Althouse: "Although it would have been illegal to fire him based on, say, his race or religion, firing him because of what he wore or because he is a Packers fan is not illegal."

January 29, 2011

"Although it would have been illegal to fire him based on, say, his race or religion, firing him because of what he wore or because he is a Packers fan is not illegal."

"John Stone says it didn't occur to him that wearing a Green Bay Packers tie to work on Monday could get him fired."

20 comments:

Trooper York said...: Poor garage. I guess he won't be pulling in the six figures anymore.; 1/29/11, 10:39 AM
KLDAVIS said...: The Church of Lombardi demands recognition...there's no way we're less of a religion than the damned Jedi.; 1/29/11, 10:42 AM
MadisonMan said...: I've read elsewhere that he's been hired by another dealer, and that his former boss tried to get him back, too, so all's well for the Packer fan.

It's stupid to do things to tick off your boss.; 1/29/11, 10:44 AM
Unknown said...: I can see the boss's point of view - why antagonize disgruntled fans of Da Bearsss?

The thing to do would have been send him to the front office for the day.; 1/29/11, 10:46 AM
Richard Dolan said...: Freedom is the darndest thing, and people use it for the strangest purposes. For one guy, it was earing a Packers tie to honor Grandma; for another it was showing loyalty to the Bears. Immovable object and irresistable force = football! (By other means, in this case.); 1/29/11, 10:53 AM
G Joubert said...: "Told to take off the tie, Stone refused and was fired. The general manager at the dealership confirms this and says it spent a lot of money promoting its connection with the Chicago Bears."

That snippet really explains it all. His behavior as a salesman conflicted with the company's marketing strategy, and he stubbornly refused to change it.; 1/29/11, 11:27 AM
traditionalguy said...: He was fired for insubordination. Packer Tie Wearers are not a yet protected class. Maybe he should only get a $10,000 fine for tie to eye contact.; 1/29/11, 12:02 PM
Skyler said...: And what if a business were to spend lot of money associating with a certain religion or race?

Just asking.....; 1/29/11, 12:16 PM
TosaGuy said...: what a great topic for reducto ad absurdium; 1/29/11, 12:32 PM
SGT Ted said...: If he is a Packers fan, it probably IS his religion.; 1/29/11, 12:45 PM
Trooper York said...: When you think about it, having anything to do with the Packers should be illegal.

I mean it leads to you taking photo's of your junk to email to sideline reporteres and stuff. Just sayn'; 1/29/11, 1:03 PM
Leon said...: whilst i can see the reason the boss fired him in regards to marketing-a boss that fires you over something stupid like that is probably not worth working for.; 1/29/11, 1:05 PM
mariner said...: Maybe his tie should have depicted a Packer ... packing another Packer.

Then it would be OK.; 1/29/11, 2:16 PM
Synova said...: Why are journalists so incompetent?

The dealership spent a lot of money promoting their connection to the Bears. Explain please! Official connection and endorsement? Unofficial, like the the dealers who target US servicemen? What? Certainly, as Joubert said, it was a marketing strategy and had to be well known.

But we can read the article and are reduced to reading between the lines.

It must take special skill to write an article that requires reading between the lines.; 1/29/11, 2:33 PM
Chris said...: Brings to mind the great CA8 no-1A-right-to-wear-Packers-jersey-to-school case.; 1/29/11, 3:00 PM
Big Mike said...: He wore a Packers tie in Chicago!!! And he's still alive to tell about it? And he's complaining?; 1/29/11, 4:22 PM
Famous Original Mike said...: Ahh, the fundamental hypocrisy of anti-discrimination legislation. People arendiscriminated against because of all sorts of different reasons. The (big el) Liberal conceit is that some are ok and some aren't. Examples like this highlight how untenable this position is.; 1/29/11, 5:45 PM
somefeller said...: The (big el) Liberal conceit is that some are ok and some aren't. Examples like this highlight how untenable this position is.

Er, no, most thinking people are able to make a distinction between the need for laws against racial, gender or religious discrimination versus the lack of need for laws against discrimination against Packers fans. Not untenable.; 1/29/11, 6:25 PM
Lyssa said...: I'll reiterate my prior comments (from a Michael Vick thread) about hating football and hating people who pattern their lives around football.

That goes for the man who insisted on wearing a tie that he knew his company objected to because it was "his" team, the boss who would fire a man for going against the team that he liked, and every damn customer who (the employer presumes) would care about the business's promoted connection to any given football team.

- Lyssa; 1/29/11, 7:19 PM
G Joubert said...: I'll put it in different terms. Political campaigns are nothing but marketing. Instead of promoting a product seeking dollar sales, political campaigns promote a candidate seeking votes. Other than that difference, they are essentially the same, both underpinned with research leading to an understanding of who the target market (or voter) is and how to reach them. A process which costs lots of money.

If a paid campaign official showed up at a high-end wealthy-donor fund-raising event wearing the lapel button of an opposing candidate, how would that play?

This guy, the salesman, was undermining the marketing plan. Not good. He can be a Packer fan, but he should leave it at home when it undermines what the company is trying to do. It causes me to question his intelligence.; 1/29/11, 8:05 PM