you're fired...

[shoothoops]

   i was not mocking anything!!!  i simply intimated that shaving her head was not suggested within my place of work.  she quit because she didn't want to work more than 30 hours.  ironic as i just saw her aunt and never has any of this been brought up

 listen jack, don't tell me what i'm mocking or not mocking and just move along.  my wife just had her port taken out following a years worth of intensive cancer therapy including chemo, radiation and antibody infusions.  she was bald for 6 months +  was as beautiful as the day i met her 40 years ago. 

someone who wishes another to "rot in hell" is the real character revealed.   pretty harsh words for someone who disagrees with another.  quit trying to twist me into someone i am not

i knew you guys would shift this thread into another attack on me...why do i keep coming to your guys little fortress here??

You said you didn't need anyone in your office looking like a "Prymaat Conehead".....

Your original message did not say she quit about hours. You lied either then or now.

I didn't wish for you to "Rot in hell"...we are all individual posters and people here and people can be addressed individually.

So it's okay for you to mock other bald people but not your wife? Do you see where this is inconsistent? Many if not everyone here has their individual experiences with cancer and other health challenges, including myself with multiple immediate family members.)

Are you saying TAMU Eagle fabricated the original message you sent?

You could have said you lied then or now, and then clarified your current position, which for now, comes across as double standards for different people, mocking bald people, denying racism/hate speech, actions, protecting racists.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

this is the first time i've re/reread that statement-it was mis-stated, but whatever.

  i did not fire her nor did she leave over this issue.  it was one of many issues we had with her, including, but not limited to attendance.  she did not shave her head.  she complained to me about having to work more than 30 hours per week.  as a professional office, we have codes of conduct as many others do as well

note, i said "grounds for"  there is context to everything.

Rocket, I know you didn't fire the employee for wanting to shave her head. That's not the point. The point is that you as an employer thought that you had the right to limit your employee's free speech because you thought that her free speech would have an adverse impact on your business.

In the case you brought up, the employer (Palentine High) is limiting the free speech of their employee because they thought that her free speech would have an adverse impact on their business.

The only difference between the two situations is that Palentine made the decision because their customers were offended by their employee's racist and bigoted views. You made your decision because you were afraid your customers would be be offended because they have bigoted and sexist views about how a woman should or shouldn't look. One decision fought against bigotry, another decision supported it.

This is capitalism at its finest. The company (Palentine High) puts out a product (education). Its customers don't like an aspect of their product (the teacher's racist views) and make their complaints known and some may have even voted with their checkbooks. Capitalism demands that a good employer would take action and improve their product by removing the aspect that the customers didn't like. Capitalism baby. It works for liberals too.

[tower912]

God bless you and your wife, Rocket.   

[Jockey]

Eng said it best