woman fired for displaying kerry bumper sticker on car

DKSuddeth

Senior Member
Oct 20, 2003
5,175
61
48
North Texas
fired for supporting Kerry

MOULTON — Lynne Gobbell never imagined the cost of a John Kerry-John Edwards bumper sticker could run so high.

Gobbell of Moulton didn't pay a cent for the sticker that she proudly displays on the rear windshield of her Chevrolet Lumina, but said it cost her job at a local factory after it angered her boss, Phil Gaddis.

Gaddis, a Decatur bankruptcy attorney, owns Enviromate, a cellulose insulation company in Moulton.

Gaddis did not return phone calls from THE DAILY about the alleged Thursday firing.

Gobbell said she consulted a lawyer, but then changed her mind about going to see him. She said she has cried about the incident and must do without income for three weeks while the state unemployment commission decides if she is eligible for compensation.

Gobbell said she was averaging 50 to 60 hours a week on the plant's bagging machine.

"The lady there (at the unemployment commission) said that she has never heard of a firing like this before," Gobbell said.

Gobbell gave this account:

"We were going back to work from break, and my manager told me that Phil said to remove the sticker off my car or I was fired," she said. "I told him that Phil couldn't tell me who to vote for. He said, 'Go tell him.' "

She went to Gaddis' office, knocked on the door and entered on his orders.

"Phil and another man who works there were there," she said. "I asked him if he said to remove the sticker and he said, 'Yes, I did.' I told him he couldn't tell me who to vote for. When I told him that, he told me, 'I own this place.' I told him he still couldn't tell me who to vote for."

Gobbell said Gaddis told her to "get out of here."

"I asked him if I was fired and he told me he was thinking about it," she said. "I said, 'Well, am I fired?' He hollered and said, 'Get out of here and shut the door.' "

She said her manager was standing in another room and she asked him if that meant for her to go back to work or go home. The manager told her to go back to work, but he came back a few minutes later and said, " 'I reckon you're fired. You could either work for him or John Kerry,' " Gobbell said.

"I took off my gloves and threw them in the garbage and left," Gobbell said.

Though she is unemployed and uncertain if she will get her job back, Gobbell said, she doesn't regret her decision to keep the sticker on her windshield.

"I would like to find another job, but I would take that job back because I need to work," she said. "It upset me and made me mad that he could put a letter in my check expressing his (political) opinion, but I can't put something on my car expressing mine."

She was referring to a flier that she said Gaddis placed in employee envelopes to remind them of the positive impact that President Bush's policies have had on them. An employee at the plant who would not identify himself confirmed the contents of the letter.

Gobbell provided a copy of the flier. It says:

"Just so you will know, because of the Bush tax (cut):

I was able to buy the new Hammer Mill
I was able to finance our receivables
I was able to get the new CAT skid steer
I was able to get the wire cutter
I was able to give you a job"
It further says:

"You got the benefit of the Bush tax cut. Everyone did."
 
If she was truly fired over a bumper sticker, then her former boss is a real jerk and needs to be fined at the very least. NO ONE should be forcing ANYONE else to vote a certain way.
 
CSM said:
If she was truly fired over a bumper sticker, then her former boss is a real jerk and needs to be fined at the very least. NO ONE should be forcing ANYONE else to vote a certain way.


It's not about forcing somebody to vote; obviously that's impossible. But it could be about having a working force with a like-mindset. :)
 
-=d=- said:
It's not about forcing somebody to vote; obviously that's impossible. But it could be about having a working force with a like-mindset. :)
then I would think that the hiring process would involve questions like 'do you vote republican or democrat'. but that would be illegal, wouldn't it?
 
That's not much of a reason to fire someone. If there isn't more to the story than that, I think that's not right.
 
I don't think she is telling the truth. I don't like to brag, but I have a radar for liars. Just ask my hubby!

However, most employers have the ability to fire any employee without reason-providing that they are not under contract, etc. It sucks, but that is life. There is nothing she really can do about it. Besides, if she backed out of seeing a lawyer, she must feel that she does not have a lot of ground to stand on as far as legal action.
 
fuzzykitten99 said:
I don't think she is telling the truth. I don't like to brag, but I have a radar for liars. Just ask my hubby!

However, most employers have the ability to fire any employee without reason-providing that they are not under contract, etc. It sucks, but that is life. There is nothing she really can do about it. Besides, if she backed out of seeing a lawyer, she must feel that she does not have a lot of ground to stand on as far as legal action.

I agree. If there was any substantial truth to this, she would be able to get an ACLU lawyer for free and they'd make this national news in a hot New York minute. Could be that it could still happen...there is still time before the elections.
 
fuzzykitten99 said:
I don't think she is telling the truth. I don't like to brag, but I have a radar for liars. Just ask my hubby!

However, most employers have the ability to fire any employee without reason-providing that they are not under contract, etc. It sucks, but that is life. There is nothing she really can do about it. Besides, if she backed out of seeing a lawyer, she must feel that she does not have a lot of ground to stand on as far as legal action.
or she may just not want to deal with a lawsuit. and an employer can't just fire for no reason unless thats specifically stated in the work agreement.
 
DKSuddeth said:
or she may just not want to deal with a lawsuit. and an employer can't just fire for no reason unless thats specifically stated in the work agreement.

Are you kidding? In this sue-happy society she would stand to rake in the big bucks. And since she is out of a job anyway what would she stand to lose - a windfall like that would be worth going after.

Since the employer did not fire her on the spot, it appears that he took some time to look up his rights. And then fired her based on some company rule he verified. I don't think he would be stupid enough to open himself to a lawsuit. Just my guess.
 
DKSuddeth said:
and an employer can't just fire for no reason unless thats specifically stated in the work agreement.

yes they can. it's called a layoff. it's a nicer term than "fired". not only that, is he could even say that she had poor performance, etc. and maybe she "forgot" to mention that she was a mediocre employee. We are only hearing HER side. Not the employer's side.
 
I seriously wonder if I would see all the blase responses if this headline had read 'woman fired for having bush/cheney sticker on automobile'
 
IT sucks but its capitalism. I would say the same for someone getting fired for a Bush/cheney sticker. What were the circumstances? What kind of job was it? Is the employer in a state where you can fire anyone anytime? etc etc.

It doesnt make it right. But its legal.
 
It at the very least shows extreme immaturity on the boss's part...if this is true. You don't fire people for politics - intentionally causing harm (economic here) because of political views is contrary to what I believe this country is about.
 
Personally, if this man fired the woman for being a Kerry supporter, I think he is a total asshole. If the woman was fired for a Bush/Cheney sticker rather than a Kerry/Edwards sticker I would tell her the same thing: If that is the real reason you were fired, then you should be able to get a lawyer for this matter no problem whatsoever...

However....

If it is his privately-owned business, then I feel he should have the right to fire or hire whomever he pleases...I may think he is a major prick for firing someone for their political beliefs...but guess what...its not my business.

Now, if he takes gov't money, or participates in any program that makes him responsible for upholding the legal requirements to fire a person...then I think he has to hold to them...

I agree with most everyone here, however...I think there is a lot more to this story that we are not hearing from the woman involved.
 
ScreamingEagle said:
Yes, but it's more - it's individual freedom.

Don't you make the rules in your own house? Same goes for your own company.

Ve haf vays of making zem cooperate. :slap:

Your analogy does not hold up. When someone comes to your house and annoys you by voicing support for kerry, you can demand that they leave. But the workplace is a different situation. Even without a collective bargaining agreement, workers have certain rights in the workplace. An employer has only limited authority over freedom of speech and then only in context of job performance.

If we accept your analogy as correct, then we should no longer call the hired help employees. We should call them slaves.

The employer's action was stupid in the extreme. If this woman hires a shyster she will end up owning a substantial portion of the company. Matter of fact, she probably doesn't even need to hire a shyster. There's probably two van loads of ACLU peckerheads headed in her direction within an hour after that article hit the street.

Assuming that the account stated in the article is correct, this woman's rights were clearly violated by an arrogant employer who grossly overstepped his authority.
 

Forum List

Back
Top