Wednesday February 20, 2013, 4:52 am
During the run-up to the election in November, we discussed the many corporate criminals who threatened their employees with termination if they voted for Obama. As despicable as the behavior of these Republicans was, it appears that it was not just an empty threat in all cases.
Wednesday February 20, 2013, 7:02 am
Thanks Tom for the post. A person's political views should not be considered when hiring or firing. I hope Ms. Kunkle's lawsuit is successful and she receives much more than $25,000. Read and noted.
I got to see note and comment on the Rachel post yesterday before the Care2 monster ate it.
Wednesday February 20, 2013, 8:42 am
Corporations and small companys should not be allowed to discriminate against employees who vote
contrary to the corporation's / companies' official / unofficial position on candidates for office in any
election, national or local. The voter has rights to vote per their own personal political views.
This woman should win her lawsuit with additional cash. This is an important case. This case may
wind up into the Supreme Court.
Wednesday February 20, 2013, 9:37 am
I hope she wins, one's politics should have nothing to do with their job, but sadly many of the extremists in our society are incapable of understanding that., thanks TC
Wednesday February 20, 2013, 10:06 am
Good grief – it is like Big Brother and 1984 – now they want to know your thoughts as well?! Disgusting and sounds like any Fascist or Communist state! I hope she wins her lawsuit!
Wednesday February 20, 2013, 10:51 am
Of course the brunt of the issue is PROVING this to be the reason. Are we going to have to walk around with recorders in our pockets ? Or leave off talking to ANYBODY at work about anything except WORK. next thing you know picking the next Bachlorette will get you fired.
This also brings up the other issue concerning my investment/ money being used SECRETLY to finance candidates I may not agree with by Corporations. I want to know how THEIR vote was cast !!!!
Arrrrgh !!!! Hypocracy just drives me INSANE !!!!!
Wednesday February 20, 2013, 4:05 pm
This is what happens in Fascist Countries, no one dares speak about what they truly believe due to the fact they could get fired, thrown in jail, their home taken away. I would say that if this is allowed to happen it is another step in our demise of the Country we thought we lived in and had.
Why should it be always at the expense of the little guy to protect themselves. Where is the Federal Government and the Legal help we should be all getting? It isn't there because we are on our own fighting the giants that our Government got in bed with. Corporations are the people they protect, just ask Romney "Corporations are people my friend".
Wednesday February 20, 2013, 6:23 pm
There is a distinct and purposeful cause in the GOP to propel the government toward a distorted and dysfunctional interpretation of the laws that once governed this Nation! what is intended here is the offspring of Fascism and ought to be the concern of every American!
Wednesday February 20, 2013, 9:03 pm
I hope she wins and I think Dandelion and Lee E make some very good points. However, some members of the judiciary are not as noble as they should be, and a lot will depend on the type of judge she gets.
Wednesday February 20, 2013, 10:22 pm
As some have pointed out, discrimination is usually very hard to prove. Of course we don't know the details of this case, but the former employee is not likely to win. This country is supposed to be free, but our freedom is eroding, little by little.
Wednesday February 20, 2013, 11:16 pm
In Canada, when hiring a person, it is illegal to ask gender, race, ethnicity, date of birth, sexual orientation, marital status, if any children, political affiliation, religion etc and social insurance number. You may however ask if you are legally entitled to work in Canada. It may not be on the application anywhere and during an interview it cannot be asked either. Of course if someone is black or Asian for example, some things become more apparent.
As far as firing, care must also be used and any firing has to be job related. When I was terminated at my last job, the reason was officially "job redundancy", although I believe it was because I was hired by the AVP who was fired for cause. I have checked and my position was indeed eliminated and my assistant now does the work that the 2 of us did. A friend of mine that I had previously supervised and who was gay, was terminated for poor performance. He took the Bank to court because he had all the proof that he had met or exceeded his goals. The Bank had to pay up, and pay up big.
Like John, if the owner had come to me, I would have told him "my vote, my business". The 1st amendment to the Constitution says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
"Although it is not explicitly protected in the First Amendment, the Supreme Court ruled, in NAACP v. Alabama, freedom of association to be a fundamental right protected by it. In Roberts v. United States Jaycees, the Supreme Court held that associations may not exclude people for reasons unrelated to the group's expression."
In my view, and I am not a lawyer, the right to vote your conscience and not how the employer dictates is covered in the 1st amendment. A person's voting record should never enter into anything to do with employment.
I am reminded of a situation, a hiring situation at my church years ago, when I was the head of the personnel committee. We were hiring a church secretary, not a minister. One committee member named Gary asked what religion an applicant was. I instructed the applicant not to answer his question and then took Gary out of the room to remind him of the rules. Eventually I had to turf Gary off the committee. Even though it was a church, the secretary's job did not have anything to do with her religion. Had her religion forbidden her to type using a computer or typewriter, then he could ask the applicant if there was any reason why she could not complete the job as outlined, but again not her religion.
I hope this employee wins her lawsuit, and I hope the courts award her far more than the $25,000 she is seeking. This is blatant violation of her constitutional and democratic rights, in my opinion.
Thursday February 21, 2013, 3:59 am
Thanks to all. Kudos to Sheryl and Lynn. Back when I was working I often discussed politics during breaks, and there are several former Republicans because of it. To fire some for doing so violates the right to freedom of speech.
Saturday February 23, 2013, 8:22 am
Thanks Tom! And the sad thing is our taxpayer dollars including those who voted for Obama (and the other Progressive parties) are paying her wages. The Republicans seem to want every aspect of our Country to fail. I hope she has the best of luck with her lawsuit.