Re: [BDSM-LegalIssues] You did, didn't you, say the following, 'tongue in cheek', RIGHT? WAS: Re: New b
Denis,
Very good points you make here & have made in the past.
What if you were wrong & had a wrongful termination suit brought
against you because you fired someone upon their arrest instead of
waiting till the courts did their duty and it was just a case of
mistaken identity or a spiteful spouse? This could be more
devastating to your business than waiting till the outcome.
Accused teachers are put on district duty until conviction (in some
states, depending on the circumstances)
desk duty till their internal investigation is complete. I would
imagine other businesses & occupations do the same because they are
willing to concede that the arrest just may be wrong or the
accusations just may be wrong. Just as long as you also figure the
possible consequence of making the wrong decision could destroy both
the ex employees future as well as your own business as well as the
future of your own employees.
Now to bring this back to BDSM... If an arrest record talks about
the flyer/toys etc that were found in the trunk of the arrested
persons car when they were pulled over, regardless of the person's
innocence, just the relationship to BDSM could destroy their job
because of what it is they were doing. Is this right? No but it may
not be the reason for the arrest that is their downfall but the
"outing" that happened because of it.
Lochai
切り縄 http://kirinawa.
On Jan 7, 2008, at 7:10 PM, Dennis wrote:
> --- In BDSM-LegalIssues@
> wrote:
>
> > Huh? Name just one case where the fact that somebody was arrested
> was
> > a factor in his conviction.
>
> Aside from the rather obvious fact that he is in the courtroom
> against his will, the fact that he was arrested and the manner of
> the arrest are read into the record. If it is in the record, it is
> evidence.
>
> Evertything is a factor in his conviction, including the phase of
> the moon.
>
> > Hey, in case you didn't know: being in business is risky. That's
> why
> > it's generally more profitable than being employed.
>
> And I have the right to mitigate that risk by getting rid of people
> who, in my sole judgement, increase my risk or otherwise make it
> less pleasant to do business.
>
> > There are good ways and bad ways to manage
> > risks. The worst way is to pawn off the risk on your own employees.
> > And that's exactly what you are doing here - and then you turn
> around
> > and claim that you are "protecting their livelihood". Sheesh.
>
> I'm not pawning off anything. If you present yourself as a risk -
> your fault, my fault, nobody's fault - then I have the right to rid
> myself of you.
>
> And what happens to the livlihood of the rest of the employees if a
> risky employee beggars the company. If you want me to be a welfare
> agency, indemnify me. And pay me for the privelege of carrying dead
> wood.
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
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
5:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home