Trial set for firing over use of 'n' word

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Mr.Fitnah, Jan 10, 2011.

  1. Mr.Fitnah
    Offline

    Mr.Fitnah Dreamcrusher

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,480
    Thanks Received:
    2,673
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Paradise.
    Ratings:
    +2,673
    Trial set for firing over use of 'n' word

    By Michael Klein
    Inquirer Staff Writer

    A federal jury will be asked to decide whether it is acceptable for an African American person, but not a white person, to use the "n" word in a workplace.

    U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick has ruled that former Fox29 reporter-anchor Tom Burlington's lawsuit against the station, claiming a double standard and alleging that he was the victim of racial discrimination, may go to trial. However, Surrick denied Burlington's claim of a hostile work environment.

    Burlington, who is white, was fired after using the "n" word during a June 2007 staff meeting at which reporters and producers were discussing reporter Robin Taylor's story about the symbolic burial of the word by the Philadelphia Youth Council of the NAACP.

    Burlington, who began work at the station in 2004 and is now working as a real estate agent, was suspended within days and fired after an account of the incident was published in the Philadelphia Daily News. He alleges that he "was discriminated against because of his race," according to court documents. He claims in his lawsuit that at least two African American employees at Fox29 had used the word in the workplace and were not disciplined.

    The dispute began after Taylor, who is white, used the phrase the "n" word during the 2007 staff meeting. She said participants at the burial had said the full word "at least a hundred times or more," according to court records.

    "Does this mean we can finally say the word n-?" Burlington asked colleagues, according to depositions.

    Trial set for firing over use of 'n' word | Philadelphia Inquirer | 01/05/2011

    So can only blacks use the N word?
    What will the SCOTUS say?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. actsnoblemartin
    Offline

    actsnoblemartin I love Andrea & April

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,039
    Thanks Received:
    407
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    La Mesa, CA
    Ratings:
    +407
    im sorry but blacks who use the word ******, are morons, and whites should not want to be morons.

    Still, if they wanna be morons, fine. Im against all double standards, whether they be against whites, men, non muslims, etc

    we will always have racism, because rational thought, and intellectual discussion about race are impossible :cuckoo: with race baiters and left wing culture
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
  3. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,318
    Thanks Received:
    12,691
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,756
    To make it discrimination I believe it would have to be proven that a black person said, 'does this mean we can finally say the word honky?' and not been disciplined or let go.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. strollingbones
    Online

    strollingbones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,550
    Thanks Received:
    15,607
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    chicken farm
    Ratings:
    +31,870
    they will rule for freedom of speech and the that everyone can say ******
     
  5. strollingbones
    Online

    strollingbones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,550
    Thanks Received:
    15,607
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    chicken farm
    Ratings:
    +31,870
    okay let me say this.....with all the problems what blacks have in this country....i am always amazed at their reaction to things that have little importance...ie....racial epithahs and such....


    again it is not what you are called it is what you answer to that matters
     
  6. goldcatt
    Offline

    goldcatt Catch me if you can! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    10,330
    Thanks Received:
    2,331
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    CentralPA
    Ratings:
    +2,331
    No, it has nothing to do with freedom of speech. It was a private employer, the First Amendment only applies to government.

    If you read the full article, the facts aren't entirely as suggested in the OP. Another white employee at a staff meeting made an observation about the use of what she called "the n-word" at an event that took place outside the station among non-station employees. To which Burlington replied asking is it was then okay for "them", presumably station employees from the context of the article, to use the term "******". Apparently he was advocating its use on the air. A black producer objected, and the race (no pun intended) is on.

    There is no report in this article anyway of any black employee using the word, except that he "claims" it was done at other times by two employees. It would be interesting to see the allegations in the complaint.

    A private employer has the right to place limits on speech including the use of profanity or words that are considered offensive to other employees. It also caused the employer bad publicity when the events at an internal staff meeting showed up in the local newspaper. If they had a policy in place on the use of language or reason to believe he (as a news anchor, a high profile position) was causing bad press for the organization that could hurt its business, they were well within their rights to fire him.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
  7. strollingbones
    Online

    strollingbones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,550
    Thanks Received:
    15,607
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    chicken farm
    Ratings:
    +31,870
    if you allow one person...regardless of race ...to use the word then you have to allow everyone...simple as that...

    remember mark furman paid a higher price for saying ****** than oj did for the murder of 2 people
     
  8. goldcatt
    Offline

    goldcatt Catch me if you can! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    10,330
    Thanks Received:
    2,331
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    CentralPA
    Ratings:
    +2,331
    Mark Furman's use of the word also caused bad publicity for his employer. In his case it was a government employer, but when it impacts the employer's effectiveness and ability to do its job....the employee usually goes.

    Like I said, I'd be interested to see the allegations in the complaint of black employees at the tv station using the word, including when it allegedly occurred, in what context and whether it was reported or made public to embarrass the station.

    Bottom line is, you embarrass your employer in public your ass is usually gone.
     
  9. zzzz
    Offline

    zzzz Just a regular American

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,072
    Thanks Received:
    422
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Yountsville
    Ratings:
    +429
    The problem here is twofold. First did the employer express that as a condition of employment was this word forbidden. Second, if it was anyone saying the word has to be disciplined equally regardless of race.

    When you accept a job, you accept the conditions of employment, including dress code and how you act while on the premises or the on the job. Of course a lot of these rules are ambiguous, but have been upheld as being a condition of employment. But an employer cannot punish one person for an offense and not punish another for the same offense because of race. This is discrimination. Now the level of punishment can be different because of time of employment or other factors like probationary status of the employee.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
  10. frazzledgear
    Offline

    frazzledgear Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    1,479
    Thanks Received:
    541
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +541
    How would that prove discrimination? Your statement only proves the guy's complaint in the first place that you too think specific words are off limits to some people based on nothing but their race! Every time I see a news report about someone else in trouble for saying the "n" word, its like OMG, tell people WHAT the word was the got them into trouble and let's leave the dumb ass guesswork out of a news report here!!! It isn't being used as a pejorative in that instance but a factual accounting in a news report! They can sure say "bitch" and "bastard" which many people still find incredibly offensive especially since most times people hear it on network tv, someone is actually being called those words -both of which are actually gender-based, one a direct reference to a woman and the other a reference to the marriage status of someone's mother -and both meant as pejoratives and insults! But the idea that a reporter must say someone was fired for saying "the 'n' word" is beyond PC -it is downright childish, as if human ears are SOOO delicate they will shrivel up if they hear the full word in a report about how someone got fired for using the word! A word they can and will hear REPEATEDLY if they just turn on their radio and can STILL hear it in movies as well! But only when said by a black person which is clear double standard. There is a move to re-write and censor Huckleberry Finn to remove the word -when in reality, that word was in COMMON USE at the time and to understand the real nature of that story -a story in which the good guy IS a black runaway slave -why censor out a word like that to "pretty up" the story to be POLITICALLY CORRECT? The word is worse than the fact the hero of the story was a slave in the United States? Are you kidding? It was never intended to be a politically correct story in the first place -a story in which the bad guys were all WHITES, Huck's father was a lowlife scumbag - and the hero and most decent person in the story is a black runaway slave! I've never understood the contrived "outrage" here with this book. Oh no, can't let kids read THAT story because the PC police said "bad!" and even READ that word much less have it part of a classroom discussion as part of this book. Gee, why not go back and re-write the classic works of others going all the way back and put the PC police on them too and strip them of anything that remotely smells like a term that carries any racial, gender, sexual oriented, handicapped label at all? Why not let the PC police just re-write our entire history while we are at it -oh, I forgot, they are. After all we all know the PC police are the bestest, smartest, wisest people who ever lived. Just think how much better the story of Huckleberry Finn would have been if Twain had just checked in with the PC police first so he could write a story about a runaway slave who was the hero -but one who never once had to endure being called "******" by a white person like he really would have been!! ROFL Yeah, the PC police make the best morons maybe.

    I personally find the word "******" used by anyone today in normal conversation or in modern entertainment offensive. It is never used in my house and I never had to tell anyone it wasn't to be used in my house. But then race is rarely a topic of discussion in my home anyway. I live in a very racially mixed neighborhood -about 25% black and 10% Hispanic. Conservatives aren't nearly as obsessed with race as liberals are and liberals constantly assume that since they are SOO obsessed with race - why their political opponents HAVE to be even MORE obsessed with it! Which is why I find it such bullshit when liberals insist conservatives didn't vote for the most far leftwing extremist Presidential candidate we have had since Woodrow Wilson just because the man is black. Oh yeah, like if he just had white skin I would have voted for a man who chose to surround himself with leftwing extremists, radicals, domestic terrorists and communists, none of whom ever held a real job in their lives and has one of the most extremist leftist agenda of any Presidential candidate in my lifetime!! ROFL! That must mean I didn't vote for that LIAR Gore or TRAITOR Kerry because they were white, right? lol Obama is further left than either of those two and I would have cut off my hand first before voting for either of them. Obama's political views made him a nonviable candidate for me then and in 2012! NOT his race. He's not getting my vote and I don't give a crap what color he is any more than I cared what color Liar Gore and Traitor Kerry were when I didn't vote for them either! It is because he IS so far left and with Pelosi and Reid pursued such a leftwing extremist agenda that caused the conservative backlash -NOT his race! But I really, REALLY hope liberals keep insisting Obama's skin color caused it -(I guess that 27 point sharp drop in approval ratings during his first year must be all those white morons who needed nearly a full year to notice he was black, right? ROFL) because it means they will not make any adjustments to their extremist agenda, won't go back to trying to deceive voters they are "centrists" when they are not and they will continue to push their extremist agenda - which will insure they remain losers at the ballot box!

    I think anyone who uses the "n" word is a moron -but since blacks are far more likely to use it than anyone else I know, I wonder why so many go out of the way to keep this word alive in the black community by using it themselves and so frequently, including the word as part of their entertainment even -at the very same time they act so "outraged" if it comes out of a white person's mouth. If its an offensive word to their ears, it is offensive no matter who says it which means I find the "outrage" that suddenly appears when a white person says it to be phony, contrived and manipulative. If it is acceptable coming from a black person, then it is acceptable coming from an Asian or white person as well. If it is unacceptable coming from a white or Asian person, it sure as hell is not acceptable coming from a black either!

    The notion that it is somehow JUST AND PROPER to "outlaw" words that only some racial groups are not allowed to say as "offensive, getting fired-type speech" while other racial groups are allowed to say them with impunity -is racist in itself, fosters even more racial discrimination, is divisive and counterproductive -and REALLY STUPID.

    BTW -even though some blacks tried to get "honky" going as a word they hoped would be equally offensive to whites - it never really caught on and most whites are not offended by it. The dictionary says honky is an "offensive name for white person". But why would I get offended by a word that isn't really associated with any offensive traits BUT my race when my race isn't offensive to ME? So now some are trying it with "cracker" but to whites their mental image of who is a "cracker" doesn't ever include themselves and among whites the word refers to a specific kind of person with traits beyond just having a white skin -so again, not going to be viewed as equally offensive either. No insulting name for whites is going to catch on because they focus only on a word intended to identify their race instead of identifying negative traits that whites would agree are negative. Not true of the word "******" though and the use of the word by anyone as part of their normal conversation or as part of their music etc. should be discouraged -ESPECIALLY in the black community! Blacks should be even MORE outraged to hear another black person use this word than a white even! This is a word that was in common, everyday use during slavery in reference to slaves -identifying both their race and their status as not being the equal of a white. To some whites, it still does -so why allow its reinforcement by using it themselves! It is why there IS a very offensive element to this word that will never exist for either "honky" or "cracker". Pretty sad social statement that nearly 150 years after slavery ended that blacks want and deliberately continue to label themselves and each other with it, keeping it alive as a modern word instead of sending it to the "archaic term" pile where it belongs. But at the very same time schizophrenically want whites to be pretty severely punished if it comes out of their mouth -even if the word is said in a statement just asking if the word can be used at all! As if they only perceive it as a negative connotation that it means someone not the full equal of a white person if a white person says it -but in reality others both black and white still hear that negative connotation even when it is a black person saying it! What idiocy to think it loses all negative connotations if a black person says it! Until blacks decide they have had enough of hearing this word from ANYONE, including other blacks -they will never stop hearing it from other racial groups either. People see AND RESENT the hypocrisy here in the unequal treatment of people who say this word, treatment that is based on NOTHING but a person's RACE. Which is something that is actually WRONG and the very definition of "racial discrimination"! Shouldn't a decision to punish someone for the use of the word AT A BARE MINIMUM be based on whether an insult was actually intended by the use of the word or not?

    Or better yet how about discouraging the use of any demeaning, insulting labels that are based on race in the first place! What a novel idea! But that means being equally offended and punitive to any black person who uses the word as well! When I find it necessary, I personally prefer to use labels that insults someone's intelligence which cuts across all racial lines because race is irrelevant when it comes to idiocy and no one's race is something I (or anyone else) should find offensive in the first place!
     

Share This Page