Illinois salesman fired for wearing Packers tie

[ATLBound]

(01-25-2011 11:05 PM)Peyton Wrote:  You are the one that's not getting it. There is no existing right to wear a Packers tie at a Chicago dealership. It's not protected in the constitution.

He was given instruction. He refused to follow instruction. He's fired. End of story.

If your boss tells you to go cheat on your wife and he fires you because you don't want to, you don't think you can file a lawsuit against him?

This is more extreme but the same concept. The obligation is to support what you like unless specified otherwise is a set of rules for your employment.

[Peyton]

(01-25-2011 11:19 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  If your boss tells you to go cheat on your wife and he fires you because you don't want to, you don't think you can file a lawsuit against him?

This is more extreme but the same concept. The obligation is to support what you like unless specified otherwise is a set of rules for your employment.

Yeah you are just being silly now. I'm done discussing this.....agree to disagree. Let me know when John Stone gets his million dollar settlement.

[Peyton]

(01-25-2011 11:19 PM)lsmalls15 Wrote:  ATLBound, take a closer look at the association clause:

* denying employment opportunities to a person because of marriage to, or association with, an individual of a particular race, religion, national origin, or an individual with a disability.

Notice that it's not just any association that meets the discrimination threshold. It must be an association with an individual of a particular race, religion, national origin, or individual with a disability. Nowhere is association with a sports team denoted as a protected affiliation...and it would take a damn good lawyer to convince a jury that Packer Nation fits the definition of national origin.

Oops...game over.

[ATLBound]

(01-25-2011 11:25 PM)Peyton Wrote:  Oops...game over.

haha you're funny. no need to be rude because we're disagreeing. like you said agree to disagree. and he isn't filing a lawsuit so i guess we won't see that happening.

But I know 100% that if I was well within the rules I was presented with at my job and there were no other reasons to fire me except that I wore a Falcons tie and my supervisor just didn't like it, then that is called "firing without proper cause"

I will ask my lawyer for the proper term and come back tomorrow

[papachaz]

(01-25-2011 11:01 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  Dude you're making my point for me. He wasn't fired for being out of dress code. He wasn't fired for being rude to a customer. He CLEARLY wasn't fired for lack of sales or production.

He was fired for being a fan of the Packers.

How can I make this simpler?.....

Say I work at a place that is neutral and let's you express your feelings however you want to....

My supervisor did not own the business but he was an atheists. I was never advised that I couldn't support my religion. I came to work with a shirt that says "I love Jesus" on it.

He can express his feelings about the shirt but he can't fire me for it. Now if after that day they change the rules and make this a part of some form of dress code or expression then I wouldn't be able to wear it anymore.

I will talk to my HR apartment at work about it, but there is supposed to be so many hours of communication for a change in rule if there is any, regardless of privately owned or not.

This is not insubordination, it is discriminatory

ok i just can't help myself. He was NOT fired for being a fan of the packers, he was fired for refusing to remove the tie.
Your argument about your boss being an atheist proves my point. If you wore that shirt, and your boss found it offensive, as in he felt that you were harassing him because of his religious beliefs, (or religious NON beliefs) he has grounds for harassment against you. if you and he had had religious discussions in the past and you knowing he was an atheist wore the shirt anyway, he could fire you for making the workplace feel hostile to him. religion is a basis for discrimination. fandom is NOT religion, it's NOT race, its NOT age, it's NOT sexual, it's NOT anything that the EEOC qualifies as something for which discrimination can be fired.

as for peytons 'i suck cock' t shirt, that would be something of a sexual nature, which would be offensive to some people, regardless of their sexuality. same thing as when they came around the pepsi plant i worked at and made us all take down the Snap On tools swimsuit calendars. if it's something that might offend someone coming in, then you remove it before it happens. This manager no doubt could have handled it in a much better way, but removing something that could have been considered potentially offensive to a customer or business partner is within his right. To refuse to remove that would be grounds for disciplinary action. multiple warnings almost always result in termination.

This is why this is an easy lawsuit.

If the Bears won this wouldn't have happened

If the guy was wearing a totally irrelevant team, i.e. the Steelers, then this wouldn't have happened...

but because this a rival team and they lost to them and they are in Illinois then it's a problem? What about that does not speak to discrimination?

how do you know it wouldn't have happened? the manager is concerned that his business relationship with the Bears could be negatively impacted. He might very well thought that if the dude was wearing any other team. If he's worried about the potential business that could be lost because of this tie, he's within his right to ask him to remove/replace it. he did so, repeatedly, and was ignored. like i already said, multiple warnings usually end in disciplinary actions.

[ATLBound]

(01-25-2011 11:32 PM)chazmataz Wrote:  ok i just can't help myself. He was NOT fired for being a fan of the packers, he was fired for refusing to remove the tie.
Your argument about your boss being an atheist proves my point. If you wore that shirt, and your boss found it offensive, as in he felt that you were harassing him because of his religious beliefs, (or religious NON beliefs) he has grounds for harassment against you. if you and he had had religious discussions in the past and you knowing he was an atheist wore the shirt anyway, he could fire you for making the workplace feel hostile to him. religion is a basis for discrimination. fandom is NOT religion, it's NOT race, its NOT age, it's NOT sexual, it's NOT anything that the EEOC qualifies as something for which discrimination can be fired.

as for peytons 'i suck cock' t shirt, that would be something of a sexual nature, which would be offensive to some people, regardless of their sexuality. same thing as when they came around the pepsi plant i worked at and made us all take down the Snap On tools swimsuit calendars. if it's something that might offend someone coming in, then you remove it before it happens. This manager no doubt could have handled it in a much better way, but removing something that could have been considered potentially offensive to a customer or business partner is within his right. To refuse to remove that would be grounds for disciplinary action. multiple warnings almost always result in termination.

This is why this is an easy lawsuit.

If the Bears won this wouldn't have happened

If the guy was wearing a totally irrelevant team, i.e. the Steelers, then this wouldn't have happened...

but because this a rival team and they lost to them and they are in Illinois then it's a problem? What about that does not speak to discrimination?

how do you know it wouldn't have happened? the manager is concerned that his business relationship with the Bears could be negatively impacted. He might very well thought that if the dude was wearing any other team. If he's worried about the potential business that could be lost because of this tie, he's within his right to ask him to remove/replace it. he did so, repeatedly, and was ignored. like i already said, multiple warnings usually end in disciplinary actions.

"If he'd worn the tie on Saturday I wouldn't have minded," he said, according to the Sun-Times.

This statement clearly shows his reasoning for firing the guy. So him wearing a Falcons tie wouldn't have mattered.

That was his secondary reason after this hit the news. The boss also agreed that NO customers complained about the tie. Hurting the business was a cover up after the fact.

[Radical]

This belongs in ABF.

[papachaz]

i asked my lawyer about this this morning. he actually laughed right out loud, and said no way in hell (his exact words) would HE try to represent anyone in a law suit like this, that it would be a complete waste of time, and most likely would be thrown out before ever going to a trial. he said that while by definition of the word discrimination, some might want to say that, that being discriminated against because you root for a different sports team would not be considered grounds to file on based on the EEOC's defined guidelines.

thats not saying there's not another lawyer who woudn't take this and try. but i'm still of the mind all those seminars i went to were right, as far as the discrimination goes. NOW, if i were the bosses boss, this dude would be called in on the carpet for how he handled the situation, and yeah i'd reprimand HIM for cussing at an employee. While i still believe the actual firing was for insubordination, i also know (see my posts above) that cussing an employee DOES constitute harassing behavior, and can be grounds for action based on making the workplace a hostile environment. Of course, it would have to continue on an ongoing basis. I'd do my job as his boss and write him up for cussing out an employee, and probably make it a final warning so that if it ever happened again, i'd be able to fire him with no worries because i'd have the paper trail.

that's it, i agree to disagree, but i'm done with this.

[Paulitik]

All I know, if I still lived in Atlanta, I would absoltuely refuse to buy a car from anyone wearing anything to do with the New Orleans Ain'ts. I would be an absolute dick about it too. I'd complain to the manager, and refuse to ever buy from that dealership. I'm not religious, so I focus my prejudices, irrationality and superstition on my sports affiliations. I don't care if you're Religion, Color, Sexual Orientation, but if you are a Goddamn Ain't or Gator fan, you can go fuck yourself(granted, that only applies in context of the situation, wearing gear, game day, at the sports bar, having a sports discussion, etc. If I were working, I'd be professional) .

I'm not sure if it was worth firing the guy over, obviously it's a dick move to rub a loss in the people's faces when you are depending on them to make a living. But I totally get his manager not wanting him to wear the tie out of respect for their clientele being predominantly Bears fans. I probably would have sent him home for the day, but I totally get the insubordination aspect.

[illmusic]

(01-25-2011 04:43 PM)Peyton Wrote:  I wouldn't have sympathy for him if I was on a jury. The boss asked him to take it off. Bosses ask us to do things that seem unfair all the time out here in the professional world.

The boss gave him the choice of wearing the tie or keeping his job. He chose to take a stand with the tie.

I don't see how there is a case there....straight up insubordination.

this...there doesn't have to be a set rule that says, "no Packers tie". I'm sure there is a sentence in there somewhere that illustrates you have to dress professionally...a Packers tie is easily on the line of professionalism. whatever lawyer is licking his chops at that case got their degree out a cereal box lol