Was I wrongfully terminated? Can I sue?

[Serp]

As far as the terminology of "Gay." This girl is less than average when it comes to intelligence. For example: she works at a sub shop, and she's not allowed to make sandwiches or interact with customers because she doesn't have the mental prowess or the people skills to do either. Another example would be someone hired to McDonalds but not allowed to make food or talk to customers, could you imagine how bad someone would have to be to be that worthless in a job atmosphere?

There is no way in all of hell she knows the original meaning of gay. And aside from that, the pure point that I was pissed off and said I wanted to file a complaint clearly shows that I am not Happy, then she called me gay a 2nd time.

Obviously she meant it in an offensive manor.

 

[You Are Guilty]

JAL, I think agree with you for the most part, but in an effort to get everyone on the same page, let me put a hypothetical to you:

Employee threatens to file "discrimination complaint" because co-worker says "god you're ugly". Boss subsequently fires employee. Illegal retaliation?

 

[eerelations]

This girl is dumb as a box of rocks. She works at a sub shop..

And so do you.

She called you a name, you got OTT about the name, you caused trouble amongst your coworkers with your OTT, and they fired you. All very straightforward, reasonable and legal.

 

[justalayman]

JAL, I think agree with you for the most part, but in an effort to get everyone on the same page, let me put a hypothetical to you:

Employee threatens to file "discrimination complaint" because co-worker says "god you're ugly". Boss subsequently fires employee. Illegal retaliation?

With only what you have posted, no.
there is no evidence of discrimination as well; nothing said falls under any protected class or limiting statutes or guidelines I am aware of. Additionally, with only what you posted, it is not apparent the firing was due to the attempt to file a complaint.


In contrast, there was proof of sexual harassment in the OP's situation. (although as posted, just this one time)

There was a specific statement warning OP that if he did file a complaint, he would be fired.

Additionally, ugly is not a protected class nor does is it included in any laws such as sexual harassment or any other protections from abuse I am aware of.

As I stated before, the chance OP had a viable complaint against the co-worker was near nil but the actions of the employer are in direct contrast to the laws of Indiana. What he did is verbally recieve the complaint, mentally judge it and find it lacking and simply saved the paperwork and fired the kid. That is not what the laws require.

One thing not mentioned and it is obviously reading between the lines;

The girl chimes in: "It's not harassment, you really are gay." With no smile on her face, no chipper tone, just straight "Bitchyness"

I would suggest that this was not an isolated incident. A girl doesn;t simply grab a statement like that out of thin air. There are almost always comments before a girl would say "but you are gay". I would suggest that she has made other similar comments previously. Definately reading between the lines though.

 

[Serp]

And so do you.

She called you a name, you got OTT about the name, you caused trouble amongst your coworkers with your OTT, and they fired you. All very straightforward, reasonable and legal.

If you're going to quote someone, make sure to include the entire quote and don't take it out of context.

The point wasn't that she works at a sub shop, the point is that she works at a sub shop and they won't even let her make a sandwich. Wrap your mind around that and go sit in the corner.

EDIT: Apparently some people think that pointing out the obvious is insulting, so I added this edit to warn people not to read below if you are easily offended.


It's like someone who posts on a forum but adds nothing to the topic... wait a minute.... THAT'S YOU!

 

[Serp]

With only what you have posted, no.

Additionally, ugly is not a protected class nor does is it included in any laws such as sexual harassment or any other protections from abuse I am aware of.

I would suggest that this was not an isolated incident. A girl doesn;t simply grab a statement like that out of thin air. There are almost always comments before a girl would say "but you are gay". I would suggest that she has made other similar comments previously. Definately reading between the lines though.

To the first part: I believe I read under the Indiana sexual conduct in the pamphlet that discussing someone's appearance or their appearance short-comings is sexual harassment, so the term "Ugly" would suffice by that standard.

To the 2nd part, this girl is just an ass. I've never spoken to her since she has a twin and I can't tell them apart. The attack was completely random with no provocation. You don't have to believe it, but it's the truth and everyone who wrote down and signed a copy of their story agreed on that part.

So I don't care who believes it was un-provoked or not, we have 3 signatures saying it was, one of them from the girl. So just act on that "theory."

But thank you all for your advice so far. ^.^ I really do appreciate it.

Edit: If that sounded a little rude I'm sorry, it wasn't directed at anyone, just a general statement about the girl and being out of nowhere. Seriously, she's just a bitch. They won't let her or her sister work the register because they suck ass at interacting with people and make snide comments.

 

[justalayman]

If you're going to quote someone, make sure to include the entire quote and don't take it out of context.

The point wasn't that she works at a sub shop, the point is that she works at a sub shop and they won't even let her make a sandwich. Wrap your mind around that and go sit in the corner.

It's like someone who posts on a forum but adds nothing to the topic... wait a minute.... THAT'S YOU!

surp, while it sounds discriminatory, I suggest you curb your attitude if you want this thread to continue. Yes, we get testy occasionally and it does not seem fair but we aren't asking the questions. A harsh attitude will tend to cause everybody to ignore your thread.

eerlations has been around for quite awhile and is a good source of information.

Realisticaly, EE's comment really wasn't such an incorrect statement. You did lament about her working at a sub shop and of course the irony that goes along with that is that you did to.

Now be nice or I am sure things will come to an abrupt halt.

 

[justalayman]

=Serp;1986538]To the first part: I believe I read under the Indiana sexual conduct in the pamphlet that discussing someone's appearance or their appearance short-comings is sexual harassment, so the term "Ugly" would suffice by that standard.

I cannot find it in the brochure. Here is what was written describing sexual harassment that I saw:

!"#$
%"!&'()*&+!*
) $!#&!!&,$&
!-&!-,#&!&*,
*)&!'& %".#
,&+!*&)-$!#&!
!&,/&$#,+
!%-!%)
#&! !!+0%!)1

well, so much for that. I don't know how to fix that but the statement is on the 2nd page, left column, about halfway down in pink.

To the 2nd part, this girl is just an ass. I've never spoken to her since she has a twin and I can't tell them apart. The attack was completely random with no provocation. You don't have to believe it, but it's the truth and everyone who wrote down and signed a copy of their story agreed on that part.

there is nothing illegal about being an ass, per se. It is when that is combined with other actions is when being an ass can add to the level of the infraction.

So I don't care who believes it was un-provoked or not, we have 3 signatures saying it was, one of them from the girl. So just act on that "theory."

So just act on that theory? Folks that post here do so because they want to. There is no requirement for us to do anything we don't want to do.

But thank you all for your advice so far. ^.^ I really do appreciate it, pedophiles shouldn't be allowed to just do what they want and fire hard workers and let the 17 year olds stay when the 17 year old is in the wrong.

You are now at the same level as the girl. I presume you speak of your boss that fired you when you reference a "pedophile. You have now libeled your former boss. not a wise move.

Edit: If that sounded a little rude I'm sorry, it wasn't directed at anyone, just a general statement about the girl and being out of nowhere. Seriously, she's just a bitch. They won't let her or her sister work the register because they suck ass at interacting with people and make snide comments

And you are proving yourself to be better? Snide is a bit of an understatement for the comments you have been tossing out.

 

[Serp]

Realisticaly, EE's comment really wasn't such an incorrect statement. You did lament about her working at a sub shop and of course the irony that goes along with that is that you did to.

Now be nice or I am sure things will come to an abrupt halt.

1. SERP.
2. Obviously you don't understand either. The point of the statement: "She works in a sub shop," makes NO SENSE. Does everyone see the comma? That means there is more to the statement. EE was purposely misquoting me in order to change my statement out of context.

NOW PLEASE READ THE ENTIRE STATEMENT:
"She works in a sub shop, and she's so dumb they won't let her make sandwiches."
THAT IS THE WHOLE STATEMENT. Enjoy.

Now it doesn't matter that the sub shop is involved, I could have used another example, like so:
"She's the president, but doesn't know how to run a nation."
Now do you see the point I'm making?

EE purposely took my quote out of context and mis-cited me. That is very unprofessional and frowned upon in a modern world.

I'm not being pissy, just trying to educate so we can all see eye-to-eye.

 

[justalayman]

damn kid! It is you that doesn't get it. We all saw the post EE referenced. It doesn;t really matter. How you overreacted is much more telling.



yes, you are being pissy. You are getting bent all out of shape over a small comment. If this is indicative of you in general, I think you have more problems than getting fired to deal with in your life.

Sorry kiddo but I'm checking out of this one.

Best of luck to you. I gave you the places you need to contact. The rest is up to you, as far as I am concerned.

 

[Serp]

there is nothing illegal about being an ass, per se. It is when that is combined with other actions is when being an ass can add to the level of the infraction.



So just act on that theory? Folks that post here do so because they want to. There is no requirement for us to do anything we don't want to do.


You are now at the same level as the girl. I presume you speak of your boss that fired you when you reference a "pedophile. You have now libeled your former boss. not a wise move.



And you are proving yourself to be better? Snide is a bit of an understatement for the comments you have been tossing out.

Wow... this is just wrong all over, where to start. This entire post could have been avoided if someone payed attention before posting.

"there is nothing illegal about being an ass, per se. It is when that is combined with other actions is when being an ass can add to the level of the infraction."
- We were discussing how it was unprovoked. Being an ass wasn't the reason I want to take action, it was an explanation to those who said that the comment could have been warranted by something I said, or a previous conversation. No, nothing was said prior, she's just an ass. How hard is that?



"So just act on that theory? Folks that post here do so because they want to. There is no requirement for us to do anything we don't want to do."
-I don't even understand this statement. "We don't do what we don't want to do." That has NOTHING to do with what I said. I have no way of coming to everyone's house and giving them copies of the written documents we all made, this entire thread is based on what I've said and that everything would be in theory on the part of anyone who replies. I said nothing about forcing people to do anything against their will, so I'm going to assume you're apologizing already to me as you read this.

"You are now at the same level as the girl. I presume you speak of your boss that fired you when you reference a "pedophile. You have now libeled your former boss. not a wise move."
- I'm dropping this topic now, no reason to drag it out. What my former employer has done to minors is his business, not mine.

"And you are proving yourself to be better? Snide is a bit of an understatement for the comments you have been tossing out."
-This just seems like your opinion to me. If you can't handle basic writing and reading and I have to come back and explain simple things that is not my fault and in no way makes me snide or arrogant. I explain things in a manner that a child could understand, if you have a problem with that, try to not make me repeat myself.


Again, none if this is meant to be "flaming" or "Offensive" in anyway or to anyone, like I previously said, but it seems like people don't understand. Just read it for what it is, process the information, and take deep breaths and realize that it's not meant to hurt any body's feelings, I'm thankful for any advice anybody has given me, but this whole accusation thread is just bothersome and off-topic, so can we stop them?

Thank you.

 

[Serp]

damn kid! It is you that doesn't get it. We all saw the post EE referenced. It doesn;t really matter. How you overreacted is much more telling.



yes, you are being pissy. You are getting bent all out of shape over a small comment. If this is indicative of you in general, I think you have more problems than getting fired to deal with in your life.

Sorry kiddo but I'm checking out of this one.

Best of luck to you. I gave you the places you need to contact. The rest is up to you, as far as I am concerned.

Sorry, I have no patience for the less-educated of the world. That is not my problem. When someone is counter productive I try to eliminate it, it's a good system to live by.

Again I appreciate your advice, I really do, I have in no way or in any post tried to offend you, that was all your own doing, and as you said, "The rest is up to you, as far as I am concerned."

You can be offended over nothing, or you can mellow out.

If people explaining things to you in simplicity bothers you, I recommend college, or to not be near people who have gone to college. Again, this is just advice, you've given me good advice and I don't want you to be agitated.

Just calm down, I have no ill-will against you.

It's good that you say you understand the post I made, it's terrible that it has nothing to do with the actual sub-shop, it was an example of her intellect.

Take care.

 

[justalayman]

=Serp;1986585]Sorry, I have no patience for the less-educated of the world. That is not my problem. When someone is counter productive I try to eliminate it, it's a good system to live by.

If everybody on this site felt that way, I suspect you would have had no answers to begin with. You must understand that you simply said that those with more education in a given area (think about those that have posted to your thread) are justified in refusing to help those with less education (think, you) So, per your advice, I guess we need to eliminate you.


With that, I'm outta here.

 

[mitousmom]

EEOC's regulations 29 C.F.R. § 1604.11(a) define sexual harassment as "unwelcome . . . verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature . . . ." The terms heterosexual and homosexual (and gay since it is another term for homosexual) refer to the sex of the individuals having sexual relations. Therefore, the use of either is a sexual comment. Most heterosexuals don't consider being described as heterosexual as offensive. Unfortunately, many homosexuals and gays still consider the descriptions as unwelcome and offensive. If the recipient does, he can allege sexual harassment. Technically, a heterosexual who objects to that term and considers it offensive and unwelcome can allege
sexual harassment.

The inquiry the employer is required to conduct when it receives a complaint of sexual harassment is designed to determine whether the complained of incident occurred and whether the conduct is sufficiently frequent or severe to create a hostile work environment which requires the employer's intervention. The employer's responses to the complaint: not conducting the inquiry; telling the complaining to ignore the comment if he wants to keep his job and not telling the girl that her comments were inappropriate and must, both of which suggest that nothing is wrong with the statement, regardless of the number of times it is said; and then terminating him for raising the issue - if they occurred as the OP says, all violate Title VII.

However, I agree that the OP needs to watch his own language even though he's not talking directly to those he is describing. He adds nothing to his case by saying that the girl is as "dumb as a box of rocks" and referring to someone else as a pedophile.

 

[Serp]

If everybody on this site felt that way, I suspect you would have had no answers to begin with. You must understand that you simply said that those with more education in a given area (think about those that have posted to your thread) are justified in refusing to help those with less education (think, you) So, per your advice, I guess we need to eliminate you.


With that, I'm outta here.

Could have sworn you said you left.... weird. Anyway, HI!

And I don't believe I said educated in a specific field... See, there's that word-twisting again and taking things out of context that I'm guessing this forum must be famous for.

Again, wrong. Please read what I post, not just skim it.