Firm Justified In Firing Anti-Gay Worker Court Rules

http://www.365gay.com/newscon04/01/010704hpBias.htm

A federal appeals court in San Francisco Tuesday ruled that computer maker Hewlett-Packard Co. acted legally when it fired a longtime worker for posting anti-gay Bible verses in his work cubicle to protest the company's diversity campaign.

Richard D. Peterson claimed the company violated his constitutional right to freedom of religion and sought $1 million in damages.

Peterson, who had worked at Hewlett-Packard's Boise, Idaho facility for 21 years, objected to diversity posters the company put up calling for tolerance of gay employees. He said that as a devoted Christian, he said he had a duty "to expose evil when confronted with it" and did that by posting the bible verses where other employees could see them.

/sarcasm

That is horse hockey, HP management should read your Dr. Seuss sig line.

the guy is a bigot and he disrupted the work environment

I'm sure that you wouldn't want a white supremacist or whatever spreading his filth at work

hire and fire as they please.

HP is not a private company, it is traded publicly with the ticker symbol HPQ.

Meaning it is not owned by the public and the employees are not civil servants. If I recall correctly, Idaho is also an "at will" employment state (a law which republicans love) which means a employer can terminate you for any reason at all.

if they had fired an outspokenly gay, liberal employee. Or a black employee.

If a company has a right to fire anyone they want for any reason, it could have just as easily been someone like that than this guy.

And does it really matter if it's a publicly-traded company or not? What's the difference?

are not a protected class. Freedom of Speech is only about your interaction with the Government - local-state-federal.

included your interactions with everyone, in a national, never-ending exchange of ideas, a marketplace of philosophies that never closes.

Isn't the government just one source of the suppression of free thought, corporate and private power being the other?

Just not on company property.

Go tell your boss he is a fucking asshole who doesn't know what the hell he is doing, and then when you get fired, see how fast you get laughed at out of court for claiming you were exercising your "freedom of speech".

Freedom of speech means you have a right to not be persecuted by the government, it doesn't mean you have the right to say whatever you want without consequence.

If I worked at Burger King at the drive thru and said "Welcome to fucking Burger King you damned asshole, what the hell do you want?" through the speaker, I would expect to be fired for not behaving in a manner consistent with company policy.

Same with this guy. He didn't like the companies diversity policy and chose to express his displeasure by openly breaking it and trying to hide behind his religion to affirm his breaking of the policy.

Title 7 also applies to private corporations in the U.S. The federal laws are extended via interstate commerce. So gays can be a protected class under Title 7 in private corporations. If the Christian worker is targeting gays in the workplace, he's creating a hostile environment based on sexual orientation which is based on gender. Besides, his expression of his religious views is not ancilliary to his practicing his religion, therefore, his individual religious rights will not supercede those of other employees -- especially when the business has a necessity and legal obligation to create a harmonious work environment for all employees.

IMHO.

the guy was completely in the wrong. He was being combative with his religiosity, using it as a weapon to club those who didn't believe the same way he did...

he is not being paid by HP to convert the heathens to his brand of christianity--he's being paid to do a job. It does not include him preaching or displaying his religious preferences... his religion has no weight in his job, despite what he may hysterically cry about. HP was right in firing him. Now he has all the time in the world to preach and convert, since that seemed to be more important to him than doing his damn job.

I'm sure he'd been given plenty of warnings to cease and desist, but being the overbearing, arrogant christian he has turned out to be, he felt that the company policies couldn't possibly be meant to be followed by him because his god called him out to call out all those that he feels is living in sin.

I see the "judge not lest thou be judged" phrase passed him by... another arrogant christian in the wrong.

n/t

If you are fired because you are too old, that is discrimination. If you are fired because you are too young, tough. Being young is not a protected class, sexual orientation is, as is old age.

Not to go off on a tangent, but that sounds mighty like a slippery slope there. How do you get on this "protected" list and what rights are you then granted that "unprotected" aren't?

See:

http://www.hr-guide.com/data/G714.htm

Religion The term "religion" includes "all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief." 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-(j). The EEOC Guidelines state that protected religious practices "include moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong which are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views." 29 C.F.R. § 1605.1.
Sincerity of religious belief is an issue for the trier of fact. E.E.O.C. v. Ilona of Hungary, Inc., 97 F.3d 204 (7th Cir. 1997). The statute imposes a duty to "reasonably accommodate to an employee's or prospective employee's religious observance or practice" unless doing so would impose an "undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business." 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-(j).

Did H.P. show that these postings in his cubicle constituted "undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business."? Wouldn't they have to?

IMHO, I think the courts leaned in the direction explained with post 11.

There is a conflict between two protected classes here, but the hostile work environment was being created by this man, not the gay employees. So I think they leaned in the favor of the gay employees on this one.

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."--1 Tim. 2:11-14 if he were trying to express his displeasure at equal opportunity for women.


or any number of verses that rail against those who are Jewish or of Pagan beliefs.

I don't think one can make a case that your religious beliefs allow you to make an inhospitable workplace for others, particularly as an employee.

Both genders check
all races check
all national origins check

This applies specifically to employment situations:

Title 7 protects you on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender or religion against discrimnatory employment practices (intentional or those which have a disparate impact).

(Under Title 7, gays are not directly protected due to their sexual orientation, per se, but because male homosexuals are often singled out and this becomes an issue based on their gender. Also of interest is that white employees can also sue under this law. (i.e. reverse discrimination). They fall under the category of race).

ADA is the American Disabilities Act which protects disabled people in the work place.

ADEA is the Age Discrimination Employment Act which protects people over the age of 40 from losing their jobs because employers hold the opinion that older employers are less productive. Unfortunately, there are several loopholes around this one.

in the work place -- particularly if they know about it, or should have known about it and did nothing to stop it. This Christian fellow sounds like a Doug Williams waiting to happen (Re: Lockheed massacre)

The man was disrupting the workplace. Someone putting up a sign that said "I hate Christians" would also be disrupting the workplace and worthy of getting his ass canned.

I'm working on the assumption here that the man was asked to take down his sign and refused. He hasn't a leg to stand on.

And if he wants to "confront evil", I can offer him a few phone and fax numbers in Washington to use.