Employers are not supposed to ask questions relating to personal life issues. Employees don’t have to answer if they are. I’ve never asked anyone about sex with either gender. Be quiet and do your job. Many of these cases come about because of poor performance so the employee plays the race card or the female card or the LGBT card. Not all, but many. Personally, I am happy to have good employees; don’t care what they are.
Glad the judges ruled this way. Otherwise, what is next? Blondes vs. Brunettes?
Jack,
I agree to an extent. It should never be an interview question. But, what about when my gay friends adorn their cubicles with their spouses? Or, bring their spouse to a company event? Then, all of a sudden, there is a “poor performance” review. They should be a protected class, absolutely! No one should ever be fired because of a boss’ hidden disgust of those “icky gays”.
Or, requests time off to attend the gay pride parade, or hangs a rainbow flag in their cube next to their American one, or talks/dresses/acts differently…the list goes on. My LGBT brothers and sisters have been discriminated against too long. It must stop!
You know what I love about the people who are down voting you -probably Polar and his loyal servant Agent – by down voting they are endorsing the opposite. They are admitting they support the suppression of basic human rights. Amazing. Truly amazing. The Breitbart Bigots has squirmed their way into another conversations.
Yes, Conserving the Truth, you’re right. I would be totally disgusted if I had to look at gay peoples pictures every time I walked by a cubicle. Sick of having their deviant lifestyle shoved in my face. And as for your gay pride parade question, Captain Disgusting, gays can use PTO to attend their disgusting parades just like I can use my PTO to attend a parade or football game. Why did you ask such a stupid question?
March 16, 2017 at 4:06 pm
Captain Planet says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
13
14
Hey Perplexed,
That same deviant behavior goes on in heterosexual bedrooms, too. Is it still icky then?
March 16, 2017 at 4:07 pm
Captain Planet says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
13
10
Deviant being your word. I choose to call it love.
March 16, 2017 at 6:03 pm
Conserving the Truth says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
13
14
Perplexed,
Are you being serious? If not, Ha! Great mockery of an absurd, stone age bigot. If not, well, wow. Fascinating. I’ve always known people like you exist, however, it is interesting facing one in the wild. Deviant lifestyle shoved in your face? Classic!!!! Hahahahahahahahaha. You must get a lot of anxiety in any city that has progressed passed 1980s ideology. The best part of what you have said is not the absolute instanity of it, it is not the absurd nature of your obviously confused disposition but rather how what you’ve said will be viewed in 20 years. Maybe 10 if we are lucky. You are truly perplexed.
March 16, 2017 at 7:09 pm
martin says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
15
12
@Captain.. Not everyone that can’t stomach two guys kissing is a Bigot.. Just because one gets nauseated when they watch a Doctor cut a leg off does not mean they hate the Doctor or the patient.. Some people still look at the gay communities like they have mental issues.. I like how people throw the Bigot and race card around.. Maybe people like you should stop trying to make people accept the fact that they have to watch the Doctor cut the leg off.
March 17, 2017 at 8:40 am
Captain Planet says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
12
8
Ah, Martin, you reveal so much when you equate love to amputation. You are literally comparing apples to dismemberment. Well done, sir!
March 17, 2017 at 8:41 am
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
7
9
Also, Martin, I’m curious. What do you think about two beautiful women kissing?
March 17, 2017 at 12:33 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
7
8
Or those pictures of The First Lady doing nude girl-on-girl porn? Have to love those family values!!!
March 17, 2017 at 3:33 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
1
5
Conserving, Agent has explicitly attacked gays, and has called them and trans people perverts.
March 17, 2017 at 9:50 am
Jack Kanauph says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
14
0
Captain,
I don’t disagree with you. As an Employer, I just want workers who care about the company and do a great job. Personally I don’t care about color, religion, orientation…unless it begins to have a negative impact on clients, staff or performance. I don’t believe in flaunting my religion or forcing it on others. I expect the same from others in my company. I suspect that many execs feel this way too.
It happens. Someone gets fanatical about a topic and goes off the deep end. I have seen it happen and seen it effect job performance because the person focuses on being _______ instead of doing their job.
Agent,
You might be onto something here. I see a few posters out here flaunt their conservative political orientation and they seem to be the biggest trouble makers.
March 16, 2017 at 1:45 pm
me says:
Like or Dislike:
8
6
You’re GLAD the judges ruled this way? That this sort of workplace discrimination is acceptable?
What bothers me in the article is the statement ” but several of the judges seemed to signal during oral arguments that they were ready to broaden the scope of the 53-year-old civil rights law.”
It isn’t the courts place to Make law. They are to interpret it. To legislate from the bench by persons not subject to the vote is wrong and never intended by our founding fathers.
I have never been a fan of using precedence to make a decision. It is lazy. Make your decision based off of the facts presented and the applicable law. Just because a judge made a particular decision 38 years ago, does not mean it is the right decision for today.
They made the decision based on LAW, Ron. Why is that hard to understand? Are laws to be ignored because you disagree with them? No! Change the law if you don’t like it.
Employers are not supposed to ask questions relating to personal life issues. Employees don’t have to answer if they are. I’ve never asked anyone about sex with either gender. Be quiet and do your job. Many of these cases come about because of poor performance so the employee plays the race card or the female card or the LGBT card. Not all, but many. Personally, I am happy to have good employees; don’t care what they are.
Glad the judges ruled this way. Otherwise, what is next? Blondes vs. Brunettes?
Jack,
I agree to an extent. It should never be an interview question. But, what about when my gay friends adorn their cubicles with their spouses? Or, bring their spouse to a company event? Then, all of a sudden, there is a “poor performance” review. They should be a protected class, absolutely! No one should ever be fired because of a boss’ hidden disgust of those “icky gays”.
Or, requests time off to attend the gay pride parade, or hangs a rainbow flag in their cube next to their American one, or talks/dresses/acts differently…the list goes on. My LGBT brothers and sisters have been discriminated against too long. It must stop!
Captain,
You know what I love about the people who are down voting you -probably Polar and his loyal servant Agent – by down voting they are endorsing the opposite. They are admitting they support the suppression of basic human rights. Amazing. Truly amazing. The Breitbart Bigots has squirmed their way into another conversations.
Also, second travel ban was blocked by a brave judge from HI. God bless him.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hey Perplexed,
That same deviant behavior goes on in heterosexual bedrooms, too. Is it still icky then?
Deviant being your word. I choose to call it love.
Perplexed,
Are you being serious? If not, Ha! Great mockery of an absurd, stone age bigot. If not, well, wow. Fascinating. I’ve always known people like you exist, however, it is interesting facing one in the wild. Deviant lifestyle shoved in your face? Classic!!!! Hahahahahahahahaha. You must get a lot of anxiety in any city that has progressed passed 1980s ideology. The best part of what you have said is not the absolute instanity of it, it is not the absurd nature of your obviously confused disposition but rather how what you’ve said will be viewed in 20 years. Maybe 10 if we are lucky. You are truly perplexed.
@Captain.. Not everyone that can’t stomach two guys kissing is a Bigot.. Just because one gets nauseated when they watch a Doctor cut a leg off does not mean they hate the Doctor or the patient.. Some people still look at the gay communities like they have mental issues.. I like how people throw the Bigot and race card around.. Maybe people like you should stop trying to make people accept the fact that they have to watch the Doctor cut the leg off.
Ah, Martin, you reveal so much when you equate love to amputation. You are literally comparing apples to dismemberment. Well done, sir!
Also, Martin, I’m curious. What do you think about two beautiful women kissing?
Or those pictures of The First Lady doing nude girl-on-girl porn? Have to love those family values!!!
Conserving, Agent has explicitly attacked gays, and has called them and trans people perverts.
Captain,
I don’t disagree with you. As an Employer, I just want workers who care about the company and do a great job. Personally I don’t care about color, religion, orientation…unless it begins to have a negative impact on clients, staff or performance. I don’t believe in flaunting my religion or forcing it on others. I expect the same from others in my company. I suspect that many execs feel this way too.
It happens. Someone gets fanatical about a topic and goes off the deep end. I have seen it happen and seen it effect job performance because the person focuses on being _______ instead of doing their job.
Jack, it seems the ones who flaunt their orientation are the big trouble makers.
Agent,
You might be onto something here. I see a few posters out here flaunt their conservative political orientation and they seem to be the biggest trouble makers.
You’re GLAD the judges ruled this way? That this sort of workplace discrimination is acceptable?
You left out the employee plays the poor, overlooked white male card…
Jack, if they ask about a separate trannie bathroom, that might be a clue.
Don’t ask, don’t tell?????
What bothers me in the article is the statement ” but several of the judges seemed to signal during oral arguments that they were ready to broaden the scope of the 53-year-old civil rights law.”
It isn’t the courts place to Make law. They are to interpret it. To legislate from the bench by persons not subject to the vote is wrong and never intended by our founding fathers.
I have never been a fan of using precedence to make a decision. It is lazy. Make your decision based off of the facts presented and the applicable law. Just because a judge made a particular decision 38 years ago, does not mean it is the right decision for today.
They made the decision based on LAW, Ron. Why is that hard to understand? Are laws to be ignored because you disagree with them? No! Change the law if you don’t like it.
Then why reference a prior decision in this decision? That is my objection.
I hear you, Ron. If we kept making decisions based on previous law, well, St. Patrick’s Day tomorrow would be awfully boring!
Ron, are you referring to Roe v Wade?