Re: [BDSM-LegalIssues] Re: New book -- good but disturbing
Good grief Jay.
You have my permission to forward this thread (unclipped of course) to Susan Wright (who isn't a board member) and anyone else you
like on the NCSF board. Their email addresses can be found on our website.
I've never indicated once that I was speaking for NCSF.
I've simply stated that private corporations, such as the one I work for, in employment at will states, have the right to hire or
fire employees for any number of reasons- which include at my company, criminal substance abuse or violent histories.
I'm sorry you find that so terribly distressing. But, the policies of my private employer do not dictate what I do in my private
life or the volunteer work I preform for NCSF or other organizations.
If you'd like to make this discussion at least relevant to the list, what do you feel about BDSM organizations that require their
members to sign waivers indicating they're not felons or members of a sex offeder registry?
Leigha
On Tue , 'Jay Wiseman' sent:
> So the essence of your reply is: Given that Maryland is an "at will"
>
> state (as are the employees at your company) this completely
> justifies your firing a *completely factually innocent* person (and
> also your not re-hiring them) on the sole basis of their having been
>
> arrested.
> Scenario: the police arrest an employee of yours for murder. Upon
> learning of his arrest, you immediately fire him. Within 48 hours,
> subsequent police investigation conclusively proves that "some other
>
> dude" did the murder. Employee is promply released and all charges
> against him are dropped. The police even informally apologize for
> all he was put through. However, said employee is still out of a
> job, and you are perfectly fine with this because, hey, Maryland is
> an "at will" state.
> After all, to have been arrested is, by your explicitly stated
> standards, to have a "history" and therefore, again by your
> explicitly stated standards, to be a potential liability. *Actual
> innocence* (a troublesome nuisance, I know) is a complete non-issue
> for you.
> Given the above, the people that your volunteer organization (NCSF)
> has *defended* would *not* be hired by, or would be fired from, your
>
> company -- and your own words conclusively demonstrate that you're
> completely at peace with that because hey, it's an at-will situation
>
> so things are all perfectly fine, don'tcha know.
> In brief, if an action is legal, then said action is also just
> perfectly peachy. No problem here.
> Given that you would not hire people that your volunteer
> organization
> (NCSF) has defended, and that you have *repeatedly* defended and
> justified your practice, your continued association with both your
> company and with NCSF is completely untenable.
> From which one will you be resigning forthwith?
> Best,
> Jay
> p.s. do I have your permission to forward your posts in this thread
>
> to Susan Wright?
> --- In BDSM-LegalIssues@
> wrote:
> >
> > Jay-
> >
> > Maryland is an employment at will state. The employees where I
> work
> are not unionized and are not covered by any type of contract
> > or collective bargaining agreement. As such, the only protections
> they have in either the hiring process or their jobs are the laws
> > that cover employees (including me by the way) from discrimination
>
> based on gender, age, disability, religion, race, nationality
> > and military service in some cases, etc. Maryland does not have
> laws protecting people based on arrest or conviction records or for
> > that matter based on sexual orientation.
> >
> > If the owner of the company I work for decides he doesn't like
> someone's personality, it's completely legal for him to fire that
> > employee. If he feels like an employee's (or potential employee's)
>
> arrest/conviction record would be disruptive to his business or
> > expose the company to liability, it's completely legal for that
> person to be fired.
> >
> > Again, Maryland is an employment at will state and employees don't
>
> have recourse if they're terminated for a reason that falls
> > outside of those protected discrimination classes. The
> unemployment
> system of course covers them but private employers aren't
> > obligated to hire or maintain employment for people who don't fit
> inside their corporate framework (barring for reasons of
> > discrimination covered by the law.)
> >
> > Employees or potential employees with substance abuse or violent
> histories are an unacceptable risk for most employers, including
> > mine. And, once again I'll note, the background checks the company
>
> I work for conducts are authorized in writing by the employees
> > before they are ever done.
> >
> > For whatever it's worth- I work for a company owned by people of a
>
> minority religious faith, and 60%+ of our employees are African
> > American. I'm out in my office about my sexual orientation and
> about my work with and for NCSF. I love the place I work.
> >
> >
> > -Leigha
> >
> >
> >
> > > Wow. Freakin' wow. There it is, in black and white for all to
> see.
> > > Um, let me guess. As a matter of corporate policy, you do, of
> > > course, routinely re-hire those fired employees, with full back
> pay
> > > and benefits, who have been arrested for violent felonies if
> they
> > > subsequently have their original charges dropped, or reduced to
> a
> > > non-
> > > violent felony, or reduced to a misdemeanor, or acquitted,
> right?
> > > Your company has had such a "rehire and restore" policy for
> years,
> > > right?
> > > The alternative suggests that a person who is *completely
> factually
> > > innocent* of such a charge nonetheless summarily loses their job
> > > with
> > > your company with no recourse (ah, the joys of "at will"
> > > employment),
> > > and further suggests that you are just fine with that. After
> > > all, "can't take a chance" right?
> > > > I'm surprised you feel like my volunteer work with and for
> NCSF
> is
> > >
> > > relevant in this matter at all.
> > > >
> > > > Leigha
> > > I'm not surprised, not at all, that you're surprised.
> > > Jay
> >
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> http://sitemail7.
>yahoogroups.
> http://groups.
>92NXVpBF9TAzk3MzU5
>TI3OARzZWMDZnRyBHN
> http://groups.
>9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdy
>WMDZnRyBHNsawNycGx
> http://groups.
>9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdy
>nRwYwRzdGltZQMxMTk
> http://groups.
>5mBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0
>GsDbXNncwRzdGltZQM
> http://groups.
>F9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGd
>bGlua3MEc3RpbWUDMT
> http://groups.
>iBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0B
>sDbWJycwRzdGltZQMx
> [9]
> http://us.ard.
>=groups/S=17050838
>3/*http://college-
>A152932587[
> http://groups.
>DgzMARncnBzcElkAzE
> http://groups.
>9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdy
>3RuZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTE
> http://sitemail7.
>digest@yahoogroups.
> [13]
> http://groups.
>3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkA
>N0aW1lAzExOTkyMTI0
> [15]
> http://sitemail7.
>unsubscribe@
> http://groups.
>jBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0B
>sDdm1icnMEc3RpbWUD
> http://groups.
>3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkA
>RzdGltZQMxMTk5MjEy
> http://us.ard.
>groups/S=170508380
>http://tech.
> http://us.ard.
>groups/S=170508380
>http://advision.
> http://us.ard.
>=groups/S=17050838
>*http://advision.
>
Post message: BDSM-LegalIssues@onelist.com
Subscribe: BDSM-LegalIssues-subscribe@onelist.com
Unsubscribe: BDSM-LegalIssues-unsubscribe@onelist.com
List owner: BDSM-LegalIssues-owner@onelist.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.onelist.com/community/BDSM-LegalIssues
Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
posted by Annja Sue at
3:23 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home