4 ms·

Ignoring the wider issues, is this specific headline concerning or interesting? Of course they would be fired. They’re contributing money to a protest movement

Ignoring the wider issues, is this specific headline concerning or interesting? Of course they would be fired. They’re contributing money to a protest movement against their bosses that is deemed unlawful. You can’t expect to work for the government and fund a movement against that same government.

briHass 5y ago
Why not? Is everyone that works for the government supposed to hold exactly the same opinions and political leanings? If a staffer in a Republican area of the US donated to BLM and was fired, would there be a different reaction?
- MattGaiser 5y ago
  She doesn't work for the government, but rather is a political staffer of the government of the day. So imagine that the communications director to the Lieutenant Governor of a GOP state donated to BLM.
- mbfg 5y ago
  i would certainly expect your scenario to play out as you stated.
- pjc50 5y ago
  Some organisations are simply illegal to give money to; this has long been a "War On Terror" thing. It is not clear whether that actual process applied here or whether this is just private action.
- zuminator 5y ago
  Certainly in the US if you are an at-will private employee you can be terminated for any reason or no reason at all, except for explicitly protected classes. Political affiliation is not a protected class, at least not on a Federal level, although a few states have varying degrees of protection [0] that may have protected this staffer. As for government employees, the situation is more complicated. If you are a low-level government employee, your political affiliation is not valid grounds for being terminated. However, employees who are considered as placed in "policymaking" [1] roles, which would include being an "adviser" [1] of some sort, would be able to be terminated according to US standards. [0] https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/pages/politics-at-work.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/... [1] Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347 (1976). Also see Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois, 497 U.S. 62 (1990).
merpnderp 5y ago
Hasn’t the US just gone through 6 years of protests against the government that have been a lot more violent than this, and I don’t recall anyone being fired for donating. If the rule is you can’t use civil disobedience and be employed by the government, that rule is being unevenly applied.
- basisword 5y ago
  What's this got to do with the US?
- rohitb91 5y ago
  Exactly, I'm certain that many here cheer when there are protests that explicitly are about a government stepping down. Think about the thousands and even millions that demanded Trump resign, that Obama resign, that Putin resign, that Modi resign, that Macron resign, and so on.
Canada 5y ago
Well it's a big government isn't it? Surely they could reassign her to communicate for her bosses on some other matters?
rohitb91 5y ago
It was also retroactively deemed unlawful. It would be like donating to BLM and then the government using emergency measures to shut down the protests like freezing bank accounts of those involved and then you lose your jobs and your accounts are frozen by the government and anyone that doesn't help the government stop the protest can be prosecuted by the government as well. A lady in Ottawa who owned an ice cream shop was harassed because the information was leaked but in her mind she was supporting truckers that were out in the freezing weather protesting instead of working and still needed food and shelter. People donate to protests and causes on a whim that get popular on social media all the time. I imagine a lot of people were donating to support some of the most thanklessly hard-worked people in society, truckers, that worked throughout the pandemic bringing back goods for the lucky people that could stay at home. The backgrounds of some of the initial organizers (some who are legitimate white supremacists) was not known initially and I imagine the majority still don't know and are instead protesting what they see as unnecessary mandates for truckers to get vaccinated even though they drive their trucks alone, and there's no indication that truckers are the cause of the spread of COVID. I'm having an extremely hard time imagining people being okay with this and if you just change the protest cause just a bit I think it helps make clear why this is so dangerous.

briHass 5y ago

Why not? Is everyone that works for the government supposed to hold exactly the same opinions and political leanings? If a staffer in a Republican area of the US donated to BLM and was fired, would there be a different reaction?

MattGaiser 5y ago
She doesn't work for the government, but rather is a political staffer of the government of the day. So imagine that the communications director to the Lieutenant Governor of a GOP state donated to BLM.
mbfg 5y ago
i would certainly expect your scenario to play out as you stated.
pjc50 5y ago
Some organisations are simply illegal to give money to; this has long been a "War On Terror" thing. It is not clear whether that actual process applied here or whether this is just private action.
zuminator 5y ago
Certainly in the US if you are an at-will private employee you can be terminated for any reason or no reason at all, except for explicitly protected classes. Political affiliation is not a protected class, at least not on a Federal level, although a few states have varying degrees of protection [0] that may have protected this staffer. As for government employees, the situation is more complicated. If you are a low-level government employee, your political affiliation is not valid grounds for being terminated. However, employees who are considered as placed in "policymaking" [1] roles, which would include being an "adviser" [1] of some sort, would be able to be terminated according to US standards. [0] https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/pages/politics-at-work.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/... [1] Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347 (1976). Also see Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois, 497 U.S. 62 (1990).

merpnderp 5y ago

Hasn’t the US just gone through 6 years of protests against the government that have been a lot more violent than this, and I don’t recall anyone being fired for donating. If the rule is you can’t use civil disobedience and be employed by the government, that rule is being unevenly applied.

basisword 5y ago
What's this got to do with the US?
rohitb91 5y ago
Exactly, I'm certain that many here cheer when there are protests that explicitly are about a government stepping down. Think about the thousands and even millions that demanded Trump resign, that Obama resign, that Putin resign, that Modi resign, that Macron resign, and so on.

Canada 5y ago

Well it's a big government isn't it? Surely they could reassign her to communicate for her bosses on some other matters?

rohitb91 5y ago

It was also retroactively deemed unlawful. It would be like donating to BLM and then the government using emergency measures to shut down the protests like freezing bank accounts of those involved and then you lose your jobs and your accounts are frozen by the government and anyone that doesn't help the government stop the protest can be prosecuted by the government as well. A lady in Ottawa who owned an ice cream shop was harassed because the information was leaked but in her mind she was supporting truckers that were out in the freezing weather protesting instead of working and still needed food and shelter. People donate to protests and causes on a whim that get popular on social media all the time. I imagine a lot of people were donating to support some of the most thanklessly hard-worked people in society, truckers, that worked throughout the pandemic bringing back goods for the lucky people that could stay at home. The backgrounds of some of the initial organizers (some who are legitimate white supremacists) was not known initially and I imagine the majority still don't know and are instead protesting what they see as unnecessary mandates for truckers to get vaccinated even though they drive their trucks alone, and there's no indication that truckers are the cause of the spread of COVID. I'm having an extremely hard time imagining people being okay with this and if you just change the protest cause just a bit I think it helps make clear why this is so dangerous.