Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
At will employment, don't you just love it? nt Tommy_Carcetti Dec 2012 #1
That is interesting to me. ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #2
You respect him for being weak willed? Rex Dec 2012 #4
No. I typed what I meant. ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #9
By ending the career of someone else. Rex Dec 2012 #10
I adressed that too. ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #16
Ya you said that was really 'lame'. Rex Dec 2012 #17
What do my comments say to you? nt ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #20
That I am wasting my time here. Rex Dec 2012 #22
That is not what I said. I do not respect him for firing her. ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #23
You asked what your comment 'said' to me Rex Dec 2012 #28
I should have been more clear. nt ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #32
Bull maxrandb Dec 2012 #14
I am unable to read minds, I have never met this man or woman, ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #18
If he was "hitting" she would not have taken it to court. immoderate Dec 2012 #31
And what you meant says that the Dentist was weak willed as he had to get rid of the cui bono Dec 2012 #24
I'm not excusing anything. The words in my post were meant to go together. ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #27
If he was really concerned about preserving his marriage, he would have attempted to fire her before EOTE Dec 2012 #8
Maybe. nt ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #11
Or he could have been a professional and learned how to work Rex Dec 2012 #13
She should be glad to be away from that sexist pig. Rex Dec 2012 #3
Family values my ass. Initech Dec 2012 #5
On what constitutional basis can someone discriminate against blueclown Dec 2012 #6
Same here, kinda shocked at the ruling. Rex Dec 2012 #12
The problem is that it is not discrimination against the class jberryhill Dec 2012 #38
Doesn't this involve disparate impact? blueclown Dec 2012 #42
Because it only impacts one person jberryhill Dec 2012 #43
all-male court unblock Dec 2012 #7
this country has lost its fucking mind maxrandb Dec 2012 #39
What a despicable ruling (and a despicable dentist). If this court decision is in any petronius Dec 2012 #15
Yeah, does he turn away attractive female patients for the same reason? cui bono Dec 2012 #25
Unbelievably stupid decision. Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #19
Family values my ass Amaril Dec 2012 #21
Sounds like "Bosses WIFE can fire attractive female workers". JoePhilly Dec 2012 #26
Good God. What is the affirmative defense against something like this? Baitball Blogger Dec 2012 #29
HUh? I'm for Iggy Dec 2012 #30
In law school we learned about the "attractive nuisance", but not this. Manifestor_of_Light Dec 2012 #33
Ladies, get your burqas out life long demo Dec 2012 #34
maybe the court tried to squeeze this in under the alienation of affection laws R B Garr Dec 2012 #35
Isn't this the justification that fundamentalist Muslims use for requiring burqas? Piazza Riforma Dec 2012 #36
does anyone else here remember that, when we were fighting to get the ERA--we were told that niyad Dec 2012 #37
did the woman suddenly have plastic surgery? an extreme makeover? she worked there for ten niyad Dec 2012 #40
We had a guy ask that a new woman be fired because his wife didn't want them travelling together Sen. Walter Sobchak Dec 2012 #41
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Iowa Court: Bosses Can Fi...»Reply #20