Posted on 09/23/2005 12:38:17 PM PDT by Help!
I agree. Especially if he's "shaking his fist" and "lunging over a table" at someone. (If true) guy sounds like a nutjob.
"I agree it shouldn't be sexual discrimination or harrassment, but anyone who yells and screams at coworkers, or the people they supervise, should be canned on the spot."
Let me get this right. No manager is allowed to lose his cool even ONE time? No matter the circumstances? And if he does, he's gone, out of a job? Bosses get pissed, and raise their voices. It happens. So do fathers and mothers.
Where do you work, The Institute For Nobody's Feelings Should Ever Be Hurt, Because Getting The Sniffles Over Perceived Slights Diminishes Our Self-Esteem?
Grow up.
..more leftwing discrimination and bigotry revealed. Precious.
Lost it a little once when this office cutie was going to make copies of HD files on a CD-R.
Laughed, said it was impossible and proceeded to watch.
Was berated by others for being so mean.
And tears, dang...never mind!
I agree. There is no reason to yell and scream at any worker.
Don't confuse them with common sense.
See 22.
If THEY find the behavior more intimidating, then the issue at hand is a personal one.
After all, some may find one's screaming "damit" when finding a spider crawling on their arm, to be intimidating.
If this type of "no definition" law making continues, then we are lost for it will never be satisfactorily dealt with until Utopia is achieved via pleasing all.
Utopia, will not be achieved however, only chaos.
I have observed more tantrums from women in the workplace than from men.
I worked for a Jewish mom and pop furniture store after college. The owners were around 60-70, and would fling words back and forth all day. He was constantly bitching about her, and she was right back in his face. It was hilarious, but the office girls could never handle it. I guess they felt "harassed". I just thought the bosses were asses!
So if you, for instance, say in a firm, level voice at normal speaking volume that "the work is not up to standard and that it will have to be redone to met an important customer deadline" and, in response, she cries, are you then guilty of sex discrimination under the "reasonable woman standard"?
I've got a feeling this standard is like the famous Supreme Court justice pronouncement concerning obscene materials "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it!"
I notice that the 9th Circuit is citing its own precedents in making this ruling just as it did in the Pledge case last week.
Ok all you men on FR.... BETTER BE NICE TO US GIRLS... ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE BLONDE!
/sarc
Smells like collusion to me.The NEA and the Ninth Circuit = two of a kind.
It amazes me how abusive an employer the NEA is. Shouldn't they be setting an example?
A female outburst requires societal help.
A male outburst requires Prozac and a jail term.
Somewhere Hillary Clinton and Ruth Ginsberg are high-fiving.
What B.S. Some men find it more intimidating than other men, as some women will find it more intimidating than other women and, some men will find it more intimidating than some women.
Diogenes would need a searchlight to find a reasonable woman.
Thats because they have to work with men and men are the men they have to work with. /s
My statement makes more sense than this "circus" court contemplation.
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.