655
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
655 points (97.1% liked)
News
23397 readers
3575 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm a senior manager at a pretty big company.
That's something she does on the side, and if anyone in the workplace gave her shit, I would tell them to leave it the fuck alone unless they wanted me to bring HR in to the convo.
Can people please not be cunts? (I'm an Aussie...)
Edit: People need to disconnect things. Say there's leaked nudes (or even just public nudes) of a work colleague. Let's take it to they used to do porn. Yep, that's something they did. That has zero impact on their role now or who they are in their role. They don't deserve shame, or ridicule.
You know this chick:
Those expressions were her reaction to taste testing some kombucha on a video or stream. Those screenshots were grabbed by the internet and used in a similar format to the Drake meme, "Nah that's bad" "actually I like that
She worked at a bank. They fired her for it.
That's fucked up. There's nothing about that video that was remotely inappropriate for work. Everyone needs to join a union, holy hell.
I heard Unions were of the devil!
So she was essentially fired for being a comedic actor. Imagine if the restaurant industry had the same policy.
It's potentially worse, and stupider, than that.
The bank didn't fire her specifically because she posted the video where she made a couple faces after trying kombucha. They fired her because her face started to get used for the meme. Completely out of her control, because people started posting "thing I don't like, thing I like" memes with this format, often times with various political messages. Basically someone else used her face in a "this brings joy, this does not bring joy" meme and she got canned because of the bank's "image." As if it was actually her saying these things.
I mean, I hope she got a hell of a lawsuit out of that, because damn. Also its a bank so you know they have at least some money.
At Will employment. "In a meme" is not a protected class, and a reasonable bank employee could see her meme-attachment having a detrimental effect on business (you don't have to be in your reasons for firing someone as long as those reasons aren't protected or being used to hide that you're firing them for a protected reason). I'd guess she'd have no case in almost any state in the US with their lack of employee protections.
And to be clear - she probably got unemployment. "At-Will" isn't a magic spell.
Terminating an employee without cause requires them to pay unemployment.
She was terminated "for cause". To get unemployment, she's likely to have to fight for it. She's likely to win, but it's not a free thing.
It's super duper easy. The unemployment office LOVES forcing companies to pay up.
You're not wrong, but I've also worked at companies that successfully contested unemployment claims. It can depend by state, but "it was entirely this person's fault" is a bad start. Employers win about 30% of contested claims, and then about 15-20% of appeals (#1 cause for an employer losing a contested claim or an appeal appears to be withdrawing or not showing up for it). (Some numbers)
And the main reason employers lose when they show up is lack of preparation. In a case like the above, if they can show a policy (preferably one signed by her) that directly forbids her onlyfans account, they probably have a pretty good case to shut her down.
That said, they're very unlikely to waste their time and money to fight it. Ultimately (as my current employer's HR put it) "it's just a cost of doing business" and a waste of money to pursue.
Gross. Here in Brazil the employers would be bending over backwards to beg her not to sue them for all they're worth.
Here in Sweden this wouldn't be a problem whatsoever, and she'd have worker rights. Well, the conservatives driven by American cock sucking ideals are dismantling all that, but so far, she'd be ok.
ed: i get political when I'm drunk, sorry
Isn't that where fired comedic actors go after they are fired?
Wow. TIL. That sucks.
What would HR at your company say?
Stop giving people shit about their "hobbies".
Are you saying that to me or as a quote?
"We need to protect our innocent company from these scumbag workers at all cost!"
I assume, they don't exist to protect workers' rights.
HR where I work is excessively paranoid about terminations. They will want a paper trail of performance failures or argue to death that "then they'll be able to argue they were really fired for a protected reason. Get me a paper trail of performance failures".
Not saying our HR is worker-friendly. They're just VERY lawsuit-averse.
Flip-side, I worked at a company that fired anyone for any reason and just kept cash aside for wrongful termination suits. And they had a HUGE HR team, whose job it was to keep the employers happy.
It's like a union, but for corporations.
If the actions of an employee will reflect on a company, why shouldnt they have the right to decide to work with someone that doesnt do those things on the side?
If an america employee went on the news yelling racist things (on the side), shouldnt they company have the right not to work with them?
Yes - and the company should then pay the employee for the termination unrelated in any way to their performance on the job. Keep in mind, the better solution would be to have racism be actually illegal in 'murica, so the employer fires that employee after they explicitly break the law.
How exactly would you do this, and who gets to decide what is racist? Right now we have half country getting called racist on a regular basis.
You do what most of the world already did. Simple as that. Oh, forgive me - I forgot 'murica likes being stuck 200 years in the past at all times.
You mean the rest of the world where people get put in prison for having a bad opinion? If that is stuck 200 years in the past, I will take it.
'murican being 'murican, as expected. "I don't wanna go to prison for being a racist cunt, I want black people to keep going to prison for literally no reason instead! wah wah wah!"
Oh gotcha you are just strawman guy... Sure dude, people are just going to prison becuase of their race, you are a genius! I guess you just want them to go to prison for say naughty things or drawing pictures of prophets.
How much of a privileged cunt a person would have to be to think otherwise? Oh, my bad - your country prefers to shoot black people outright, huh?
Now you have switched to false narrative guy. You are very versatile.
Why is it always corporations that should get the slack. Aren't you and me more important, our rights? You're not a megacorp, why do you take their side? They're not on yours!