Interesting Case

[Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell]

Read the following article ...

 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/26/trooper.racism.ap/index.html

 

I'm not sure whether I agree or disagree with the Nebraska State Troopers over this firing (because he was a member of the KKK), but I do wonder what they do to the troopers who are members of the NAACP or LULAC?

 

I would say that if they fire someone for being a KKK member, then they should fire everyone who belongs to "a group who might compromise the integrity of the department"... just my opinion though.

[hugo]

From the link.

 

Arbitrator Paul J. Caffera, a New York lawyer, last week overturned the firing.

 

He said Henderson was entitled to his First Amendment rights of free speech and that the state violated the troopers' contract, in part when it fired Henderson "because of his association with the Knights Party ... and the Ku Klux Klan."

 

Caffera is 100% right.

[Jhony5]

but I do wonder what they do to the troopers who are members of the NAACP or LULAC?

 

I feel the same as you do on this one. Not sure really. However the Klan is more equivocal to the Black Panther Party then the NAACP.

 

On second thought, even as a white dude, I don't feel real comfortable having a police officer joining the Klan. Police often forget that they are to be held to a higher standard once they assume that kind of authority. I think he should either be a cop, or a hate monger.

 

I mean lets not whitewash (no pun intended) this thing. The Klan represents overt hatred and separation of minorities.

[lilmizztemper]

I say let him have his job...if he screws up and treats minorities unfairly...then fire him.

[snafu]

And I agree with Hugo and MRIH. If it doesn’t interfere with his judgment while making an arrest. The way the judicial system is working right now the NAACP would be jumping up and down and win every time this guy arrested a black man. But as our reverse discriminating society works, the KKK does not get the same rights as NAACP.

 

I personally find both highly offensive organization and would'nt want a police officer affiliated with either or any other segregated group.

[lilmizztemper]

I feel the same as you do on this one. Not sure really. However the Klan is more equivocal to the Black Panther Party then the NAACP.

 

On second thought, even as a white dude, I don't feel real comfortable having a police officer joining the Klan. Police often forget that they are to be held to a higher standard once they assume that kind of authority. I think he should either be a cop, or a hate monger.

 

I mean lets not whitewash (no pun intended) this thing. The Klan represents overt hatred and separation of minorities.

 

give it time...he will be harassed into retirement!

[hugo]

Don't get me wrong. The klan is quite offensive. The 1st exists primarily to defend offensive speech. Noone tries to censor speech that they don't find offensive. A private employer should certainly have the right to fire a klansman. A public employer should not.

[lilmizztemper]

I just think no one should be fired simply by being part of an organization or club. If it does NOT interfere with the manner in which they conduct business. If the trooper can still be professional and treat everyone equal then he should keep his job. If he cant get past his hatred then thats a different story. They should fire him for his actions ON the job...not his actions while off duty. Everyone should be entitled to his/her own opinion. My bet is that this officer (if he loves his job) will go out of his way to be curtious to minorities...just because he knows he is under scrutiny.

[hugo]

A private employer should be able to fire any employee for any reason.

[Lethalfind]

A private employer should be able to fire any employee for any reason.

 

Normal every day people can post pictures of themselves on the internet naked without fear of reprisal...COPS can't. We had a case just like that, a cop was fired for this action.

 

Why on earth should an officer be allowed to be in the KKK AND carry a gun. Just seems like a bad combination too me.

 

There are alot of actions that normal every day people off the street can legally participate in that is not allowed when your a cop.

 

I can invite a person to live with me after he gets out of jail, a cop can not...the list goes on.

[Jhony5]

Posted by Hugo:

A private employer should be able to fire any employee for any reason.

 

Damn Sherman, lets all get in the wayback machine and head to 1940. A wonderful time when women couldn't drive, blacks couldn't vote, and an employer could fire you for getting pregnant.

This statement is ignorant beyond all reason.

 

Lillmizz says:

I just think no one should be fired simply by being part of an organization or club.

 

??? Organization or club??? The KKK is neither. They are a movement standing against all that America is supposed to stand for. They still stand in the middle of the town square yelling "Niggers go home". And Y'all motherfuckers want your police hiding behind hoods participating? Thats fucked up right there.

 

Posted by HUGO:

A private employer should certainly have the right to fire a Klansman. A public employer should not

 

Police are not just public employees. They have the power to stop you for reasons that they can fabricate, ask you who you are, where your going, where you came from, what do you have in your pockets, whats in your car etc. They also have the authority to override what you say happened and have your freedom taken away for something you may not have done at all. This generic title of "public employee" applies more towards bus drivers then cops. Taking control of that sort of power and control comes with sacrifice. That sacrifice being the inability to join groups whom preach hatred and separation based on ethnic origin. I say, to fucking bad for you if you want to be a cop and a Klansman. One or the other.

 

Posted by SNAFU:

The way the judicial system is working right now the NAACP would be jumping up and down and win every time this guy arrested a black man. But as our reverse discriminating society works, the KKK does not get the same rights as NAACP.

 

Does the NAACP have a long and storied history of hunting and killing white people? NOPE. Does the NAACP hide behind masks and stand in front of the court house screaming terrible hateful messages at white people? NOPE. I'm not getting the parallels between the two.

[hugo]

Posted by Hugo:

 

 

Damn Sherman, lets all get in the wayback machine and head to 1910. A wonderful time when women couldn't drive, blacks couldn't vote, and an employer could fire you for getting pregnant.

This statement is ignorant beyond all reason.

 

 

It is your statement that is ignorant. The first two issues you raised were the result of government oppression. Yes, an employer should be able to fire you for getting pregnant. Allow individual liberty, free from the constraints of a tyrannical majority, and the free market will reduce discrimination to a low level. You can, in the absence of a contract, quit your job for any reason whatsoever. The employer should have the same right to terminate you for any reason also. How would you like it if the government forced you to remain employed at a certain job?

[Jhony5]

HUGO puts foot in mouth here:

Yes, an employer should be able to fire you for getting pregnant.

 

No response necessary!

[hugo]

HUGO puts foot in mouth here:

 

No response necessary!

 

I realize it does not jive with your pinko liberal world view.

[hugo]

Normal every day people can post pictures of themselves on the internet naked without fear of reprisal...COPS can't. We had a case just like that, a cop was fired for this action.

 

Why on earth should an officer be allowed to be in the KKK AND carry a gun. Just seems like a bad combination too me.

 

There are alot of actions that normal every day people off the street can legally participate in that is not allowed when your a cop.

 

I can invite a person to live with me after he gets out of jail, a cop can not...the list goes on.

 

The Constitution protects the cops right to be a klansman.

[hugo]

Some needed reading for the ignorant

 

Employment at Will

 

 

 

 

What Employment at Will Means

As are many employees only after the fact, you might be surprised to learn in advance that U.S. employers may legally fire you for just about any reason, no reason or even an unfair reason. That's partially because there are relatively few labor laws that protect workers from wrongful termination and none that generally protect from workplace "unfairness" per se. But it's more so because most states consider employment to be "at will" in legal jargon.

 

In plain English, the Employment At-Will Doctrine means that employment is presumed to be voluntary and indefinite for both employees and employers. As an at-will employee under the doctrine, you may quit your job whenever and for whatever reason you want, usually without consequence. In turn, at-will employers may terminate you whenever and for whatever reason they want, usually without consequence.

 

Either party may end the relationship without prior notice, but neither party may breach contracts. Employers cannot violate state or Federal laws, and generally cannot rightfully terminate employees who refuse to do something that is contrary to public policy and sound morality, such as breaking the law. But with these few exceptions aside, it's pretty much open season on employees year round.

 

Although you may "legally" quit at any time without prior notice, you might deprive yourself of termination benefits, such as accrued vacation pay, if you don't give at least the minimum notice documented by your employer. U.S. employers typically require minimum notice in the form of a resignation letter submitted at least two weeks in advance, and document the requirements in employee policy manuals or similar documents.

 

In the absence of contracts (such as collective bargaining agreements) that either waive or enforce it, the Employment At-Will Doctrine is typically enforced under common law.

 

It was the outcome of the 1908 case of Adair v. United States that set the U.S. Supreme Court precedent for employment at will. Contact your state's labor office to find out if it upholds the Employment At-Will Doctrine.

 

Your employer might require you to sign an agreement that documents the terms of employment at will, to ensure you agree in writing. If written correctly, it's a legal and binding contract, backed by the common law. Alternately, the terms might be in a policy manual or similar document, and you likely agreed in writing to abide by company policies when you hired on. In the absence of explicit, signed contracts, some states consider policy manuals and such to be binding, implied contracts.

[Jhony5]

I realize it does not jive with your pinko liberal world view.

 

Label me how you will. I'm sure you'd feel a little violated if you got fired for having large feet.

 

I'd like to hear what our resident ladies have to say about that pregnancy remark.

[Jhony5]

The Constitution protects the cops right to be a klansman

 

Yes it does, but not at the same time he's a police officer. He can be a Klansman. He can be a cop. He can't be both. Its called a conflict of interest. If your father is a judge, he can't make a ruling on your case. Same thing.

 

Please don't quote the constitution on this one. As it was written by people whom only wanted the right to vote to be extended to rich white land owners. They were great men, whom believed all men were created equal, as long as you weren't a woman, ******, poor , or a child.

[angie]

I would love to know why they should be allowed to fire a woman for being pregnant. I functioned normally my whole pregnancy. Hell, I did my job better than most anyone else I worked with, and called out less than everyone else. Actually, the only time I didn't go in was because of bad snowstorms, which to me is a viable excuse, because I lived 30 miles away, and everyone else was about 5 miles (or less). Pregnancy doesn't mean you're crippled for 9 months. Unless there is a medical condition that is a threat to yours or your baby's health, most women who have "issues" are merely using it as an excuse to be lazy asses.

[hugo]

Yes it does, but not at the same time he's a police officer. He can be a Klansman. He can be a cop. He can't be both. Its called a conflict of interest. If your father is a judge, he can't make a ruling on your case. Same thing.

 

Please don't quote the constitution on this one. As it was written by people whom only wanted the right to vote to be extended to rich white land owners. They were great men, whom believed all men were created equal, as long as you weren't a woman, ******, poor , or a child.

 

Sorry, the arbitrator rightfully disagreed with you. Government employees have rights you and me do not. Government is held to the 1st Amendment, private employers are not.

[hugo]

Label me how you will. I'm sure you'd feel a little violated if you got fired for having large feet.

 

I'd like to hear what our resident ladies have to say about that pregnancy remark.

 

I'd be glad I did not waste any more of my life working at a company that would fire someone for that reason.

[Jhony5]

Sorry, the arbitrator rightfully disagreed with you. Government employees have rights you and me do not. Government is held to the 1st Amendment, private employers are not.

 

ALL people are held to anti-discrimination laws. Apparently you've been in your cave for awhile, guy.

[hugo]

ALL people are held to anti-discrimination laws. Apparently you've been in your cave for awhile, guy.

 

No, they are not. Apparently you are a dumbass. I can quit my job because my boss is black. Many small businesses are also exempt from anti-discrimination laws.

[Jhony5]

No, they are not. Apparently you are a dumbass. I can quit my job because my boss is black. Many small businesses are also exempt from anti-discrimination laws.

 

Federal anti-discrimination laws apply to ALL employers in the united states. PERIOD! Of course they do not apply to people whom wish not to work for ******s you god damn shit fer brains. Do you actually think your right on this???

 

http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

 

Theres nothing to argue here. So why not just admit your drunk right now and not capable of reason?

[hugo]

Federal anti-discrimination laws apply to ALL employers in the united states. PERIOD! Of course they do not apply to people whom wish not to work for ******s you god damn shit fer brains. Do you actually think your right on this???

 

http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

 

Theres nothing to argue here. So why not just admit your drunk right now and not capable of reason?

 

No, they do not. Ever been in a Chinese Restuarant and notice all their employees were chinks? Just confess you are a dumbfuck.