Skip to comments.
Woman alleging firing over bumper sticker speaks out
( Air America update )
NCTimes.com ^
| 10 Mar, 2006
| TERI FIGUEROA
Posted on 03/11/2006 6:38:04 AM PST by Hillarys Gate Cult
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-65 next last
To: cowboyway
I had a cleaning lady down in south Florida that showed up one day with "Hillary 08" and "Buck Fush" bumper stickers on her car.
Check that all of your valuables are where they're supposed to be. Now.
21
posted on
03/11/2006 7:07:59 AM PST
by
RandallFlagg
(Roll your own cigarettes! You'll save $$$ and smoke less!(Magnetic bumper stickers-click my name)
To: misterrob
At the same time, the firing did not occur. The employer made things right and is still being sued. This is a typical leftist response-sue. What loss can the woman demonstrate other than one day's wages?
To: Hillarys Gate Cult
Okay, so the whole "You're fired" is a joke, which this woman didn't get.
They ask her back to work, tell her she's not fired & she decides she'd rather sue for being fired, even though she wasn't really fired.
I'm not surprised. Most of the lefty's I know have NO sense of humor - they are truly humor-impaired.
23
posted on
03/11/2006 7:12:02 AM PST
by
KosmicKitty
(WARNING: Hormonally crazed woman ahead!!)
To: Hillarys Gate Cult
"I stewed about it for days," TRANSLATION: I posted and posted at DUmmieLand and realized that I could win the lawsuit lottery and never have to work again. I could go join Code Pinko and get to kiss Cindy Sheehans a$$ and then come back and brag about it to all my fellow freaks! Yippee Me! Yippee Me!
/s
To: misterrob
I agree. How could you not know you were fired? Who fires someone over a bumper sticker ... right on the spur of the moment? Could it have been a joke that the employee decided to escalate?
To: misterrob
Everyone around here would be freaking out, calling Nope. Most of us understand the Employer should have the right to hire and fire whom ever they want. Contrary to the Leftist mythology, MOST of us understand you are not entitled to any job you want. If an employer wants to fire you for being a Righty, that is their business. Personally I believe it would be a stupid business decision, but it is entirely their right.
26
posted on
03/11/2006 7:26:41 AM PST
by
MNJohnnie
(Professional Journalism- the Buggy Whip makers of the 21st century)
To: Ken522
She admits that her manager allegedly said " I guess I'm going to have to fire you" That doesn't mean "you are fired". She didn't show up for work, and the company wrote her and told her she had better or she WILL be fired. At best, it looks like a 50/50 case. The manager didn't tell her to remove the sticker or anything, she only gave an opinion of what she thought of the station, and she has a right to her opinion. That "she could be an al qeada member for all she knew" is also only a personal opinion. I'll bet it gets thrown out, or at worst, the employer will have to pay 2 weeks severence pay. Her lawyer bill will be more than she will extract from this.
To: Hillarys Gate Cult
Do you part, FIRE A LIBERAL TODAY!!!
28
posted on
03/11/2006 7:29:24 AM PST
by
Porterville
(Sure are a lot of these few Muslim Extremist Fanatics)
To: Hillarys Gate Cult
If that poor, poor woman is really without a job, perhaps she could join that peace activist group in Iraq.....now that there's an opening....
29
posted on
03/11/2006 7:33:21 AM PST
by
Postman
To: Hillarys Gate Cult
"I guess I'm going to have to fire you" sounds like a sort of "If I tell you, I'll have to kill you" type of joke. That would explain why the boss wasn't smiling when she said it.
If the boss was joking, she should have known better. Liberals cannot take a joke. As for the al-Qaida remark...well, read my tagline.
To: misterrob
I'm afraid the company is in the soup for sure.
They're dealing with a liberal = professional victim. The professional victims are good at what they do.
31
posted on
03/11/2006 7:40:44 AM PST
by
biggerten
(Love you, Mom.)
To: Hillarys Gate Cult
At the beginning of the year, the "local" AAR station, probably one of the first to carry them after the "founding"
of AAR, changed to ESPN. Previously, they carried Hannity and Gallagher. Now, Hannity is carried by the CC station.
To: Hillarys Gate Cult
33
posted on
03/11/2006 7:44:06 AM PST
by
who knows what evil?
(New England...the Sodom and Gomorrah of the 21st Century, and they're proud of it!)
To: VOA
I don't think that an "Enron" sort of investigation could ever work against AA... First off, none of the investors would file suit. They're all "true believers" in the cause. Secondly, AA doesn't follow any sort of business model that could possibly turn a profit, or even break even, and the "investors" knew that from the beginning. A radio show that becomes successful draws advertising to a station. As the success grows, the people behind the radio show can charge fees for allowing stations to run the show. AA actually has to PAY stations for their air time, much like an infomercial. And lets face it, that's really what AA is. An infomercial for the leftist line of thought, since they can't seem to make anyone want to listen.
Mark
34
posted on
03/11/2006 7:54:40 AM PST
by
MarkL
(When Kaylee says "No power in the `verse can stop me," it's cute. When River says it, it's scary!)
To: MarkL
Agreed. Better to let AA die all on it's own.
35
posted on
03/11/2006 7:56:58 AM PST
by
RandallFlagg
(Roll your own cigarettes! You'll save $$$ and smoke less!(Magnetic bumper stickers-click my name)
To: Hillarys Gate Cult
KLSD????? Man, you can't make this stuff up!
36
posted on
03/11/2006 7:58:07 AM PST
by
IronJack
To: doesnt suffer fools gladly
"I guess I'm going to have to fire you" sounds like a sort of "If I tell you, I'll have to kill you" type of joke.
Threatening to kill someone is not a laughing mater, and it is against the law to kill someone. This is no different than a sexual predator intending to meet someone, even though he doesn't get any sex he is prosecuted as if he did. The same thing should go for death threats.
This is serious business, like Airport security, and just as airport security is not a laughing mater, neither are death threats, Mister.
You know, sometimes I hate adding a sarcasm tag...
37
posted on
03/11/2006 8:00:15 AM PST
by
Mark was here
(How can they be called "Homeless" if their home is a field?.)
To: misterrob
Do you believe employers should be forced to hire twits like this?
I believe just the opposite. A wise employer would seek to avoid hiring people like this in the first place and, failing that, would find ways to get rid of them after finding out what they are about.
It isn't her politics per se that make her poisonous in the work enivironment. It's her sense of entitlement and vengeful personality. This is the kind of humorless troublemaker who keeps the rest of the employees constantly agitated, who is looking to file a complaint withthe EEOC if you attempt to correct her disruptive behavior or require her to conform to the the minimum requirements of the job.
In my opinion, this womyn appears to be unemployable, and for good reason.
38
posted on
03/11/2006 8:00:29 AM PST
by
JCEccles
To: Mark was here
Threatening to kill someone is not a laughing mater, and it is against the law to kill someone. This is no different than a sexual predator intending to meet someone, even though he doesn't get any sex he is prosecuted as if he did. The same thing should go for death threats. This is serious business, like Airport security, and just as airport security is not a laughing mater, neither are death threats, Mister.Oh for Heaven's sake, lighten up. I'm talking about the old JOKE of "If I tell you, I'll have to kill you"....like I heard an actor from the Sopranos tell a tv interviewer yesterday when asked about the upcoming plot lines.
THAT'S what I meant, MISTER!
To: doesnt suffer fools gladly
Oh for Heaven's sake, lighten up. I'm talking about the old JOKE
Think for a second about why I made mention of a sarcasm tag! I could tell you why I made mention of it... but then I would have to kill you.
40
posted on
03/11/2006 8:08:57 AM PST
by
Mark was here
(How can they be called "Homeless" if their home is a field?.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-65 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson