reasonable discrimination or not?

Minimum moderation and heated debates.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby kiryan » Mon Apr 11, 2011 9:00 pm

Was born a woman, had reassignment surgery to "become a man", has state ID issued as a man.

Fired from his job of watching men pee because it stipulates that a requirement of the job that the applicant be a man.

Personally, I think its perfectly valid and it shouldn't be discrimination for him to be fired.. or at least it should be legally protected discrimination. Whats next, a woman applying for the job and claiming its discrimination?

While there are some good arguments why it should be discrimination... I think at the end of the day we have to consider why if you were born a woman would you seek out a job for men only except for antagonistic reasons.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110411/ap_ ... 5zZ2VuZGU-

HADDONFIELD, N.J. – A transsexual man has sued the drug-treatment center where he worked, claiming it discriminated against him when it fired him from a job that only a man is allowed to do: watching men urinate
...
He says managers at Urban Treatment Centers in Camden believed he was a man when the drug treatment center hired him in June to monitor men as they gave urine samples for drug tests. Because of its nature, the job was open only to men — a prerequisite his lawyer says was appropriate.
...
In a response to the civil rights complaint, the company maintained that it was appropriate to remove Devoureau from the job because only men were allowed to hold the p.osition.
...
New Jersey is one of a dozen states in the nation that bans discrimination based on transgender status, a law that was adopted in 2006 and took effect in 2007.

Jillian Todd Weiss, a professor of law and society at New Jersey's Ramapo College who also consults with employees about workplaces transgender issues, said it appears to be a simple case under the state's laws and judicial precedent.

"I would have absolutely told them to retain the employee and think about how to address transphobia and heterosexism in their environment. You don't ask someone: 'What do your genitalia look like?'" she said. "That was a very poor choice on the employer's part."
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Ragorn » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:52 pm

What parts does he have now? If he has an outie, it's discrimination.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
amena wolfsnarl
Sojourner
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:14 pm
Location: grande prairie alberta canada

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby amena wolfsnarl » Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:51 pm

In this kind of situation his sexual orientation should have alot to do with it. If he's into woman that's fine, if however he is into men.... Fire his/her ass. By allowing a gay thing? To hold this job you open the door to all kinds of inappropriate comments and situations. I'm usually pro gay rights but this is a job they should not have
Dugmaren tells you 'Welcome to Canada, don't blame us if you're stupid enough to get eaten by the wild life'
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Tue Apr 12, 2011 4:47 pm

Companies should be allowed to protect themselves from such liabilities. Either the state shields the company from lawsuits patients might bring from having a transgender person watch them pee, or the company should be allowed to decide who gets to watch.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Kifle » Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:58 pm

Teflor Lyorian wrote:Companies should be allowed to protect themselves from such liabilities. Either the state shields the company from lawsuits patients might bring from having a transgender person watch them pee, or the company should be allowed to decide who gets to watch.


This. Until there is protection for the hiring entity, discrimination has to be allowed in some cases. Nobody should be forced into a trap. I've had to deal with employees that "couldn't" be fired, and it was a nightmare. There are certain personalities I will never hire in conjunction with certain physical characteristics. I don't hire women who are greedy -- especially if they are attractive. Why? They are much more likely to sue for sexual harassment. Greedy women I've ran into always try to do less work for the same or more pay. They eventually feel slighted in some way, mainly because their attempts at using tits and ass to get a raise fail, and they retaliate. I don't hire minorities if they even mention "my people" or indicate past discrimination. The list goes on, but when I was VP and handled hiring, the company's safety came first. I imagine it's the same type of necessary racial profiling that cops have to do in certain areas.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:50 am

Generally, discrimination based on what you've said is flat-out illegal. You could probably be successfully sued personally by any applicant that you reviewed that could connect your forum post with your identity and your former company fined and forced to hire those people. While the bulk of regulation and legislation address businesses with 15 or 50 or more employees, many of the laws apply to any business.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Vigis
Sojourner
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Vigis » Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:12 am

For the purposes of the article Kiryan posted, the company is most likely within their legal rights. GLBT is not a protected class at a federal level, and only protected in a handful of states. Decisions on past cases have set the precedence that an individual's sex is determined by their DNA, not their gender identity, gender preference, or appearance. The company made it clear that it was a bona fide occupational qualification that the individual be male;

On a personal level, I could care less who watches me take a piss; truth be told I would prefer a female (I'm proud of my junk!)
Just to stave off the questions, yes I would be equally fine with a male watching, whether gay or straight, but I probably wouldn't wink at them :)
Nerox tells you 'Good deal, the other tanks I have don't wanna do it, and since your my special suicidal tank i figure you don't mind one bit!'

Alurissi tells you 'aren't you susposed to get sick or something and not beable to make tia so i can go? :P'
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Kifle » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:05 am

Teflor Lyorian wrote:Generally, discrimination based on what you've said is flat-out illegal. You could probably be successfully sued personally by any applicant that you reviewed that could connect your forum post with your identity and your former company fined and forced to hire those people. While the bulk of regulation and legislation address businesses with 15 or 50 or more employees, many of the laws apply to any business.


You're very right. It was highly illegal what I did; however, I will stand by what I did and say it was the right thing. And, no, I couldn't be sued at all. Proving that this is my account is one thing; proving that I'm the one using this account is another. Anything gained here would be highly circumstantial, and without any recorded history of my actions, the suit would be tossed out quicker than you could say "go try to milk another company for free money you worthless piece of shit." This is just the tip of the ice burg of the shady things that go on within upper level management at virtually every company I've had dealings with. As an example of a hiring situation that was hilarious: a buddy of mine that owns a company out in California, who was a manufacturer which supplied the company I worked for at the time, sent me a picture of a candidate for his assistant position (with her permission) during the interview. We then had a conference call on speaker, which she could hear, where I was attempting to guess her bra size. Yes, I am a man, but it was more a test than anything. Anyway, during this little carnival game, she was joking and laughing and generally not taking it seriously. He hired her. He's happily married and is rarely in the office -- where she is all day. Now, why is this useful? Because she's not going to sue him for some joking offhanded remark down the road. We are both the type of people that joke about these things, and it is important that our employees have the same type of humor, which is not something to be ignored when hiring. She turned out to be a great employee and still works there to this day, albeit with more pay and responsibility. Now, is what we did illegal? Probably. But, I don't see any difference between being able to accurately gauge this facet of one's personality over, say, matching a prospect to a position based upon the company's mission statement. In an interview, you're being judged how well you fit in a company, large or small. Personality, in any aspect, should be fair game. You can choose to not hire someone based upon a written test which may or may not indicate a higher probability of theft or dishonesty. Show me the difference between something like that and any personality test I've ever devised and used in an interview setting. The only difference is public sensitivity and ignorance about the actual hiring procedures. I would never discriminate based upon something one cannot help -- such as race, sexuality, gender identity, etc. But, I will choose not to hire someone based upon certain personality flaws -- especially in conjunction with other alarm-raising characteristics.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:25 am

It's really not that hard, you see, IP addresses give away a lot with a court order. Now an idiot might have a hard time suing, because, well, they're stupid, but just as a warning, if any funny looking lawyer gets tossed this as a civil rights case, you may have a problem. Unlikely, but I felt like I should warn you anyway.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Kifle » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:40 am

Teflor Lyorian wrote:It's really not that hard, you see, IP addresses give away a lot with a court order. Now an idiot might have a hard time suing, because, well, they're stupid, but just as a warning, if any funny looking lawyer gets tossed this as a civil rights case, you may have a problem. Unlikely, but I felt like I should warn you anyway.


Eh, I'm aware of the risks, but, again, knowing the transmitting address and knowing the physical user transmitting the message are completely different. Circumstantial evidence is just that. Also, with the community we have here, the probability of anyone being even far removed from any poster here who has also stepped into one of my offices for an interview are about as good as a North Korean has for not going hungry and then winning the US lottery while getting struck by lightning five times in a row.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Vigis
Sojourner
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Vigis » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:56 am

Any time I have ever had to deal with an employee due to potentially discriminating situations, I always make sure it is tied back to performance or being under-qualified. Let me tell you, firing somebody here is way harder than in the US. Last one I had to let go, I had to pay 4 weeks severance AND document a lack of improvement for 6 weeks after the original warning...
Nerox tells you 'Good deal, the other tanks I have don't wanna do it, and since your my special suicidal tank i figure you don't mind one bit!'



Alurissi tells you 'aren't you susposed to get sick or something and not beable to make tia so i can go? :P'
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Wed Apr 13, 2011 6:27 pm

Kifle wrote:
Teflor Lyorian wrote:It's really not that hard, you see, IP addresses give away a lot with a court order. Now an idiot might have a hard time suing, because, well, they're stupid, but just as a warning, if any funny looking lawyer gets tossed this as a civil rights case, you may have a problem. Unlikely, but I felt like I should warn you anyway.


Eh, I'm aware of the risks, but, again, knowing the transmitting address and knowing the physical user transmitting the message are completely different. Circumstantial evidence is just that. Also, with the community we have here, the probability of anyone being even far removed from any poster here who has also stepped into one of my offices for an interview are about as good as a North Korean has for not going hungry and then winning the US lottery while getting struck by lightning five times in a row.

Hey, some people like dancing outside in a thunderstorm. I have no problem with that and for the most part, the dancers seem to do ok.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Ashiwi » Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:44 am

He had reassignment surgery to become a man. He should be allowed to participate in all activities open to men. I see no problem with him holding a job restricted to men only.

And let's remember that the job market has been very tight recently. Why would you assume that he took a "men only" job for antagonistic reasons?
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Kifle » Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:47 am

Ashiwi wrote:He had reassignment surgery to become a man. He should be allowed to participate in all activities open to men. I see no problem with him holding a job restricted to men only.

And let's remember that the job market has been very tight recently. Why would you assume that he took a "men only" job for antagonistic reasons?


The thing I would like to see is statistics on gender reassignments where the end result is a "homosexual". I'd be willing to bet that this person in particular was a gay woman that switched to being a straight man.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby kiryan » Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:31 am

Ashiwi wrote:He had reassignment surgery to become a man. He should be allowed to participate in all activities open to men. I see no problem with him holding a job restricted to men only.

And let's remember that the job market has been very tight recently. Why would you assume that he took a "men only" job for antagonistic reasons?


Because of her hangup on being a man. Sure she might've picked that job because it was the best available to her and made sure everyone knew within a couple months that she used to be a woman, but more than likely she just wanted to make a point... or even sue.

I liked Vigis comment about gender being determined by DNA in past court cases. I could go with that.

I think the best argument against this is why does the job have to be conducted by a man... because a woman is incapable.. no? because a man feels more comfortable having another man watch him pee... not always true (think potential for gay or horny preferences)? because of social standards and stereo types of what qualifies as decent (when has that ever stopped our society before)?
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Re: reasonable discrimination or not?

Postby Ashiwi » Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:15 pm

kiryan wrote:
Ashiwi wrote:He had reassignment surgery to become a man. He should be allowed to participate in all activities open to men. I see no problem with him holding a job restricted to men only.

And let's remember that the job market has been very tight recently. Why would you assume that he took a "men only" job for antagonistic reasons?


Because of her hangup on being a man. Sure she might've picked that job because it was the best available to her and made sure everyone knew within a couple months that she used to be a woman, but more than likely she just wanted to make a point... or even sue.

I liked Vigis comment about gender being determined by DNA in past court cases. I could go with that.

I think the best argument against this is why does the job have to be conducted by a man... because a woman is incapable.. no? because a man feels more comfortable having another man watch him pee... not always true (think potential for gay or horny preferences)? because of social standards and stereo types of what qualifies as decent (when has that ever stopped our society before)?


You seem to be making guesses here without having any facts on the individual. I'm assuming positively and you're assuming negatively. If you approach the article strictly objectively, there's really nothing to lead you down that path.

I could potentially be persuaded by the gender/DNA thing ... if it were illegal for the state to issue a drivers licence to him as a male. He was recognized by a government entity as a male. He should be able to perform the duties of a male in situations where the legality of his gender is questioned.
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!

Return to “Current Events & Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest