Don't get too fit or you can be fired!
Replies
-
if your boss has told you your clothing is distractive and you need to wear more conservative attire then you need to heed to that warning. Nothin to see her folks move along.0
-
if your boss has told you your clothing is distractive and you need to wear more conservative attire then you need to heed to that warning. Nothin to see her folks move along.
sounds like you didnt read the entire article
0 -
People keep focusing on her dress, but that was one snippet of the article. His own attorney stated that the plaintiff didn't do anything wrong. I didn't read anywhere that she refused to change how she dressed. I also didn't read evidence beyond his erection that her clothes were actually inappropriate (and really, many women have curves, it can be impossible to wear something that conceals their shape completely, and why should we have to? People don't expect men with nice broad shoulders to have to wear something that conceals their shape. Of course there is a line, but women with larger breasts would have to wear a potato sack to completely conceal the fact that they exist and prevent people from noticing them. And again, why should they have to? I take care to dress conservatively at work and am still unable to prevent human nature.)
However, since employers can pretty much let anyone go for any reason in many states, I'm not surprised. However, if I were a female employee in that office, I'd quit ASAP. I don't want the wife and the pastor calling the shots on my job, and really, it's pretty difficult to be impartial when you are the boss and your spouse is an employee. (Many professions have ethical codes about not being your friend or loved one's supervisor for this reason.)0 -
if your boss has told you your clothing is distractive and you need to wear more conservative attire then you need to heed to that warning. Nothin to see her folks move along.
His attorney:
"***While there was really no fault on the part of Mrs. Nelson,***it was just as clear the decision to terminate her was not related to the fact that she was a woman," he said. "The motives behind Dr. Knight terminating Mrs. Nelson were quite clear: He did so to preserve his marriage."0 -
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2012/12/27/yelp-users-slam-dentist-who-fired-his-assistant-for-being-irresistible/?test=latestnews
Some quotes from the article:
"Melissa Nelson, a 32-year-old married mother of two, had worked for James Knight for 10 years, and he considered her a stellar worker. But in the final months of her employment, he complained that her tight clothing was distracting -- once telling her that if his pants were bulging that was a sign her clothes were too revealing, according to the Supreme Court opinion."
and
"On Dec. 21, the court ruled 7-0 that bosses can fire employees they see as an "irresistible attraction," even if the employees have not engaged in flirtatious behavior or otherwise done anything wrong."
OMG, what a load of crap. Read the whole article and see what happened. Melissa may not have been "offended" by her bosses remark about bulging pants but it was totally inappropriate. Talk about stupid men....the dentist and all the men on the Iowa supreme court fit the bill. It was not all about Melissa's tight clothes. It was about the dentist and his roving eye and his wife wanting Melissa GONE. The only thing Melissa is guilty of is being naive. The judges however have much to answer for and are demonstrating a lack of respect for women and giving employers a way to fire women without just cause. Stupid Idiots. The truth is, a woman can just be a woman, dressing any which way, covered from head to toe, and randy men will still be randy men. They may not be able to change their feelings of attraction but they sure as h*** can change their behavior.
Reminds of a comic that said if women wore big boxes, the men would mention how well one of them was wearing the Frigidaire one...0 -
What I take out of that is this: Don't wear tight and/or revealing clothing to work.
That's what I see, too. What's the problem?0 -
that is quacked.0
-
Additionally, she was filing under "discrimination". The court found no discrimination because it doesn't have a clause for "tight clothes" or "because my wife said so". That's why they ruled against her.0
-
That's what I see, too. What's the problem?
The problem is that wasn't actually the problem. (I hope a man's erection is not necessary and sufficient evidence to convict a woman of dressing in an overly sexual way.)0 -
Actually, if you read the story carefully you'll see that the dentist asked his assistant not to wear such revealing clothing and she wouldn't dress in a less provocative manner.
So yeah. Fire the assistant, save your marriage. It's as easy as that.
If the woman had any common sense she could have dressed more conservatively and still been attractive, and then looked for another job. Just because you have 'it' doesn't mean that a professional office is where you should flaunt it, even if you have been working there for 10 years.
Actually the article also says she wore scrubs every day to work. And she was a dental assistant. I'm sorry, I read this article a few days ago and was just shocked. Basically his wife was offended because he found this assistant attractive and told him to fire her, and he did to 'save his marriage'. Tell him to stop being a randy old coot and find some courtesy and professionalism. Seriously, to talk about your pants bulging out at work? I'd turn around and walk out the door and hire an attorney for harassment. Different strokes for different folks of course, but to be fired for being attractive? Ugh.0 -
Amen to this. ^ For sure the responsibility is up to the person in the relationship!So yeah. Fire the assistant, save your marriage. It's as easy as that.
Seriously? If this guy can't control himself, how is getting rid of one attractive woman from his life going to save his marriage? Would you want to stay married to a man who had zero self control? It is HIS responsibility to not cheat on his wife, it's not the responsibility of women to protect him from himself.
If you want to be in a committed relationship, it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to stay committed and faithful.
Regarding this particular case. If there was a dress code and she did not adhere to the dress code and got fired after being warned, then fair enough. If not, then she has a good case for discrimination. Discrimination happens everyday but this is a big story because, let's face it, a hot white women is involved.
I'm sorry but I don't feel like reading the article because I don't have the stomach to deal with the comments right now. I have the sense that a lot of people will have suddenly become feminists over this issue and yet these same people could care less about other instances of discrimination and absolutely atrocities that are occurring to women across the globe.0 -
I would say that due to the employee's blatant non-compliance to rules set by her employer, she obviously wanted to be fired. And with good reason! look how many people are talking about this, I heard about it first on my way in to work on my car stereo. I myself would never go against any rule set by my employer and if I did I would expect there to be severe consequences! :explode: :explode: :explode: DUH!
ok, i stand corrected. the firing was due to blatant drama in the workplace. end of story.0 -
I would say that due to the employee's blatant non-compliance to rules set by her employer
Where do you see this?0 -
I love that he consulted his pastor before terminating her and ending up in court. Typical Christian rhetoric - women are the evil temptresses who are obviously trying to corrupt and disgrace innocent, naive men who have zero control of their urges... OH PLEASE. GET A GRIP. :huh:
It's a dentists office. I hardly think she was turning up in micro-minis and nipple tassels with plastic stripper heels. Her "inappropriate" attire was probably just snug and he couldn't bloody control himself. What a creepy, old lech. And the idea that "irresistible" sexual urges make sexual harassment / discriminatory firings are somehow different from "uncontrollable greed" making embezzling ok or "blind rage" making assault in the workplace ok is ridiculous. You're an adult, you control your crap while you're at work. As long as she wasn't flashing nipples or sending him sexts (which, I highly doubt someone would do to a man they consider a "father figure") then he's COMPLETELY in the wrong.
Not to mention - it's ok to fire someone because your wife doesn't like them???? There goes any and all job security for ANYONE in ANY job who's boss has a wife. :huh:0 -
I would say that due to the employee's blatant non-compliance to rules set by her employer
Where do you see this?
Exactly! And she wore scrubs!!!!! Her scrubs were to attractive? Pa-lease!0 -
An employer should have the right to fire an employee without cause. I also wonder how many of you would even hire, much less keep a sexy housekeeper around your hubby while you are at work.....
If my hubby couldn't keep his hands to himself, he'd be out the door. If you can't trust them, you can't trust them. Learned that the hard way.
___
Having been around lots of people wearing scrubs over the years, I have to say that a few women with just the right body type (very large, perky breasts that are fairly high on the chest wall) have absolutely amazing cleavage even in scrubs. Not that that excuses the sleazy dentist.0 -
I saw that a few days ago and I just can't comprehend it. So apparently it's our fault if the men around us can't control their own actions. Unbelievable! That's the same thing as saying it's the woman's fault for getting raped because she was attractive. There is a lot that isn't discussed in the article but the main idea to me seems to be that it's a womans fault for being a woman and men don't have to take any responsibility or control their own thoughts and actions.
Exactly!!0 -
Do you have the court decision handy for me to actually read? Because all I see is a link to a poorly written sensationalistic article, that doesn't really give any real information on the actual court decision. I believe the only decision the court made was that the dentist in question did not commit discrimination when he terminated her. It's very simple, any employee can be terminated for any reason, as long as that reason doesn't discriminate based on gender, race, or religion. He fired her because he found her too attractive, and his wife wanted him to fire her. There's no discrimination there, because without a written contract, a person can be terminated at any time, for any reason. It's called "At-Will Employment."What I take out of that is this: Don't wear tight and/or revealing clothing to work.
Too bad that's not what their decision said nor what the legal precedent this case will set.
You can take anything out of it you want, but you have to step back and realize what the long term effects will be.
At-Will employment legal definition: "any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work." Notice the part in bold.
She sued for discrimination, that she was fired just for being female. She wasn't fired just for being female, therefore, it's not discrimination.0 -
I hadn't read the part about his... pants. That would seriously freak me out if someone said that to me (except for my husband, lol). Ugh, just ugh. There's fault on both sides.0
-
Where in the article did it say she wore scrubs?I would say that due to the employee's blatant non-compliance to rules set by her employer
Where do you see this?
Exactly! And she wore scrubs!!!!! Her scrubs were to attractive? Pa-lease!0 -
Her termination went beyond merely being fit,
There were other factors like both parties texting each other outside work and engaging in sexual innuendo.
When his wife found out, she demanded the employee be fired.
A job is not an entitlement, and a business is not a social service. If my wife found out I was texting the maid and such, the maid would be GONE!
Such is life....
Funny, if I found out my guy was hitting on the maid, HE would be gone, not the maid. But I guess there are a lot of people in the world who are willing to put up with partners who disrespect them and their relationship. And (apparently) a lot of people who think it is OK for a man to have no self control around other women when he is supposed to be in a monogamous relationship.
I love this. Thank you - I really don't get some women and the way they can treat other women or blame them for their husband/boyfriends issues. It would not be fair to fire a maid because your husband flirted with her.0 -
http://www.catholic.org/hf/family/story.php?id=49066
This article says she wore standard scrubs, but he said they were tight so he got aroused when he looked at her.
Another article says he texted her asking her how often she orgasmed.
This article says she wore long sleeved or short sleeved t shirts and scrubs:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/iowa-court-oks-firing-female-worker-irresistibly-attractive-article-1.1226068
(All this aside, I think my views are summed up by another article: Just because something is lawful doesn't make it right. By the law, I think the decision was lawful, though I'm not fond of "at will" employment. While an employee can technically leave at any time, if they don't give notice, there are consequences including sacrificing vacation time and future bad references, while there are little to no consequences for an employer to let someone go at any time.)0 -
Her termination went beyond merely being fit,
There were other factors like both parties texting each other outside work and engaging in sexual innuendo.
When his wife found out, she demanded the employee be fired.
A job is not an entitlement, and a business is not a social service. If my wife found out I was texting the maid and such, the maid would be GONE!
Such is life....
Funny, if I found out my guy was hitting on the maid, HE would be gone, not the maid. But I guess there are a lot of people in the world who are willing to put up with partners who disrespect them and their relationship. And (apparently) a lot of people who think it is OK for a man to have no self control around other women when he is supposed to be in a monogamous relationship.
^^^ THIS!!! ^^^ Why are most women so quick to attack each other rather than the true source of the trouble???0 -
Where in the article did it say she wore scrubs?I would say that due to the employee's blatant non-compliance to rules set by her employer
Where do you see this?
Exactly! And she wore scrubs!!!!! Her scrubs were to attractive? Pa-lease!
lolololol draaaaaaaaama!!!!0 -
Her termination went beyond merely being fit,
There were other factors like both parties texting each other outside work and engaging in sexual innuendo.
When his wife found out, she demanded the employee be fired.
A job is not an entitlement, and a business is not a social service. If my wife found out I was texting the maid and such, the maid would be GONE!
Such is life....
Funny, if I found out my guy was hitting on the maid, HE would be gone, not the maid. But I guess there are a lot of people in the world who are willing to put up with partners who disrespect them and their relationship. And (apparently) a lot of people who think it is OK for a man to have no self control around other women when he is supposed to be in a monogamous relationship.
^^^ THIS!!! ^^^ Why are most women so quick to attack each other rather than the true source of the trouble???
Don't *kitten* where you eat, and don't sleep where you work. It's normal for business to have policies against co workers dating, and when they're found out the one that's either the least valuable or the higher legally risky is fired. Since he owns the business or is the bigger revenue driver he was maintained. This is normal business practice when there is an affair in a business environment. It's not just a matter of being attractive, it's a matter of everyone keeping their pants on.0 -
The article keeps clarifying that the firing was not gender discrimination but based on uncontrollable attraction. If it had been a very attractive man who was his assistant, there would not have been an issue. That, my friends, is most definitely gender discrimination. Why is it that we never hear about men being fired for being attractive. It mentions nowhere that she wore revealing or provocative clothing. Also, was he called in question about his work attire due to his "bulging pants?" Seriously?
For all of you ladies out there that are arguing that the lady deserved to be fired because she was being too provocative, you are probably the type of women who spur this kind of behaviour in men on. Women who can no longer satisfy their husbands and get all bent out of shape every time their husband is around a pretty woman. Most of the time it is the fault of their husband because he can't keep his @!ck in his pants. Seriously! WTF?!?! Ladies, hold your men accountable or find another man who isn't so easily provoked.
I've been the brunt of this type of discrimination and I dress very modestly at work. Fortunately I quit that company before they fired me and found a job that is way better and pays me three times what they paid me. Not every woman who is discriminated against gets so lucky.
The article also mentioned innapropriate texting. Now in my experience, if an issue arises out of flirtation between two parties, the superior is the one that is supposed to be held accountable.0 -
I agree that if she is breaking dress code, than he has a right to fire her. The article shows he took issue with her tight clothing and she refused to change that. I don't think its necessary to wear clothes so tight that you can tell if a dime in your pocket is heads or tails. There are plenty of classy ways to dress and show off your killer body.If she had a right to wear it, then he had a right to fire her. Isn't that what democracy is all about? Didn't we fight for equal rights?
Exactly.
She was asked to wear less provocative clothing. She didn't, that's a fact that both sides agreed on.
*shrugs* The dentist showed restraint and self control in that he chose to fire his assistant rather than attempt to get in her pants. I commend the man. He understood what his weakness is and avoided it, just like I don't keep ice cream in my freezer any longer, lol!
And yes, psfr, you can fire someone for having a different religion or belief than you do. About 10 years ago a Muslim boss successfully fired his employee for repeatedly eating BLT sandwiches at her desk. Pork is against their religion, and they asked her to stop and she didn't.
It's called a democracy. It's called capitalism and freedom to believe what you want. Private business owners have a different set of rules than government workers.
However, I doubt this guy's marriage is going to last. If his wife demands he fire every woman who dresses in tight clothing, than there might be issues of trust going on. If she has a reason not to trust him, than eventually he's going to cheat anyway. If there is no reason for her to act like that, he's gonna get sick of it and not want to stick around.0 -
Her termination went beyond merely being fit,
There were other factors like both parties texting each other outside work and engaging in sexual innuendo.
When his wife found out, she demanded the employee be fired.
A job is not an entitlement, and a business is not a social service. If my wife found out I was texting the maid and such, the maid would be GONE!
Such is life....
Funny, if I found out my guy was hitting on the maid, HE would be gone, not the maid. But I guess there are a lot of people in the world who are willing to put up with partners who disrespect them and their relationship. And (apparently) a lot of people who think it is OK for a man to have no self control around other women when he is supposed to be in a monogamous relationship.
^^^ THIS!!! ^^^ Why are most women so quick to attack each other rather than the true source of the trouble???
Don't *kitten* where you eat, and don't sleep where you work. It's normal for business to have policies against co workers dating, and when they're found out the one that's either the least valuable or the higher legally risky is fired. Since he owns the business or is the bigger revenue driver he was maintained. This is normal business practice when there is an affair in a business environment. It's not just a matter of being attractive, it's a matter of everyone keeping their pants on.
So... the moment a coworker is attracted to another coworker one of the coworkers has to get fired? What the hell?!0 -
I agree that if she is breaking dress code, than he has a right to fire her. The article shows he took issue with her tight clothing and she refused to change that. I don't think its necessary to wear clothes so tight that you can tell if a dime in your pocket is heads or tails. There are plenty of classy ways to dress and show off your killer body.
Where are you reading this refusal to change her clothing? Where is the evidence that it actually broke dress code? That wasn't even the reason she was dismissed. I feel as if I am missing something because of everyone saying her clothing was so provocative. A man getting an erection from a nice looking woman is not evidence of sexually inappropriate behavior. He fired her due to his feelings, not her dress. He feared he would have an affair with her (because she obviously has no say in that) and asked her about her orgasms and sex life. I didn't read anything that suggested her patients were complaining, just that he grew more and more attracted to her and couldn't deal with it.
Would people be making the same assumptions about the employee's dress if the employee had been male and the dentist gay? "You know your outfit is too inappropriate when I have a bulge in my pants."0 -
Her termination went beyond merely being fit,
There were other factors like both parties texting each other outside work and engaging in sexual innuendo.
When his wife found out, she demanded the employee be fired.
A job is not an entitlement, and a business is not a social service. If my wife found out I was texting the maid and such, the maid would be GONE!
Such is life....
Funny, if I found out my guy was hitting on the maid, HE would be gone, not the maid. But I guess there are a lot of people in the world who are willing to put up with partners who disrespect them and their relationship. And (apparently) a lot of people who think it is OK for a man to have no self control around other women when he is supposed to be in a monogamous relationship.
^^^ THIS!!! ^^^ Why are most women so quick to attack each other rather than the true source of the trouble???
Don't *kitten* where you eat, and don't sleep where you work. It's normal for business to have policies against co workers dating, and when they're found out the one that's either the least valuable or the higher legally risky is fired. Since he owns the business or is the bigger revenue driver he was maintained. This is normal business practice when there is an affair in a business environment. It's not just a matter of being attractive, it's a matter of everyone keeping their pants on.
So... the moment a coworker is attracted to another coworker one of the coworkers has to get fired? What the hell?!
If I'm understanding the situation correctly it had at least started in the direction of an inappropriate relationship that both were participating in. Text messages back and forth, not just from him to her. If it was directional it would have been harassment but it wasn't. The situation had to come to a head. In most relationships you simply break up but when you're the boss and the other person isn't its just not that simple. It seems as though it wasn't just a matter of his attraction to her, but a situation where it became more that a boss and subordinate and didn't qualify for sexual harassment despite what would seem to be highly inappropriate behavior on his part (talking about his "bulge").0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions