Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fired – For Love Without Marriage
CBS ^

Posted on 06/17/2006 5:17:58 PM PDT by narses

AP) The owners of a roller skating rink have fired an 18-year-old woman they called one of their "Top 10" employees because she moved in with her boyfriend, violating a company ethics policy that prohibits "live-in relationships of an intimate nature."

"I loved my job and I didn't want to leave," Crystal Plotner told the Coeur d'Alene Press this week.

She said she was fired after casually telling her bosses, Skate Plaza owners Marvin and Pat Miller, that she planned to move in with her boyfriend in mid-May.

Before terminating her, Plotner said the Millers said she and her boyfriend should "check out their church." She declined.

"Even if I had gone to their church, I don't think it would have saved my job," said Plotner, who worked at Skate Plaza for three years and made $9.25 an hour. "They didn't want me to live with my boyfriend. They were pushing their religion on me and I was offended. I don't have the same religious beliefs as they do."

Pat Miller praised Plotner, saying that "In all the years that we've employed people, she was one of the Top 10. It was a sad day when she left because everybody loved her."

But Miller added, "We've had our (employee) handbook out for many years and it does say if you live in an immoral way with a member of the opposite sex or same sex, you will be terminated."

Miller said that in talking with Plotner, they were approaching the issue as employers, friends and Christians.

"Our advice is not to do this," Miller added. "It's fine and certainly her business that she did, but either we throw the handbook out or follow what's in it."

Pat Miller said they attempt to set a good example in the community because their business draws young people.

"If we owned a roofing company, it wouldn't have mattered," Pat Miller said. "We screen our music carefully. We have a 4-inch rule. We don't allow petting, necking or bad language. You have to decide, what kind of establishment do you want to be? We want parents to feel comfortable bringing their kids here."

She said it is the first time they have fired someone for living with a boyfriend or girlfriend, though they have rejected some applicants for that reason.

"When we first put it in we checked with our attorney, and he said we could do it as long as it's consistent."

Skate Plaza's moral and ethics policy also bans such behaviors as "public displays of promiscuous activities, homosexuality, intoxication, use of profanity, lewd behavior, use of illegal drugs, child abuse, spouse abuse, unlawful relationships, cross-dressing, stalking and nudity."

Leslie Goodard, director of Idaho's Human Rights Commission, said the policies don't appear to violate Idaho employment law.

"There is no statute that directly prohibits discrimination based on marital status, and sexual orientation is not protected," said Goodard.

But Jack Van Valkenburgh, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Boise, said Skate Plaza might be violating federal discrimination laws.

"It sounds to me as though they're pushing their religious view of what a proper living situation should be," he said.

For her part, Plotner said she's through with Skate Plaza.

"They're already judging me for how I live my life and it wouldn't be the same," she said.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Idaho
KEYWORDS: cohabitation; employerrights; employmentlaw; freedomofcontract; playinghouse; rollerskating
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
To: PhillyRepublican
Could you imagine the deafening shrieking we'd hear if she was fired for moving in with her lesbian "girlfriend"? The left would go absolutely bonkers and run with this story all the way around the block until they blamed it all on Bush!!

I love ouble entendre.

61 posted on 06/17/2006 8:26:06 PM PDT by CzarNicky (In the magical land of unicorns there's no need for clothes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer

What exactly makes him a "jackass"?


62 posted on 06/17/2006 8:50:24 PM PDT by mockingbyrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: narses

OH GOOD!!!!!


63 posted on 06/17/2006 8:52:07 PM PDT by Atchafalaya (When you're there, that's the best!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Normal4me
Even if you show up everyday and do your job as asked?

Yup, that's called "at-will employment" and most Red states follow it, thank heavens. An employer can fire an employee any time for ay reason or no reason (except for a Federally prohibited reason such as race.)

While I think it is pretty ridiculous in this particular circumstance, the alternative is worse. We don't need French-style jobs for life in this country. That way lies stagnation and massive unemployment.

-ccm

64 posted on 06/17/2006 9:23:19 PM PDT by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

" They've got company: Dems and libertarians."

Speak for yourself. Libertarians believe in the freedom to make contracts. Her contract was with the company via the employee handbook. She violated a rule, she goes out.

It's a matter of private property, ie, running your business as you see fit.

Leave libertarians out of it, please.


65 posted on 06/17/2006 9:26:19 PM PDT by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
How many folks would scream bloody murder here on FR, if she got canned because they found out she was posting on FR

Probably a few but if she had signed that she read and understood the employee handbook and it said posting on FR is grounds for termination then...
66 posted on 06/17/2006 9:28:33 PM PDT by D1X1E
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: narses
"They're already judging me for how I live my life and it wouldn't be the same," she said.

Guess she didn't judge that a handbook has meaning to all employees. If she didn't like it, she should of left right then. Her judgement must of been broken for some reason...

Now for the meat of my arguement... The "judge not" saying... Truth or wannabe truth by certain people?

"He who is spiritual judges all things" for "we have the mind of Christ" (1Cor. 2:15-16).

The notion that judgment is wrong is a ludicrous one. Should child-molesters escape condemnation? Should rapists be free from criticism? Should society refrain from judging those arrested for murder? Should we call evil good? Or would that be a judgment too?

To abhor evil, someone must first judge evil. God instructs men against "hypocrisy" commanding them to "abhor what is evil" (Rom. 12:9). Thus, unable to judge, and unaccustomed to abhorrence, Christians en masse become hypocrites when they obey the Hypocrites Golden Rule. For "judge not" (Mat. 7:1-5) is simply a hypocrites application of do unto others as you would have them do unto you (Mat. 7:12). "For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged" (Mat. 7:2). Judge others as you would have them do unto you inverted is Judge not if you do not want to be judged. Therefore the hypocrite does not judge. As Jesus said, "Judge not… you hypocrite" (Mat. 7:1, 5 KJV; Ezek. 16:52).

Christ kept this theme throughout His ministry. "Hypocrites," Jesus said, "why, even of yourselves, do you not judge what is right?" (Luke 12:56-57).

I love when people's main offense against Christians is the false "Judge Not" saying.

Jesus did say: "Judge not, that you be not judged" (Mat. 7:1)? Jesus gave that teaching to hypocrites (Mat. 7:5) however. For He specifically commands His followers to judge:

"Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment." John 7:24

"Judge not" is the Hypocrites Golden Rule. For "judge not" (Mat. 7:1-5) is simply a hypocrites application of do unto others as you would have them do unto you (Mat. 7:12). "For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged" (Mat. 7:2). Judge others as you would have them do unto you inverted is Judge not if you do not want to be judged. Therefore the hypocrite does not judge. As Jesus said, "Judge not… you hypocrite" (Mat. 7:1, 5 KJV; Ezek. 16:52).

Jesus warned against judging falsely or with hypocrisy. For immediately after saying "judge not," Jesus taught just how to judge correctly:

"And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?... Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother’s eye." Mat. 7:3, 5

Christ kept this theme throughout His ministry. "Hypocrites," Jesus said, "why, even of yourselves, do you not judge what is right?"

The Bible does not say, "Hate the sin, love the sinner." It says, "As a man thinks in his heart, so is he"

67 posted on 06/17/2006 9:45:29 PM PDT by LowOiL ("I am neither . I am a Christocrat" -Benjamin Rush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Energy Alley
Jesus, save me from your followers.

Jesus promised his followers, "you will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake. And then many will be offended" (Mat. 24:9-10). Jesus taught that ‘if they hated Me, they will hate you’" (see John 15:18-19; 17:14; Mat. 10:22; Luke 21:17).

Just as Jesus said you would be. Not that they want you to hate them, but following Jesus is has an occupational hazzard.

I am proud of the skate ring owners and the wonderful atmosphere they provide. You hate them... I have shown why.

68 posted on 06/17/2006 9:52:32 PM PDT by LowOiL ("I am neither . I am a Christocrat" -Benjamin Rush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Taylor42

It's not a matter of going to the correct church. That's a protected choice. It's a matter of behaving in a way that is clearly prohibited in the employee's handbook. I have no problems with this at all. Let employers hire who they want to hire and fire who they want to fire. Just make those grounds clear from the outset.


69 posted on 06/17/2006 11:23:14 PM PDT by CheyennePress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: narses
The employer has the right to decide whether an employee's practices comport with company policy. If the employer wants workers to be non-smoking, to keep guns out of the workplace or to get married, that's the employer's prerogative. Those who don't like such conditions are always free to seek work elsewhere.

(Denny Crane: "Every one should carry a gun strapped to their waist. We need more - not less guns.")

70 posted on 06/17/2006 11:26:22 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Normal4me
"Even if you show up everyday and do your job as asked?"

Complying with company policy was part of her job and her firing was pro forma. When she trumpeted her cohabitation to her employers, she was tendering her own resignation. Now she has what her job couldn't give her -- the spotlight.

71 posted on 06/17/2006 11:27:12 PM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: CzarNicky
Exactly. Its not like the company was checking on her. There's no need to involve other people you don't know in your personal life. Its always a good rule to follow to keep your private life... private. 'Nuff said. This young lady learned a hard lesson. As for her getting married, I happen to think its a good idea too.

(Denny Crane: "Every one should carry a gun strapped to their waist. We need more - not less guns.")

72 posted on 06/17/2006 11:28:33 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LowOiL

there is a difference between being devoted to your faith and being a busybody troll.


73 posted on 06/17/2006 11:40:01 PM PDT by Energy Alley ("War on Christians" = just another professional victim group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Energy Alley

Would you dare put the scurrility of your taglie as "War on Jews" -- just another professional victim group

(won't bother answering, I know you would)


74 posted on 06/17/2006 11:48:05 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (``)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

I sort of put the holocaust and half a century of terrorism in a different league than Harry Potter.


75 posted on 06/18/2006 12:16:02 AM PDT by Energy Alley ("War on Christians" = just another professional victim group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Energy Alley
there is a difference between being devoted to your faith and being a busybody troll.

Nevermind, your tagline says it all. Continue your screed...

76 posted on 06/18/2006 12:21:36 AM PDT by LowOiL ("I am neither . I am a Christocrat" -Benjamin Rush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: narses

It's a private company with upfront employment requirements. Now, if she had started smoking, wouldn't she have been fired from many city, state, and private organizations?

Same thing.


77 posted on 06/18/2006 3:35:34 AM PDT by OpusatFR ( ALEA IACTA EST. We have just crossed the Rubicon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Taylor42
This is bull$hit on so many levels it's not funny. Everyone who's in favor of this, are you ready to endorse being able to terminate someone if they don't go to the "correct" church? Because that's what you're signing up for.

This is simply a property rights issue. The owner of the property (the payroll cash) has the right to trade it. He has traded his property for the girls services in the past. He does not wish to trade his property in the future. The government does not own his property and should not force him to trade it away. Those that feel he should be forced to trade, believe his property belongs to the government, and the government can act as the rightful owner, deciding when to trade.

Reminds me of Communism where all property belongs to the state.

78 posted on 06/18/2006 5:03:47 AM PDT by Mark was here (How can they be called "Homeless" if their home is a field?.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ChinaThreat; Ultra Sonic 007
On a professional level, I don't think its any ones business what type of life you choose to live as long as it doesen't affect your ability to complete your job.

Really? Does your view hold true for the armed services, as well? As a Vet, I can assure you that every single servicemember is briefed during boot camp/basic training that they are no longer allowed to do things that could lead to the unfavorable image of the US Government or the military.

You can't (in your words) "live the life they choose to live", because their actions may reflect BADLY on their employer.

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. The girl knew the rules.

79 posted on 06/18/2006 7:03:22 AM PDT by ImaGraftedBranch ("Toleration" has never been affiliated with the virtuous. Think about it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: narses


Wow, that firing from a Roller Rink at 18yo is going to stalk her resume till retirement.


80 posted on 06/18/2006 7:17:03 AM PDT by Malsua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson