5 ms·

>Should a conservative business owner be able to fire anyone in their company that supports abortion? Absolutely. Are you suggesting that a liberal employee sh

• drivingmenuts 10y ago
  > Are you suggesting that a liberal employee should not be allowed to quit an anti-abortion company? Quitting is different from firing. There is a huge power differential between an employee and an employer in the US. YMMV in the EU. That said, should an employer be able to fire an employee for political views? Depends. IMO, if the business is separable from the politics, then no. Politics don't matter if you make brake pads or run a hobby shop. They do matter if it's a brand based around personality.
  • zaccus 10y ago
    >There is a huge power differential between an employee and an employer Usually yes, but not necessarily. Some highly skilled employees are absolutely vital, to the extent that them abruptly quitting would be more catastrophic for the employer than for them. Think database admin, C-levels, etc. >Politics don't matter if you make brake pads or run a hobby shop. I disagree. Even in a hobby shop, someone vocally espousing views that are abhorrent to their coworkers (like death to Jews for example) is going to be a drag on morale and productivity. If I have an employee who is spewing antisemitism and I have Jewish employees who don't want to listen to that garbage at work, should I not be able to fire them? My Jewish employees should just have to deal with it or quit?
    • drivingmenuts 10y ago
      > Some highly skilled employees are absolutely vital, to the extent that them abruptly quitting would be more catastrophic for the employer than for them. Think database admin, C-levels, etc. The employee should still have a right to quit, barring some bizarre contractual obligation. That an employee becomes absolutely indispensable is a problem for the owner to solve, not the employee. > someone vocally espousing views that are abhorrent to their coworkers That's not about the politics, that's about harassment, which is a firing offense, usually. There are many situations that could go either way, so it's not a cut-and-dried rule. I certainly would not say you could fire a Muslim for being Muslim, or a Jew for being a Jew or a Christian for being a Christian, if those particular attributes didn't have an effect on the work being done. Racists usually fall into that class where you don't know they're a racist until there's a problem you can and have to take action on.
• bmelton 10y ago
  > By law, all health insurance policies are required to provide this coverage. Those companies can still be vocally against abortion, but they still have to comply with the law. Not for nothing, but as it shook out, Hobby Lobby (one of those companies that didn't want to pay for abortion through employee healthcare plans) won their suit, so while your argument may hold merit, it excludes quite a bit of the nuance tendered by reality.
• aanm1988 10y ago
  > By law, all health insurance policies are required to provide this coverage. Those companies can still be vocally against abortion, but they still have to comply with the law. What if someone is religiously against traffic lights? Then their options are to follow the law or don't drive. Nothing to do with freedom of speech. Hobby Lobby won. It's disgusting but companies now have the right to regulate their employees health options because of religious freedom.