Kroger has to pay $180,000 to workers who were fired after they wouldn't wear LQBTQ+ pride symbols

[Foxfyre]

I don't struggle with it at all.
I've got no problem with companies requiring employees to wear uniforms, but these are symbols that have been added on the uniforms that have nothing to do with the company itself.
What would you say if a company decided to add swastika symbols to a company uniform?

I would strongly petition my employer to remove the requirement that I wear it. If he refused I would amicably resign and move on. It's his business. His reputation, His money funding it. He should have the right to set the rules no matter how screwball or ridiculous.

Also if the emphasis of the business was in that direction, I would quit anyway. But I would not think it ethical that I sue him over a policy I didn't like.

 

[Foxfyre]

Here's a thought, just quit politicizing sicko deviant fetishism and forcing sick shit on sane people. Problem solved, no need to resort to idiotic attempts at 'logic' as if they were real points of law or something.


"NAMBLA" logic - an extreme absolutist position which demands that for logical consistencies sake that certain gross crimes be allowed, in order that no one might feel restrained."

Stirling S. Newberry

Well, no one but Evul Xians and the sane, anyway. Those people need to be tossed into ovens, right?

In a free country everybody is allowed to be into whatever deviant, fetishism, sick shit they want so long as they do not break any laws or violate anybody else's rights doing that. In my opinion, employees do not have a right to set the policy in the business they work for.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

I would strongly petition my employer to remove the requirement that I wear it. If he refused I would amicably resign and move on. It's his business. His reputation, His money funding it. He should have the right to set the rules no matter how screwball or ridiculous.

Also if the emphasis of the business was in that direction, I would quit anyway. But I would not think it ethical that I sue him over a policy I didn't like.

You make some good points.

 

[Foxfyre]

You make some good points.

Nobody has been unreasonable in their points of view and there have been reasoned arguments on all sides. And I certainly sympathize with the two employees involved.

But a rational principle is defensible even when it makes it difficult for people I support and involves an employer that I don't. It should be a hard fast principle that the employer sets the rules for his/her business and the employees who choose to work for him/her should follow those rules.

IMO the employees involved were exercising their convictions by refusing to wear those aprons and that was their right to do, but they had no right to demand their employer change his policy, they were wrong to sue their employer and the court should have thrown the case out.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I would as well, but you appear to be insinuating the employer can add whatever symbols they like.

Pretty much, they are the one offering the pay checks, thus I give them a lot of leeway.

I look at it this way, the employer has a right to require uniforms, I think most of us agree with that. But when we are dealing with "symbols" that are deemed controversial such as in this situation, I don't think the employer should be firing employees simply based on the refusal to add such symbols to the uniform.

If the employer considers them to be part of the uniform then I would support their right to do so.

 

[DudleySmith]

In a free country everybody is allowed to be into whatever deviant, fetishism, sick shit they want so long as they do not break any laws or violate anybody else's rights doing that. In my opinion, employees do not have a right to set the policy in the business they work for.

You mean like how shoving people into ovens or deliberating starving them to death was legal in Germany, so nobody should have interfered with that? Feeding children hormones while convincing them to sexually mutilate themselves is apparently legal, too.

 

[Foxfyre]

You mean like how shoving people into ovens or deliberating starving them to death was legal in Germany, so nobody should have interfered with that? Feeding children hormones while convincing them to sexually mutilate themselves is apparently legal, too.

You are so non sequitur and ridiculouslyover the top here, not to mention that you haven't read the thread, I'll just wish you a pleasant day and move on. Thanks for understanding.

 

[toobfreak]

Some places it's illegal to not use someone's preferred pronouns.

That was Ireland.

So yes, this is the world we live in where you can be jailed for not calling a man a woman, or be fired for not supporting trannies and fag freakazoids.

Only if you accept it. If no one goes along with this crap, they can't arrest everybody, or let them arrest everybody and try to house most of society in prisons feeding and caring for them all while the planes and boats and trains all stop, manufacturing stops--- --- you gotta shove it right down their throats until the absurdity of it all breaks them. You see, there are millions and billions of us and only a few of them. They need our production and tax revenue more than we need anything else.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I’ve always felt that.

I think your liberalism has reached an expiration date.

 

[Coyote]

I think your liberalism has reached an expiration date.

Nope. We just don't always fit in the desinated pigeonholes