Reply
Ellie. 2 kids; Arizona 25439 posts
Nov 21st '12
Quoting Wiggity Wack:" She was on a work trip, on company time. Her actions were disrespectful and unprofessional. This merits disciplinary action, of course."


Was she on work time?

Did her company take a team building trip to that location? If not.... I'm assuming it was after hours and she was not getting paid for that time. Technically, it was not on company time.

Wiggity Wack 1 child; Connecticut 10780 posts
Nov 21st '12

Her whole, "I want to challenge authority just for the f**k of it" attitude is pretty juvenile. Not someone I'd want working for me, personally.

Ellie. 2 kids; Arizona 25439 posts
Nov 21st '12
Quoting .Colleen.:" If she was on company time, I support her being fired. If it was personal time, she was just being an a*****e and is not representing her employer"


Yes.

Sweet Little Lies 3 kids; 1 angel baby; Deception, WI, United States 6900 posts
Nov 21st '12

I think what she did was totally disrespectful. And her need to challenge authority? How old is she 14? Come on lady.

Wiggity Wack 1 child; Connecticut 10780 posts
Nov 21st '12
Quoting Man. Bear. Pig.:" Was she on work time? Did her company take a team building trip to that location? If not.... I'm ... [snip!] ... If not.... I'm assuming it was after hours and she was not getting paid for that time. Technically, it was not on company time."

The article stated that she was on a work trip. Maybe she wasn't technically on company time, but I still think she should have acted professionally, as this wasn't a personal vacation.

MysticWitchKat 2052 posts
Nov 21st '12

No because she has every right to be a t**t of the highest order according to law. I find it amusing on one hand when people will demand the right to free speech, but expect someone to be punished for free speech they find distasteful.

*~Stella's Momma~* 1 child; Missouri 1654 posts
Nov 21st '12

<blockquote><b>Quoting MysticWitchKat:</b>" No because she has every right to be a t**t of the highest order according to law. I find it amusing ... [snip!] ... hand when people will demand the right to free speech, but expect someone to be punished for free speech they find distasteful."</blockquote>



:!:

Ellie. 2 kids; Arizona 25439 posts
Nov 21st '12
Quoting Wiggity Wack:" The article stated that she was on a work trip. Maybe she wasn't technically on company time, but I still think she should have acted professionally, as this wasn't a personal vacation."


I could understand the company firing her over backlash.... but not over what she did on her own time, whether a company trip or not. Bottom line, she's a stupid immature b***h who disrespected a very sacred place. But IMO, you have to keep that apart from her work. :shrug:

Wiggity Wack 1 child; Connecticut 10780 posts
Nov 21st '12
Quoting MysticWitchKat:" No because she has every right to be a t**t of the highest order according to law. I find it amusing ... [snip!] ... hand when people will demand the right to free speech, but expect someone to be punished for free speech they find distasteful."

It's not really an issue of free speech. No one was trying to censor her or take down the picture she posted. She certainly has the right to say/post anything she wants, just as the company she works for also has the right to find the picture distasteful and discipline her for acting inappropriately on a company trip.

khigh 1 child; Fort Sill, Oklahoma 8101 posts
Nov 21st '12

<blockquote><b>Quoting MysticWitchKat:</b>" No because she has every right to be a t**t of the highest order according to law. I find it amusing ... [snip!] ... hand when people will demand the right to free speech, but expect someone to be punished for free speech they find distasteful."</blockquote>




That protects you from the fed, not your employer. The employer has the right to fire her.

MysticWitchKat 2052 posts
Nov 21st '12
Quoting khigh:" <blockquote><b>Quoting MysticWitchKat:</b>" No because she has every right to be a ... [snip!] ... distasteful."</blockquote> That protects you from the fed, not your employer. The employer has the right to fire her."


The employer is only doing it because people are freaking out she did it however which proves my point.

Wiggity Wack 1 child; Connecticut 10780 posts
Nov 21st '12
Quoting Man. Bear. Pig.:" I could understand the company firing her over backlash.... but not over what she did on her own time, ... [snip!] ... she's a stupid immature b***h who disrespected a very sacred place. But IMO, you have to keep that apart from her work. :shrug:"

I guess so...

khigh 1 child; Fort Sill, Oklahoma 8101 posts
Nov 21st '12

<blockquote><b>Quoting MysticWitchKat:</b>" The employer is only doing it because people are freaking out she did it however which proves my point. "</blockquote>




She's a dumb ass. I just wish the Old Guard had seen her. They would have given her a schooling on respect.

Wiggity Wack 1 child; Connecticut 10780 posts
Nov 21st '12
Quoting MysticWitchKat:" The employer is only doing it because people are freaking out she did it however which proves my point. "


This is a quote from an article that I posted recently. The circumstances are pretty similar. http://www.modbee.com/2012/11/08/2448491/obama-threat-gets-woman-fired.html
"We made the decision because of her comments, but also the community feedback," he said. "We are very into working with the community and doing community service. So when your community does not like you because of an employee, that's bad. We have a business to run."



Read more here: http://www.modbee.com/2012/11/08/2448491/obama-threat-gets-woman-fired.html#storylink=cpy

MysticWitchKat 2052 posts
Nov 21st '12
Quoting khigh:" <blockquote><b>Quoting MysticWitchKat:</b>" The employer is only doing it because ... [snip!] ... She's a dumb ass. I just wish the Old Guard had seen her. They would have given her a schooling on respect."


She has the right to her view as much as everyone else. She is not entitled to respect anyone else more than they respect her.