Another Karen learns the consequences of actions
- Thread starter TreyG-20
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Not that I advocate hitting women, I don’t. But our society has changed for the worse. And I’m convinced that it’s directly related to the lack of ass kickings we can no longer give out. Respect is learned. And there is nothing like a punch to the face or a spanking to get the message across.
I think it’s one of the reasons I love to watch the antifagta boys get punched. For maybe the first time in their lives, they understand everything has a price to pay. Life outside their mom’s basement can be dangerous.
I think it’s one of the reasons I love to watch the antifagta boys get punched. For maybe the first time in their lives, they understand everything has a price to pay. Life outside their mom’s basement can be dangerous.
Last edited:
I always taught my kids that every decision you make has a consequence. Sometimes big or small. Bad or good. Now or later. But there is a consequence. You get to make the decision, and you have to suffer the consequence. Understand that, and be willing to accept the consequences of your decisions.
She will file an EEO complaint claim she was discriminated against because of sex, national origin, handicap. She will claim that the employer discriminated against her for her protected speech rights and because she is Asian-female with a mental defect. I would love to represent the company. Protected speech only applies to government making laws to abridge that. Private company can make up their own rules. Being an Asian-female dumb ass is not a protection from termination for cause. EEO judge really.....
Her argument wouldn’t be EEO complaint, it would be wrongful termination. She’d most likely lose unless it’s settled for convenience because 1A isn’t protected in the workplace.
https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandto...es/employee-free-speech-in-the-workplace.aspx
https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandto...es/employee-free-speech-in-the-workplace.aspx
No, it would be an EEO complaint. EEO involves discrimination either in employment or termination for one of the protected elements under EEOC law. Those are: Religion, Race, National Origin, Color, Age, Sex, and Disability. Also an EEO can be filed to complain of an adverse employer action based on previous EEO activity under the broad spectrum of Reprisal. To further complicate matters, under EEOC rule, any employee has the right to file an EEO complaint, not just the discriminated against person. This is where things can get really hairy for a employer, in that they could face an EEO complaint by not just the primary complainant, but also that employee's fellow employees should they decide to go after the employer.
The EEOC investigation can get very expensive for the employer and time consuming. The employee has very little expense and has to prove very little at the first step of EEO complaint. The burden of proof lies on the employer. Not till an actual EEOC hearing with Administrative Judge does things get balanced for the Employer. After that hearing should the complainant want to pursue and adverse ruling of EEOC Judge, they have to file in either State or Federal District Court. Those entities generally only accept complaints from members of the State bar.
The handling of EEO complaints was something I did for many years. The EEO complaint system can be and is often manipulated against an employer by savy employees. Which is why I stopped handling them.
I can see your logic there, but I think the prima facie elements for an EEO termination would not be met assuming the cause for termination is covered in the employee handbook. I’ll honestly say that most terminations aren’t handled appropriately from an HR perspective and do leave the employer open to litigation risks.
Your last statement is why I’ve chosen to stay out of that specialty in my HR roles.
I fully agree and understand. I handled hundreds of EEO cases and maybe a hundred EEOC Admin Judge hearings over 25 years of doing them. The thing in this case I was pointing out was that as in any EEO, the complainant has nothing to loose and thus filing the EEO is a headache and nightmare for the employer.
The complainant does not have to prove their case or have any real evidence to present before filing an EEO. At least at the Federal EEOC and to a lesser degree Texas EEOC, the employer is on the defense from the very beginning. They have to prove their innocence. Generally a simple denial at the informal stage just escalates the case to a formal level where the complainant just has to present a simple prim face case of "I believe I was discriminated against in this manner (Then toss out alleged conversations of overheard utterances directed at any employee)
It is the perfect way for an employee who has been removed (and remember every state has different laws, rules and regulations on employment hiring and terminations) without cause to strike back at an employer.
Last edited:
