Employer/Employee Rights

[forgop]

Originally Posted by markem

Let me get this right.

There was a situation that you 'read about' but which you won't reveal here.

A person was fired.

You want to know if the company did something inappropriate or over the line.

You say that the company didn't do anything inappropriate such as ... and you go one to make a list.

But you seem to be fishing for a blanket condemnation of the company. Further, you seem to want validation of your own personal beliefs without disclosing what they are.

What am I missing here?

The subject of the story itself is controversial and I promised the ToE that we'd try to keep those issues out of the story. I'm just speaking of "what if" here.

[bobarian]

The "facts" provided do not allow us to give a cogent answer. If it's a news story why not provide a link? Otherwise we're just pretty much blowing wind.

Is it unfortunate? Yes
Is it wrong? Who knows
Is it illegal? Doubtful

A code of ethics denotes a specific pattern of behavior that an employee must uphold. I see nothing in the OP that suggests the employer was "meddling" in the employee's personal life. He was free to do whatever he did. But behavior has consequences.

The Constitution was written to protect the individual from government, not to protect employees from employers.

[forgop]

Originally Posted by bobarian

The "facts" provided do not allow us to give a cogent answer. If it's a news story why not provide a link? Otherwise we're just pretty much blowing wind.


The Constitution was written to protect the individual from government, not to protect employees from employers.

The ToE wanted me to keep the specifics out of the discussion because it could turn things south quite easily.

I understand the context of protection from government, but the question lies in what constitutional rights you think are fair to give up under the guideline of being employed by said company.

[markem]

Originally Posted by forgop

I understand the context of protection from government, but the question lies in what constitutional rights you think are fair to give up under the guideline of being employed by said company.

Dude! Listen. Listen closely. You have NO constitutional rights in your relationship with your employer. Constitutional rights (I'm painting writ large here) are, for the purposes of this discussion, about protection from government, not protection from employer.

[bobarian]

Originally Posted by markem

Dude! Listen. Listen closely. You have NO constitutional rights in your relationship with your employer. Constitutional rights (I'm painting writ large here) are, for the purposes of this discussion, about protection from government, not protection from employer.

Exactly! Give that man a cigar!

[taltos]

With all due respect to the ToE, his job and what he admittedly did have a direct bearing on how to answer this question. In at least one of the papers his job was mentioned. I think that the employer was correct in the firing but the ACLU believes that his First Amendment rights were violated. This story is not over yet.

[markem]

Originally Posted by taltos

With all due respect to the ToE, his job and what he admittedly did have a direct bearing on how to answer this question. In at least one of the papers his job was mentioned. I think that the employer was correct in the firing but the ACLU believes that his First Amendment rights were violated. This story is not over yet.

Well, now that the open secret is out, I can't see this thread staying around for long.

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by taltos

With all due respect to the ToE, his job and what he admittedly did have a direct bearing on how to answer this question.

And if the discussion turns specific to this case, it will become political and religious in nature and will be closed with extreme prejudice, Paul.

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by icehog3

And if the discussion turns specific to this case, it will become political and religious in nature and will be closed with extreme prejudice.

[kayak_rat]

Originally Posted by markem

Dude! Listen. Listen closely. You have NO constitutional rights in your relationship with your employer. Constitutional rights (I'm painting writ large here) are, for the purposes of this discussion, about protection from government, not protection from employer.

I agree also. A person chooses to work for a company......he chooses.

[forgop]

Originally Posted by markem

Dude! Listen. Listen closely. You have NO constitutional rights in your relationship with your employer. Constitutional rights (I'm painting writ large here) are, for the purposes of this discussion, about protection from government, not protection from employer.

I never argued constitutional rights with your employer. I'm just arguing over decency.

[bobarian]

What does "decency" have to do with anything here?

Is it "decent" for an employer to lay off an employee with 30 years seniority so they can hire a new intern for 1/5th the salary? Maybe not but it happens all the time.

"At will" employment gives employers wide leeway in dealing with their employees.

The First Amendment does not apply. The employee was sanctioned for a violation of ethical rules. Now if a government agent had stepped in and prevented him from exercising his rights that is a different issue.