4 ms·

Eich: Participated in one side of a political/moral debate on his personal time. G: Beat his girlfriend. Both: "Bosses should be fireable due to personal beli

Eich: Participated in one side of a political/moral debate on his personal time. G: Beat his girlfriend. Both: "Bosses should be fireable due to personal beliefs and actions" So, then, do we agree that employees also should be fireable due to their political opinions and misdemeanor crimes?

guptaneil 12y ago
Freedom of speech and religion does not entitle people to open bigotry and harming others. People need to stop bastardizing the First Amendment to justify everything. You are allowed to say what you want and the government can't jail you for it. It doesn't mean anybody else has to listen to you or tolerate you. To answer your question, yes an employee that refuses to work with African American employees due to their personal beliefs and bigotry should be fired. Why is bigotry towards sexual orientation different? If an employee is a public face of the company (such as the CEO), then he or she can and should be held to an even higher standard.
- RadiumTwo 12y ago
  So, we agree on the accountability aspect. Another part of my question, again without any position put forth on my part, is this: Was the method used acceptable, publically speaking out against them, and would that same method be acceptable if it was used on a rank-and-file or low-to-middle manager?
  - cjbprime 12y ago
    > publically speaking out against them You seem to be arguing that having an opinion about whether someone should remain CEO is bad and unacceptable, but the CEO having an opinion about gay people not marrying each other is good and sacrosanct. You might want to pick one.
tomasien 12y ago
Are you saying CEOs and employees are the same? I assume you'll get a lot of blowback for other reasons for this comment, but just logically - what are you talking about? As a side note: in Eich's case, he didn't "deserve" to be fired the same way G did - it just became apparent that he wasn't going to be a good fit for the community, and for Mozilla the community is their employees (basically)
- cjbprime 12y ago
  Eich was not fired, nor asked to resign.
  - tomasien 12y ago
    Yeah my comment isn't clear on that at all, thanks for the clarification.
- RadiumTwo 12y ago
  Logically, if an employee was fired for either of these reasons, would it be acceptable? I'm neither defending nor attacking the position. If, say, a coworker was accused of beating his girlfriend then returned to work, would you a) doubt his character, but accept his skill as required, b) do nithing, or c) demand he be fired? If you found out at lunch that your coworker put $1000 into a political campaign to ban gay marriage, would you ask your office mates to start a twitter campaign to request his resignation?
  - tomasien 12y ago
    Accused of beating GF? I don't know. Depends on whether I believed it and other factors. Plead guilty + police say he's on tape doing it worse than he plead to? Fired. Every time. Political donations would never have an effect on my employees. If any of them are reading this, consider this my word. CEOs are different.
ryguytilidie 12y ago
I really think its time that we as a society sit down and think about banning analogies because they end up being absolute garbage like this so often.
- RadiumTwo 12y ago
  The presentation was off. It does look like an analogy. It's intented as a question of how you'd respond if this happened with one of your coworkers.
MaulingMonkey 12y ago
I think it's reasonable for a professional driver to be fired over speeding tickets, even when they don't reach the severity of a misdemeanor. I think it's reasonable for employees doing public relations (say, "community managers") to be fired over bigotry and hateful speech, even though these can be cast as "political opinions". I'm sure we can both find examples in the other direction too, however - there's a huge spectrum of circumstances under those umbrellas. "It's complicated" -- and likely not as simple as "yes" or "no".
- RadiumTwo 12y ago
  It's a little late, and I'm not able to put time into looking into it tonight, but I imagine that towards the end of slavery, Northern business owners who claimed that paying free men to work would put their businesses under and that those same owners were looked down upon in their community. We may be looking at the same phenomenon occuring. And, yes, the spectrum is huge. This covers everything from speeding tickets to domestic violence, and beyond.
beedogs 12y ago
Uh, they always have been. Fantastic straw-man, though!!

guptaneil 12y ago

Freedom of speech and religion does not entitle people to open bigotry and harming others. People need to stop bastardizing the First Amendment to justify everything. You are allowed to say what you want and the government can't jail you for it. It doesn't mean anybody else has to listen to you or tolerate you. To answer your question, yes an employee that refuses to work with African American employees due to their personal beliefs and bigotry should be fired. Why is bigotry towards sexual orientation different? If an employee is a public face of the company (such as the CEO), then he or she can and should be held to an even higher standard.

RadiumTwo 12y ago
So, we agree on the accountability aspect. Another part of my question, again without any position put forth on my part, is this: Was the method used acceptable, publically speaking out against them, and would that same method be acceptable if it was used on a rank-and-file or low-to-middle manager?
- cjbprime 12y ago
  > publically speaking out against them You seem to be arguing that having an opinion about whether someone should remain CEO is bad and unacceptable, but the CEO having an opinion about gay people not marrying each other is good and sacrosanct. You might want to pick one.

tomasien 12y ago

Are you saying CEOs and employees are the same? I assume you'll get a lot of blowback for other reasons for this comment, but just logically - what are you talking about? As a side note: in Eich's case, he didn't "deserve" to be fired the same way G did - it just became apparent that he wasn't going to be a good fit for the community, and for Mozilla the community is their employees (basically)

cjbprime 12y ago
Eich was not fired, nor asked to resign.
- tomasien 12y ago
  Yeah my comment isn't clear on that at all, thanks for the clarification.
RadiumTwo 12y ago
Logically, if an employee was fired for either of these reasons, would it be acceptable? I'm neither defending nor attacking the position. If, say, a coworker was accused of beating his girlfriend then returned to work, would you a) doubt his character, but accept his skill as required, b) do nithing, or c) demand he be fired? If you found out at lunch that your coworker put $1000 into a political campaign to ban gay marriage, would you ask your office mates to start a twitter campaign to request his resignation?
- tomasien 12y ago
  Accused of beating GF? I don't know. Depends on whether I believed it and other factors. Plead guilty + police say he's on tape doing it worse than he plead to? Fired. Every time. Political donations would never have an effect on my employees. If any of them are reading this, consider this my word. CEOs are different.

ryguytilidie 12y ago

I really think its time that we as a society sit down and think about banning analogies because they end up being absolute garbage like this so often.

RadiumTwo 12y ago
The presentation was off. It does look like an analogy. It's intented as a question of how you'd respond if this happened with one of your coworkers.

MaulingMonkey 12y ago

I think it's reasonable for a professional driver to be fired over speeding tickets, even when they don't reach the severity of a misdemeanor. I think it's reasonable for employees doing public relations (say, "community managers") to be fired over bigotry and hateful speech, even though these can be cast as "political opinions". I'm sure we can both find examples in the other direction too, however - there's a huge spectrum of circumstances under those umbrellas. "It's complicated" -- and likely not as simple as "yes" or "no".

RadiumTwo 12y ago
It's a little late, and I'm not able to put time into looking into it tonight, but I imagine that towards the end of slavery, Northern business owners who claimed that paying free men to work would put their businesses under and that those same owners were looked down upon in their community. We may be looking at the same phenomenon occuring. And, yes, the spectrum is huge. This covers everything from speeding tickets to domestic violence, and beyond.

beedogs 12y ago

Uh, they always have been. Fantastic straw-man, though!!