Employer/Employee Rights

[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.