Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_god_button_home_depot

I'd sue for no less than 7 figures.

I cant exactly blame Home Depot though.

If you see a muslim wearing " one nation , one Allah " would it really possible no issue will rise from it?

As it no doubt will , then i dont think its fair to have double standards.

Hmmm. I'd probably just have taken the damn button off. I'm opposed to litigation except in really dire circumstances, and I don't think this qualifies.

Fateweaver: If someone had had a button that said "Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious" or that expressed an atheist point of view, would you have a problem with that?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_god_button_home_depot wrote:"This associate chose to wear a button that expressed his religious beliefs. The issue is not whether or not we agree with the message on the button," Craig Fishel said. "That's not our place to say, which is exactly why we have a blanket policy, which is long-standing and well-communicated to our associates, that only company-provided pins and badges can be worn on our aprons."

Fishel said Keezer was offered a company-approved pin that said, "United We Stand," but he declined.

Whatever, this sounds like a problem between him and the company, who gave him the opportunity to express his support for his country. In choosing to deny that option, while continuing to string along a religious message, I feel that he forfeited any real argument.

At any rate, would it be okay for me to wear this too? I could paint it red, white, and blue.

LunaHound wrote:If you see a muslim wearing " one nation , one Allah " would it really possible no issue will rise from it?

Badda-bing...

Da Boss wrote:If someone had had a button that said "Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious" or that expressed an atheist point of view, would you have a problem with that?

Badda-boom...

I actually would have no problem with it. I live in an area with lots of Native Americans (3 reservations within 30 miles of my city). The wear native pride apparel all the time and it doesn't offend.

Of course the minute I put on a shirt wearing Caucasian pride or White pride I'd be asked to leave every store in town.

That is the problem with all this PC nonsense. As an American growing up I was told to support and love my Country. I still do. The "Pledge" was taken out of schools because it wasn't PC enough; public facilities are banning or prohibiting citizens of this country from wearing any type of apparel or flair that expresses our pride in where we are and what we stand for.

I'm sorry but if you aren't from around here and get offended by me wearing a button that says "One Nation under God" then by all means get back on the boat and drift back to whatever gak hole you came from. If you are from here and feel the same way then I too encourage you to grab the next ship out of this country and find a new home.

If I lost my job for that reason I'd sue and so would everyone else I know. Dress policy be damned, they infringed on his First Amendment rights. He'll win a lawsuit, guaranteed.

Word. If the policy is uniformly enforced then he needs to STFU. I hate people who look for lawsuits and frankly this one of them.

EDIT: I bet you didn't think Overdog Frazzled would say that didya!

Fateweaver wrote:If I lost my job for that reason I'd sue and so would everyone else I know. Dress policy be damned, they infringed on his First Amendment rights. He'll win a lawsuit, guaranteed.

I consider this to be one of the thinnest lines of logic, that can be used in a case like this.

"If you look at both sides of this argument, then there should be no dress policy anywhere (, freaking hilarious), and I should be able to show any of my beliefs, any damn time I fething please, feth you job, I am an Ameri-cun."

"Sir, all of our employees are Americans, U.S. citizens rather, and we have absolutely no interest in bending to every whim of our employees. We will however, allow you to express your patriotism, via this alternate button. If you choose to not take this option, you are pretty much out of a job... in a recession."

"I. AM. AN. AMERI-CUN"

"Sir, we understand that, but it hardly addresses the issue that we have with your button..."

I didn't fraz. Not often we end up on the same side in these arguments. Who should feel dirty? Me? You? Wrexasaur? Is it the good kind of dirty? These are the great questions of our time.

Fateweaver: If you have no problem with the other buttons/messages then fair dues to you. I think you should be able to wear whatever you want, but I don't think it hard enough to want to go to court over it, if ya get my meaning. And if I did, I wouldn't want a giant pile of cash.

hmm i'm going with Frazz on this one... its a frivolous law suit wasting my tax payer dollars.

Da Boss wrote:Fateweaver: If you ACTUALLY have no problem with the other buttons/messages then fair dues to you. I think you should be able to wear whatever you want, but I don't think it hard enough to want to go to court over it, if ya get my meaning. And if I did, I wouldn't want a giant pile of cash.

Fixed that for you...

Here is why.

The fact HD had an issue in the first place IS an issue. Had it been a button saying "Kill all Jews" or "Blacks are really Ni**as" then I could see it being an issue.

Maybe they should have just told him to cover up the word "God". I think that's the real issue is that he wore a button with a deities name that not everyone believes in.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Obama signs/shirt/buttons don't offend me. They make me laugh at the dumbass wearing it.

Wrexasaur wrote:

Da Boss wrote:Fateweaver: If you ACTUALLY have no problem with the other buttons/messages then fair dues to you. I think you should be able to wear whatever you want, but I don't think it hard enough to want to go to court over it, if ya get my meaning. And if I did, I wouldn't want a giant pile of cash.

Fixed that for you...

Fixed that for you...

Fateweaver wrote:Maybe they should have just told him to cover up the word "God". I think that's the real issue is that he wore a button with a deities name that not everyone believes in.

HD wrote:"...which is exactly why we have a blanket policy, which is long-standing and well-communicated to our associates, that only company-provided pins and badges can be worn on our aprons."

I can understand this completely. Without strict company policy, anything goes really.

Unless you are willing to claim that this policy is enforced to brain wash people (oh man, will that ever hold up in court), you still have no real point.

One more thing, no one goes to Home Depot, to hear about god, or even see things about god for that matter. If a diverse customer base, inclines a company to be strict about this kind of thing, more fething power to them; they pay your wage, you do your work. This is not a matter of "free speech", it is a matter of this guy being so high on his horse, that he cannot see the fact that the company was well within it's rights to reprimand him how they saw fit.

You argument is "free speech", which has little to do with the workplace... as a matter of fact, it has little to do with anything, besides your ability to be Christian Ameri-cun, outside of your job. You were not hired to present your beliefs, and a companies image is their business, not Christian McThompsons whim.

Fateweaver wrote: Maybe they should have just told him to cover up the word "God". I think that's the real issue is that he wore a button with a deities name that not everyone believes in.

Yes i believe thats the whole issue there.

This case reminds me of the British Airways staff member who was disciplined for wearing a crucifix.

The reason for disciplining her was that jewelry was not allowed to be worn by her grade of staff.

She countered that it was a religious symbol and BA countered that by saying that a crucifix is optional for Christians while a yarmulk (for example) isn't optional for Jews.

She went to industrial tribunal and lost.

In this case, the report makes it clear that the company is private so it isn't bound by the First Amendment and does not have to allow its staff to express themselves however they like.

He was offered a patriotic alternative and refused.

It looks an open and shut case which he will lose, unless he can turn up some evidence of unfair or discriminatory practices.

(O NOES!!! Tim is going to comment on this thread... TAKE COVER!!!)

I find it sad... Insert the rant I just posted in the "Little things that bother people greatly..." thread here.
Kinda like when I was asked by a classmate why I wore a Celtic Cross and a Pentacle at the same time... I was told they conflicted with each other, and I needed to take one off. You could guess which one...

On the other hand, when I go on a business trip, I need to wear nice clothes (not jeans, Batman shirt, and trench coat) and take my jewelry off. Hair in a nice pony tail, and no steel toes, etc...
If I walked into a conference room and ran demos for a 4 star general wearing that, I would be SOOO fired!!!

That doesn't mean we should be a secular country of robots that all do what they are told...

(Dammit, Tim... There is no logical conclusion to this train of thought. Continue, and you will get caught in a mental cycle loop...)
Sometimes I just want to stand on the moon, face the wold and shout, "FETH YOU!"

Ummm...hope HD takes the guy for legal fees for forcing a frivolous lawsuit on them.

Company has a blanket policy. Guy violates policy. Guy gets canned. Guy goes to lawyer and whines like the little gak he is.

Well, at least there is now an opening for someone who *wants* a job.

The thing with America is people can sue for the dumbest stuff.

Lady spilled coffee on herself because she is stupid. She sued maccas because if the coffee wasn't as hot as it was, it would not have burned her.

A guy breaks into a house, and breaks his leg. He sues the homeowners for damages.

The company had a policy. He did not abide by said policy. He refused the options they gave him. They fired him.

Take it like a man you little whinger.

Jimi Nemesis wrote:The thing with America is people can sue for the dumbest stuff.

There are lots of frivolous lawsuits, but note than in most cases they only report the case be filed, not a win for the plaintiff. This is because these cases almost never win a penny, but explaining that isn't anywhere near as exciting. Then if you actually look into the cases where the plaintiff wins the nature of the case is normally grossly misrepresented, such as with the Macca's coffee case.

There are some bizarre results, of course, it's a human process and lots of factors play a role, but the idea that there's free money out there for these people lodging false claims is just wrong.

Lady spilled coffee on herself because she is stupid. She sued maccas because if the coffee wasn't as hot as it was, it would not have burned her.

Except there's an issue of how hot one expects coffee to be. Yeah, spill coffee and you get burned, the area is a little tender for a week and you move. In the Macca's coffee case it took the lady about a minute to get her jeans off after spilling the coffee - the coffee was so hot that in that minute enough damage had been done that she needed skin grafts to her genitals. Which is outrageously hot coffee.

Outrageously hot coffee that had caused the store in question to receive many complaints before. That the store knew was the result of a faulty coffee machine, but that they hadn't bothered to fix.

I don't know about you, but I think that when people buy hot food or drink, it's fair enough to expect it to be hot, but also fair enough to expect it isn't so hot that a few seconds exposure ends up requiring skin grafts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fateweaver wrote:The fact HD had an issue in the first place IS an issue. Had it been a button saying "Kill all Jews" or "Blacks are really Ni**as" then I could see it being an issue.

Maybe they should have just told him to cover up the word "God". I think that's the real issue is that he wore a button with a deities name that not everyone believes in.

The company doesn't want to get into the mess of deciding what buttons are offensive and what buttons are not, so it has a storewide ban on all buttons. This guy ignored the policy, and after multiple warnings he was fired.

Now, you saw a story that set off your buttons and you didn't think about it fully before posting and pointing out how outraged you were. Fair enough, we all do that, but now a fair few people have pointed out that the company acted the only way it could. At this point you can admit your mistake and move, or go on aggressively not getting the point, it's up to you.

McDonald's did end up paying damages in the hot coffee case but it was something like $80,000 not the millions sued for.

Sebster, you rock. Often I feel like I am the only person who tries to correct the "hot coffee" lawsuit misunderstanding. You get major props for fighting against the ignorance of the one line story that gets told over and over again, and for sticking up for the truth of complex situations.

you win at the internets.

sebster wrote:Except there's an issue of how hot one expects coffee to be. Yeah, spill coffee and you get burned, the area is a little tender for a week and you move. In the Macca's coffee case it took the lady about a minute to get her jeans off after spilling the coffee - the coffee was so hot that in that minute enough damage had been done that she needed skin grafts to her genitals. Which is outrageously hot coffee.

Outrageously hot coffee that had caused the store in question to receive many complaints before. That the store knew was the result of a faulty coffee machine, but that they hadn't bothered to fix.

I don't know about you, but I think that when people buy hot food or drink, it's fair enough to expect it to be hot, but also fair enough to expect it isn't so hot that a few seconds exposure ends up requiring skin grafts.

That is absolutely horrific man...

Fizzywig wrote:Sebster, you rock. Often I feel like I am the only person who tries to correct the "hot coffee" lawsuit misunderstanding. You get major props for fighting against the ignorance of the one line story that gets told over and over again, and for sticking up for the truth of complex situations.

you win at the internets.

+1 indeed .

Do all you Americans talk like that?

Not only do I hope HD gets him for legal costs, I hope everywhere in the area where he lives blacklists him from getting a job.

However, I don't think it will be an "open and shut" case. With all the damn Christian groups out there, waiting to jump on something like this. I really think this is going to get a lot of publicity if the guy loses or wins.

One thing I've learned, is that religious bigots, regardless of religion, can't keep small gak like this to themselves. Any little loss is turned into "religious discrimination" and a little victory is turned into the equivilant of the victory over the Axis powers.

Wow you combined "damn Christian" and "religious bigot" into one handy post. Woops you dropped your name tag.

This need to be settled once and for all!

yeah well i guess this is the same things as us not being allowed to have anything Xmas related at work now. No one is allowed to give or recive Xmas cards or wear clothing with Xmas pics, or saying or play Xmas songs or even have a Xmas calander, just incase someone somewhere is offended by it.
I think it sucks big donkey hole....and i'll leave it at that.

Roze wrote:yeah well i guess this is the same things as us not being allowed to have anything Xmas related at work now. No one is allowed to give or recive Xmas cards or wear clothing with Xmas pics, or saying or play Xmas songs or even have a Xmas calander, just incase someone somewhere is offended by it.
I think it sucks big donkey hole....and i'll leave it at that.

To me thats different...and total BS.

Merry Christmas!

The company where I work sends out Christmas cards, has a tree in the reception lobby, hangs up tinsel and bunting, and organises at least two parties for everyone!

What miserable Gradgrindian hole do you work in, Roze?

Kilkrazy wrote:The company where I work sends out Christmas cards, has a tree in the reception lobby, hangs up tinsel and bunting, and organises at least two parties for everyone!

What miserable Gradgrindian hole do you work in, Roze?

One which has Labour Voters for Bosses -Badum Tish!-

Seriously though, this is becoming more and more common. Political Correctness to a Degree is fine, but since Labour took over it has gotten silly.