Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
127 user(s) are online (105 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 127

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 »


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#48
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/17 3:05
Last Login :
2023/6/22 2:50
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 953
Offline
But it wouldn't have been an issue if his comments were regarding George Bush

Posted on: 2016/3/18 21:49
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24
Last Login :
2022/11/28 0:04
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1429
Offline
Quote:

borisp wrote:
Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
Quote:

borisp wrote:
Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
These are tricky issues and the balancing tests are both fact intensive and somewhat subjective.


Yes, censorship and other totalitarian ideas can be this way. I mean - it's really hard to compile a list of permissible things to say. Especially since one thing may be judged ok today - but what if we need to get it verboten tomorrow? Not an easy task. And then there are people who always want to say prohibited things, and sometimes they write them down...

BTW, could you tell me, when you hear a phrase "freedom of speech", what do you think it means?



With respect to the issue at hand, I think it means what is set out in the Supreme Court's jurisprudence on public employee speech, which is what I outlined above. A public employee has a right to speak on issues of public concern without fear for his or her job. This is balanced against the disruption and effect on government operations such speech may have.

This is a liberalization of the First Amendment compared to the initial jurisprudence. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, not a totalitarian by any stretch of the imagination, took the position that the government as employer could act as any employer would, and fire an employee for what they said. The first amendment, he opined, did not require the government to give someone a job, or retain them in that job, on the public payroll.

Nevertheless the Supreme Court has, correctly, in my view, recognized that the government, even when acting in its role of employer, can be restricted by the First Amendment. Under the more recent conservative trend on the court, such 1st amendment protection has been reduced (such as in Garcetti v. Ceballos, which has severely curtailed public employee speakers in their role as whistleblowers).

As I said, based on the facts presented, I think the employee in this case may have a viable claim if he can prove it.


This word salad means nothing.

There is just one case where a government can restrict someone's speech - and it is to prohibit disclosure of some secret information, and not just any information they want to make secret, but the one that must be secret out of national security considerations

There is no constitutional exception for "effect on government operation". We don't exist to support government operations. Government exists to protect our rights.

The very idea of "effect" is ridiculous. Next thing you know you will be telling us we can't offend any government official with our criticism for it ruins the smooth operation of the government!


You may think so, but the First Amendment jurisprudence is established in this area. It can be admittedly vague and subject to ad hoc evaluation but that's what the test is, whether you like it or not.

I think the employee's claim in this case may prevail and even if it doesn't is not a frivolous one.

Posted on: 2016/3/18 13:23
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#46
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/5/29 3:09
Last Login :
2019/10/31 13:04
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 727
Offline
Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
Quote:

borisp wrote:
Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
These are tricky issues and the balancing tests are both fact intensive and somewhat subjective.


Yes, censorship and other totalitarian ideas can be this way. I mean - it's really hard to compile a list of permissible things to say. Especially since one thing may be judged ok today - but what if we need to get it verboten tomorrow? Not an easy task. And then there are people who always want to say prohibited things, and sometimes they write them down...

BTW, could you tell me, when you hear a phrase "freedom of speech", what do you think it means?



With respect to the issue at hand, I think it means what is set out in the Supreme Court's jurisprudence on public employee speech, which is what I outlined above. A public employee has a right to speak on issues of public concern without fear for his or her job. This is balanced against the disruption and effect on government operations such speech may have.

This is a liberalization of the First Amendment compared to the initial jurisprudence. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, not a totalitarian by any stretch of the imagination, took the position that the government as employer could act as any employer would, and fire an employee for what they said. The first amendment, he opined, did not require the government to give someone a job, or retain them in that job, on the public payroll.

Nevertheless the Supreme Court has, correctly, in my view, recognized that the government, even when acting in its role of employer, can be restricted by the First Amendment. Under the more recent conservative trend on the court, such 1st amendment protection has been reduced (such as in Garcetti v. Ceballos, which has severely curtailed public employee speakers in their role as whistleblowers).

As I said, based on the facts presented, I think the employee in this case may have a viable claim if he can prove it.


This word salad means nothing.

There is just one case where a government can restrict someone's speech - and it is to prohibit disclosure of some secret information, and not just any information they want to make secret, but the one that must be secret out of national security considerations

There is no constitutional exception for "effect on government operation". We don't exist to support government operations. Government exists to protect our rights.

The very idea of "effect" is ridiculous. Next thing you know you will be telling us we can't offend any government official with our criticism for it ruins the smooth operation of the government!

Posted on: 2016/3/18 4:08
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#45
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/9/5 2:25
Last Login :
2022/2/1 5:25
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 350
Offline
Didn't realize Michigan was some 'fairytale far away world'. LOL

Hey man, if you really feel strongly about it why don't you pay for the guy's legal fees like Trump said he would for his supporters. If Trump can do it, so can you.

Oh wait, he didn't.

Posted on: 2016/3/17 20:27
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/17 3:05
Last Login :
2023/6/22 2:50
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 953
Offline
We are talking about someone who was let go by the City for expressing his opinion. Not some fairytale in a far away world.

Posted on: 2016/3/17 15:55
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/9/5 2:25
Last Login :
2022/2/1 5:25
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 350
Offline
It takes a special kind of ignorant to think this only cuts one way. It wasn't that long ago that a bunch of Repubicans tried to get someone fired for saying 'I hate Republicans.'

Posted on: 2016/3/16 14:26
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/6/5 10:12
Last Login :
2016/11/8 21:51
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 704
Offline
People tend to forget that two opposing ideas do not always have equal values.

Examples: Evolution vs. Creationism, Flat Earth vs. Spherical Earth, Man-made Climate Change vs. Liberal Conspiracy, Voting Rights vs. Voter Fraud, etc.


Posted on: 2016/3/16 14:03
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/17 3:05
Last Login :
2023/6/22 2:50
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 953
Offline
Pebble. That's jc8mans opinion and pretty accurate, your reaction is a typical liberal response. Rolling eyes thinking you are smarter then everyone. Well the joke is on us when Hillary "just tell me what to say" becomes our next president

Posted on: 2016/3/16 6:33
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/2 11:56
Last Login :
2018/10/5 14:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 756
Offline
I don?t have enough information to form an opinion whether the firing was justified, but at the very least I can say that Mr. Guglielmi probably doesn?t have much room to be critical of accepting refugees into the United States. Conditions may have been desperate in whatever backwards, impoverished region of Italy his ancestors and their strange religion came from, but they weren?t fleeing from the sort of widespread violence and destruction taking place in Syria.

Again, I don?t know what he wrote specifically, but I do know that anti-immigration sentiment is phenomenally inappropriate coming from a representative of the City of Jersey City, considering our history, our population, and our likely future. An individual who publishes such opinions would be a poor fit indeed.

Posted on: 2016/3/15 14:49
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

JC_Man wrote:
It's only free speech if it goes along with the Democratic and Liberal narrative, otherwise it's racist or divisive. You are not allowed to have your own thoughts or beliefs.

Insert wanking motion with eye rolls here

Posted on: 2016/3/15 14:16
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24
Last Login :
2022/11/28 0:04
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1429
Offline
Quote:

borisp wrote:
Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
These are tricky issues and the balancing tests are both fact intensive and somewhat subjective.


Yes, censorship and other totalitarian ideas can be this way. I mean - it's really hard to compile a list of permissible things to say. Especially since one thing may be judged ok today - but what if we need to get it verboten tomorrow? Not an easy task. And then there are people who always want to say prohibited things, and sometimes they write them down...

BTW, could you tell me, when you hear a phrase "freedom of speech", what do you think it means?



With respect to the issue at hand, I think it means what is set out in the Supreme Court's jurisprudence on public employee speech, which is what I outlined above. A public employee has a right to speak on issues of public concern without fear for his or her job. This is balanced against the disruption and effect on government operations such speech may have.

This is a liberalization of the First Amendment compared to the initial jurisprudence. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, not a totalitarian by any stretch of the imagination, took the position that the government as employer could act as any employer would, and fire an employee for what they said. The first amendment, he opined, did not require the government to give someone a job, or retain them in that job, on the public payroll.

Nevertheless the Supreme Court has, correctly, in my view, recognized that the government, even when acting in its role of employer, can be restricted by the First Amendment. Under the more recent conservative trend on the court, such 1st amendment protection has been reduced (such as in Garcetti v. Ceballos, which has severely curtailed public employee speakers in their role as whistleblowers).

As I said, based on the facts presented, I think the employee in this case may have a viable claim if he can prove it.

Posted on: 2016/3/15 13:50
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/5/29 3:09
Last Login :
2019/10/31 13:04
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 727
Offline
Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
These are tricky issues and the balancing tests are both fact intensive and somewhat subjective.


Yes, censorship and other totalitarian ideas can be this way. I mean - it's really hard to compile a list of permissible things to say. Especially since one thing may be judged ok today - but what if we need to get it verboten tomorrow? Not an easy task. And then there are people who always want to say prohibited things, and sometimes they write them down...

BTW, could you tell me, when you hear a phrase "freedom of speech", what do you think it means?


Posted on: 2016/3/15 4:30
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/5/22 20:46
Last Login :
2022/5/31 3:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 495
Offline
It's only free speech if it goes along with the Democratic and Liberal narrative, otherwise it's racist or divisive. You are not allowed to have your own thoughts or beliefs.

Posted on: 2016/3/15 0:16
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24
Last Login :
2022/11/28 0:04
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1429
Offline
As a public employee he does retain first amendment protection, though protection for such speech is qualified. If it is a matter of public concern then it is protected. It then has to be balanced against the potential for disruption or interference with the City's ability to provide effective services. Of course, he also will have to prove that he was fired for the speech and not other reasons.

These are tricky issues and the balancing tests are both fact intensive and somewhat subjective. But it's not a frivolous claim.

Posted on: 2016/3/14 20:19
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#34
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/17 3:05
Last Login :
2023/6/22 2:50
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 953
Offline
I agree pebble. Someone complained. You should have included that today only Republicans are allowed to be criticised. He would have not been fired for posting about Christie.

Posted on: 2016/3/14 17:32
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#33
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Can we be honest about what is the most likely scenario? It isn?t that he made the posts, it is that he made a post that someone complained about. Nobody was monitoring this guy?s posts on Facebook until someone in the office decided to either friend him or look him up.

I don?t know exactly what he wrote. We don?t have specifics of it. What we do know is that someone wasn?t happy and that someone complained. I can't say that I'm a fan of this termination, but it seems that they are legally allowed to do it.

As for the whole First Amendment debate, the article sums it up by interviewing a lawyer:
Mike Murphy, a Philadelphia-based attorney who represents employees in labor disputes, said he's "absolutely" seen an uptick in cases involving employees' social media accounts. The only way an employee really has a case, Murphy said, is if the disputed social media posts involve a condition of employment, such as griping about being denied a legally mandate break.

Posted on: 2016/3/14 15:22
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#32
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18
Last Login :
2020/9/25 20:40
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1609
Offline
I have to agree - at least in part - with Yvonne on this. Just because "every administration does this" doesn't make it okay. Fulop (Fubio?) has proven that the reform rhetoric everyone was doing kegstands of kool-aid over (myself included) was hollow and meaningless.

You don't spend over a year considering someone for a significant post and then fire him within a couple of weeks because he was incompetent. If he truly is, then shame on the administration for being more inept than it is unethical.

Posted on: 2016/3/14 13:23
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#31
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
He would have a better shot at winning if he had claimed he was fired because of age discrimination. No, the first amendment doesn't protect you from anything unless your liberty is threatened. The guy has all the liberty in the world to pursue another job.


The First Amendment: quite likely the most misunderstood of all the amendments. Some surveys show that almost 70% of people don't actually understand what it protects and when it is applicable.

The first amendment only states that (among other things) Congress [the government] can not institute laws that abridge [limit] freedom of speech. But, employers are free to limit the speech of their employees as they see fit, and freedom of speech does not entail some sort of blanket immunity shielding each and every person from responsibility over what they say.


Count yourself as part of the 70% who doesn't understand the scope of the First Amendment.

The First Amendment protects people from GOVERNMENT ACTIONS. Here, since the IT employee was a public (government) employee, it is 100% wrong to say the government can "limit the speech of their employees as they see fit."

Your statement is only true for the private sector.

"Many of us know that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects ?free speech,? but what exactly does that mean for government (public) employees? If you are a state or federal employee, then you are protected from retaliation for exercising free speech by the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. This means that when you exercise your right to free speech, your government employer cannot retaliate against you with negative employment action."

https://www.workplacefairness.org/retaliation-public-employees


Sigh... you post a link that directly refutes what you are saying or claiming. The government can most certainly fire an employee for things they say. The First Amendment protections are not a blanket protection that allows public employees to say whatever they want, whenever they want.

From the link YOU posted:
The Supreme Court is not yet ready to say that public employees are protected from retaliation for any First Amendment activity. Thus, while the government could not put someone in jail for complaining about a meager raise, the government might still be able to fire a public employee for this reason, unless the complaint was a matter of "public concern."


But, yes, thank you for proving the point from my original reply: most people just don't understand what the First Amendment means or how it applies to them or others.


You know, I didn't think you were a stupid guy, but now I'm not so sure.

That link directly refutes what you were saying, and shows how you don't understand the First Amendment.

When attempting to educate people on the scope of the First Amendment, you originally falsely implied that the First Amendment only applies to acts of Congress and not employers. You did not understand that it also applies to public employers, such as Jersey City.

While it's true that a public employee cannot say literally anything they want and have it protected under the First Amendment, the fact is that they enjoy protection for at least some speech under the First Amendment. Whereas a private sector employee does not have ANY First Amendment protection for their speech.

Get it now?

Posted on: 2016/3/13 18:40
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/9/5 2:25
Last Login :
2022/2/1 5:25
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 350
Offline
"What makes it right" or "ethics" have nothing to do with it. I doubt the guy got the job because he had the highest of moral standards of all the applicants. He was an IT guy, not a supreme court judge and even in that case, politics play a large role. Tell me you are not this naive.

If you have such control then by all means use it. Seems to me a very inefficient way to run, well, anything. That's what an HR department is for. It seems to me that people will find any excuse to make exceptions just because it happens in the public sector. Well guess what? Politics exist in both and employees have to wade through it whether they like it or not.

I don't really see what the big deal is. People get fired over politics every time. It sucks but that's America for you. I find it more remarkable that a 70 year old man was hired as an "IT director" albeit briefly. That's almost unheard of these days. Props to the person who hired him, too bad it didn't work out.

Posted on: 2016/3/13 18:32
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
What's your point? People have been fired over politics, inter-office or otherwise, in the private sector! I've seen worse cases where actual whistle-blowers got fired so this isn't exactly ground breaking stuff.


So that makes it right? I have no control in the private sector, but we, the public do have a limited control on what happens in the public sector. You don't use my tax dollars to reward and punish (lose jobs) because your name is Steve Fulop. We don't choose kings we elect public servants.

Posted on: 2016/3/13 18:17
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/12/12 0:13
Last Login :
2018/7/28 23:29
From Right here!
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 847
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
".....Fulop has told our employees everything they do must represent Fulop in a positive light....."


This is SOP with every administration.

Posted on: 2016/3/13 15:32
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/9/5 2:25
Last Login :
2022/2/1 5:25
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 350
Offline
What's your point? People have been fired over politics, inter-office or otherwise, in the private sector! I've seen worse cases where actual whistle-blowers got fired so this isn't exactly ground breaking stuff.

Posted on: 2016/3/13 15:09
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
Let's get to the real issue. Fulop is running for governor. He is hoping Clinton would be in the White House. He supported her in 2008. Fulop does not want anything negative posted by any of the city hall workers. I went to lunch recently and spoke to a city hall employee, which is will not name. Fulop has told our employees everything they do must represent Fulop in a positive light. It is obvious I cannot name this employee but I am sure you must know some city hall employees so ask them if they got the talk. We have a controlling person in city hall. It is all about politics and nothing else.

Posted on: 2016/3/13 14:19
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3932
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
He would have a better shot at winning if he had claimed he was fired because of age discrimination. No, the first amendment doesn't protect you from anything unless your liberty is threatened. The guy has all the liberty in the world to pursue another job.


The First Amendment: quite likely the most misunderstood of all the amendments. Some surveys show that almost 70% of people don't actually understand what it protects and when it is applicable.

The first amendment only states that (among other things) Congress [the government] can not institute laws that abridge [limit] freedom of speech. But, employers are free to limit the speech of their employees as they see fit, and freedom of speech does not entail some sort of blanket immunity shielding each and every person from responsibility over what they say.


Count yourself as part of the 70% who doesn't understand the scope of the First Amendment.

The First Amendment protects people from GOVERNMENT ACTIONS. Here, since the IT employee was a public (government) employee, it is 100% wrong to say the government can "limit the speech of their employees as they see fit."

Your statement is only true for the private sector.

"Many of us know that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects ?free speech,? but what exactly does that mean for government (public) employees? If you are a state or federal employee, then you are protected from retaliation for exercising free speech by the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. This means that when you exercise your right to free speech, your government employer cannot retaliate against you with negative employment action."

https://www.workplacefairness.org/retaliation-public-employees


Sigh... you post a link that directly refutes what you are saying or claiming. The government can most certainly fire an employee for things they say. The First Amendment protections are not a blanket protection that allows public employees to say whatever they want, whenever they want.

From the link YOU posted:
The Supreme Court is not yet ready to say that public employees are protected from retaliation for any First Amendment activity. Thus, while the government could not put someone in jail for complaining about a meager raise, the government might still be able to fire a public employee for this reason, unless the complaint was a matter of "public concern."


But, yes, thank you for proving the point from my original reply: most people just don't understand what the First Amendment means or how it applies to them or others.

Posted on: 2016/3/13 13:19
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
The city has no standing when Mayor Fulop did not fire Akil and Hanson. You cannot pick and choose what is not ethical.

Posted on: 2016/3/13 0:21
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/9/5 2:25
Last Login :
2022/2/1 5:25
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 350
Offline
Well apparently speech protection against retaliatory acts does come into play but with certain limits. The first challenge would be to prove that he was fired in retaliation and not for some other reason. If he can somehow prove it, then it becomes a matter of whether that Facebook posting is protected and a matter of 'public concern' that outweighs the employer's own concerns and reason for termination. In other words, if the employer says the speech is disruptive and the judge agrees then it will not be protected.

Posted on: 2016/3/13 0:14
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
He would have a better shot at winning if he had claimed he was fired because of age discrimination. No, the first amendment doesn't protect you from anything unless your liberty is threatened. The guy has all the liberty in the world to pursue another job.


The First Amendment: quite likely the most misunderstood of all the amendments. Some surveys show that almost 70% of people don't actually understand what it protects and when it is applicable.

The first amendment only states that (among other things) Congress [the government] can not institute laws that abridge [limit] freedom of speech. But, employers are free to limit the speech of their employees as they see fit, and freedom of speech does not entail some sort of blanket immunity shielding each and every person from responsibility over what they say.


Count yourself as part of the 70% who doesn't understand the scope of the First Amendment.

The First Amendment protects people from GOVERNMENT ACTIONS. Here, since the IT employee was a public (government) employee, it is 100% wrong to say the government can "limit the speech of their employees as they see fit."

Your statement is only true for the private sector.

"Many of us know that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects ?free speech,? but what exactly does that mean for government (public) employees? If you are a state or federal employee, then you are protected from retaliation for exercising free speech by the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. This means that when you exercise your right to free speech, your government employer cannot retaliate against you with negative employment action."

https://www.workplacefairness.org/retaliation-public-employees

Posted on: 2016/3/12 22:41
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3932
Offline
Quote:

drifterx wrote:
He would have a better shot at winning if he had claimed he was fired because of age discrimination. No, the first amendment doesn't protect you from anything unless your liberty is threatened. The guy has all the liberty in the world to pursue another job.


The First Amendment: quite likely the most misunderstood of all the amendments. Some surveys show that almost 70% of people don't actually understand what it protects and when it is applicable.

The first amendment only states that (among other things) Congress [the government] can not institute laws that abridge [limit] freedom of speech. But, employers are free to limit the speech of their employees as they see fit, and freedom of speech does not entail some sort of blanket immunity shielding each and every person from responsibility over what they say.

Posted on: 2016/3/12 20:12
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/9/5 2:25
Last Login :
2022/2/1 5:25
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 350
Offline
He would have a better shot at winning if he had claimed he was fired because of age discrimination. No, the first amendment doesn't protect you from anything unless your liberty is threatened. The guy has all the liberty in the world to pursue another job.

Posted on: 2016/3/12 18:31
 Top 


Re: Jersey City fired me for Facebook posts on Hillary Clinton, Muslims, man says
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/11/30 12:46
Last Login :
2017/8/3 1:06
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1907
Offline
Quote:

tern wrote:
I'm an IT professional and have no idea how to set Facebook settings, nor any desire to use the thing.

Robin.


Well if you don't use Facebook, why make the comparison?

Posted on: 2016/3/12 18:01
 Top 




(1) 2 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017