tone. The first time he asked the worker in a serious manner to take the tie off was with anger and the f word. The worker even said if he had asked him in a professional manner, he would have been more than happy to take the tie off. Now am I saying that the worker has a possible lawsuit? Not at all, my knowledge of law and criminal justice is precious little. However, I do think the person who fired him should lose his job for the issue. I can almost guarantee that this is not a private business and the men near the top must hate this publicity.

***Peyton*** · 01-25-2011, 10:31 PM

(01-25-2011 10:26 PM)monoxide Wrote: you can't compare somebody's favored football team to a Nazi t-shirt at the Jewish center (great places by the way, cheap food!).

Why not.

The point I am making is that asking someone to remove an article of clothing isn't denying that person employment. It's just making a legitimate management decision.

I've been a manager......I asked employees to make changes to their work outfits all the time...it's called being the boss and completely legal.

ATLBound · 01-25-2011, 10:35 PM

(01-25-2011 10:23 PM)Peyton Wrote: Dude, you are way out there. Telling someone not to wear a tie is not denying employment.

So...let's just run with this a little bit. Say I am working my job at...oh...i don't know, the Jewish center. Now....at the Jewish center, I am required to wear a T-shirt, but it doesn't specify what t-shirts I can wear.

But there isn't a specific rule against wearing a Nazi T-shirt.

So I wear my Nazi T-Shirt.

Can I then sue the Jewish center for asking me to take the T-shirt off or be fired?

the jewish center will most likely have rules against supporting something that goes against there beliefs while at work during the time of your employment.

actually i know someone that works at a christian store and when they were hired they were advised that wearing clothes that worships Satan or has any clothes with any relationship to something that goes against their beliefs would result in termination.

but if this was not advised then yes.

ATLBound · 01-25-2011, 10:37 PM

(01-25-2011 10:16 PM)chazmataz Wrote: ok the packers are not an ethnic group, a religious group, a specific race, so i just don't see where any of what you bolded applies.

fandom to a sports team does not fall into any of those categories. the only word you bolded that applies is 'group' and that group doesn't fall into any of the categories described.

in all my years in management, DOZENS of seminars on the topic of harassment or discrimination not one time EVER has the fandom of a sports team been brought up.
i'm done with this thread until either someone shows me something from a court case that shows someone won a suit for any discrimination suit that was clearly described as other than race, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age disability or the other things spelled out in the EEOC documentation.

and actually, if you go strictly on harassment, wearing something that someone else finds offensive can qualify as harassment. the owner of this dealership was definitely concerned that some of his business relationships partners might be offended by that tie, so he was within his right to ask him to change it. again, for the employee not to do so is insubordination. seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Because nobody would fire anybody for wearing their favorite team tie except for this jackass. peyton of all people knows that football is just entertainment.

ATLBound · 01-25-2011, 10:42 PM

(01-25-2011 10:26 PM)monoxide Wrote: you can't compare somebody's favored football team to a Nazi t-shirt at the Jewish center (great places by the way, cheap food!). Also, something that needs to be noted is the manager's tone. The first time he asked the worker in a serious manner to take the tie off was with anger and the f word. The worker even said if he had asked him in a professional manner, he would have been more than happy to take the tie off. Now am I saying that the worker has a possible lawsuit? Not at all, my knowledge of law and criminal justice is precious little. However, I do think the person who fired him should lose his job for the issue. I can almost guarantee that this is not a private business and the men near the top must hate this publicity.

exactly!!!! Dude I know for the a fact that if I went to work with a Falcons tie on and my superviosr tried to fire me, then it would be greatly possible that he may be fired instead.

Nowhere in my work dress code does it say I'm not able to wear my favorite sports team. It just says dress business casual. If I'm business casual then I'm within the guidelines.

He basically put his personal feelings into the matter and fired the guy. How is that insubordination when he doesn't even own the car dealership?

Jesus · 01-25-2011, 10:42 PM

The tie will become irrelevant if this goes to trial, and it won't. Once they get before a judge the employer will dig up all kinds of things the plaintiff did in the past and use the tie and his insubordination as the last straw.

If anything they will settle for an undisclosed amount and by then it won't be news.

Of course this would never have happened had the Bears won. So as usual it's Jay Cutler's fault.

ATLBound · 01-25-2011, 10:47 PM

(01-25-2011 10:31 PM)Peyton Wrote: Why not.

The point I am making is that asking someone to remove an article of clothing isn't denying that person employment. It's just making a legitimate management decision.

I've been a manager......I asked employees to make changes to their work outfits all the time...it's called being the boss and completely legal.

He CLEARLY was asking him to remove the tie because of the Packer ASSOCIATION. If that was a Bears tie, then would he ask him to remove it?

Heck no!!!

So the subject here is NOT the tie, it's what's ON the tie.

I don;t know the situation you were in as a manager, but changes to work outfits would be in relation to dress code. He was well within his dress code.

The few things that would nullify the subject of the tie being legal to ask for removal would be offensive language, religion, or logos.

Every major corporation has those 3 things in their dress code or handbook.

Can't wear or support vividly a religion, offensive language, and in my company I can't wear huge logos.

I can't even say Merry Christmas during the holiday season to customers. I have to say Happy holidays, but if I wanted to talk sports to a customer then I could.

***Peyton*** · 01-25-2011, 10:48 PM

(01-25-2011 10:42 PM)ATLBound Wrote: exactly!!!! Dude I know for the a fact that if I went to work with a Falcons tie on and my superviosr tried to fire me, then it would be greatly possible that he may be fired instead.

Nowhere in my work dress code does it say I'm not able to wear my favorite sports team. It just says dress business casual. If I'm business casual then I'm within the guidelines.

He basically put his personal feelings into the matter and fired the guy. How is that insubordination when he doesn't even own the car dealership?

Insubordination has nothing to do with being the owner, I don't know where you are going with that.

This is not a case of a guy being fired for wearing a tie. This is a case where a supervisor gave an employee instructions and the employee simply refused to follow those instructions.

Really it's just that simple.