USA Man Fired for Racism Because He Cracked His Knuckels

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
9,853
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes


This multi-racial man was fired from San Diego Gas and Electric because he cracked his knuckels, which he claims he does quite constantly.

Some claim while doing so, his hand was perhaps in a position that COULD be interpreted as a "white supremcy" symbol recently employed by a few. The multi-racial man said he never heard of such a symbol and that he was simply cracking his knuckes, as he often does. An extensive investigation was made, it was discovered this worker has no record of anything racist. He was fired.



.
 

Andrew

Site Mentor
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
4,865
Age
35
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes


This multi-racial man was fired from San Diego Gas and Electric because he cracked his knuckels, which he claims he does quite constantly.

Some claim while doing so, his hand was perhaps in a position that COULD be interpreted as a "white supremcy" symbol recently employed by a few. The multi-racial man said he never heard of such a symbol and that he was simply cracking his knuckes, as he often does. An extensive investigation was made, it was discovered this worker has no record of anything racist. He was fired.



.
Wow.
 

Lazy Suesun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
140
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
No
So the OK hand signal has now been corrupted by the PC crowd to mean White Power. Can I just change the traditional hand gesture known as the bird? When I throw that up I'll say that I'm simply a patriot and I'm showing support for the Washington Monument. Will that work?

We're losing our minds! How would any company even think to concede to the racist anarchist terrorist entity known as BLM?

The man in that report has a wrongful termination lawsuit just waiting to be filed. I hope he knows that.
 

tango

... and you shall live ...
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
9,465
Location
Realms of chaos
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
We're losing our minds! How would any company even think to concede to the racist anarchist terrorist entity known as BLM?
The problem is that when you've got the Twitter mob hounding you wanting blood you have to make a decision to either let go of one person, however innocent they may be, or deal with the aftermath of the Twitter anger. That aftermath could mean anything from a large scale boycott (who wants to deal with a racist company, or a company who hires racists, or a company who even tolerates racists?) to Molotov cocktails in reception. If the Twitter storm turns into an actual storm of physical protests and possible physical violence at what point do you concede, especially if the police refuse to take a stand? It's a classic terror tactic, make people afraid to stand up to you.

If I recall the man in question was 75% non-white, but when the Twitter mobs get enraged the facts don't matter. That non-white dude is a white supremacist, the photo proves it.

The man in that report has a wrongful termination lawsuit just waiting to be filed. I hope he knows that.
In an at-will state that may not be the case.
 

Lazy Suesun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
140
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
No
The problem is that when you've got the Twitter mob hounding you wanting blood you have to make a decision to either let go of one person, however innocent they may be, or deal with the aftermath of the Twitter anger. That aftermath could mean anything from a large scale boycott (who wants to deal with a racist company, or a company who hires racists, or a company who even tolerates racists?) to Molotov cocktails in reception. If the Twitter storm turns into an actual storm of physical protests and possible physical violence at what point do you concede, especially if the police refuse to take a stand? It's a classic terror tactic, make people afraid to stand up to you.

If I recall the man in question was 75% non-white, but when the Twitter mobs get enraged the facts don't matter. That non-white dude is a white supremacist, the photo proves it.
I think the loss of that man's services to the company, say a years pay, would be enough to use as funds to counter the racist charge against the man. Or, better yet, employ the free services of the rabid for a story media. As a company, call a press conference. Stand with your employee as he explains he was cracking his knuckles. Put the onus on the rabid racists who want to see cause to attack any corporate entity on the defensive.
And, most corporations have in house security just in case a few insane clowns want to show up. Which is why we'll one day see major corporations with fences around their properties, and automated guarded gates at all access points. This won't do anything for Molotov toting drones however, but at least its an effort on the ground.
Can we really prepare for the violently insane?



In an at-will state that may not be the case.
All of America is an "At-Will" employment nation.
 

tango

... and you shall live ...
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
9,465
Location
Realms of chaos
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I think the loss of that man's services to the company, say a years pay, would be enough to use as funds to counter the racist charge against the man. Or, better yet, employ the free services of the rabid for a story media. As a company, call a press conference. Stand with your employee as he explains he was cracking his knuckles. Put the onus on the rabid racists who want to see cause to attack any corporate entity on the defensive.
And, most corporations have in house security just in case a few insane clowns want to show up. Which is why we'll one day see major corporations with fences around their properties, and automated guarded gates at all access points. This won't do anything for Molotov toting drones however, but at least its an effort on the ground.
It's great in theory but you're trying to reach the people who aren't listening. Once you've got a group who set themselves up as judge and jury (and, metaphorically speaking at least, as executioner as well) there is no other version of events. Man is racist, man must be fired, the end. Anything less is justifying racism.

What would make more sense would be for the silent majority to become less silent, but then the silent majority doesn't want to paint a target on its back any more than the company currently in the cross hairs does.

Automated guarded gates are all well and good but for as long as some people need to get in and out you've got a weakness. If people are allowed in and out in cars you can't stop a person on foot getting through while the gate is open unless you're prepared to use force, possibly deadly force. And if you go there, sooner or later you'll take out a non-white person and provide the mob with all the proof they need that you're racist to the core. If only people on foot can get in, those people become targets between their vehicle and the gates.

Can we really prepare for the violently insane?
Yes, to a point, as long as you can be confident the police and courts have your back.


All of America is an "At-Will" employment nation.
In which case how does the guy have a wrongful termination case - if it could be argued that he brought a problem to the company and they fired him what basis does he have to fight it?
 

Lazy Suesun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
140
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
No
It's great in theory but you're trying to reach the people who aren't listening. Once you've got a group who set themselves up as judge and jury (and, metaphorically speaking at least, as executioner as well) there is no other version of events. Man is racist, man must be fired, the end. Anything less is justifying racism.
And if that narrative remains in place in action, radicals will continue to think they have the upper hand.

What would make more sense would be for the silent majority to become less silent, but then the silent majority doesn't want to paint a target on its back any more than the company currently in the cross hairs does.
The entire ANTIFA/BLM terror plot was designed to make Trump look bad from the beginning.

When I first became involved in political activism, addressing one subject in particular at that time, I thought as soon as people heard about these certain abuses they'd stand up and demand change. That's what got me involved.
Then I grew to realize rather quickly that the dumbing down of America campaign activated shortly WW2 to date, has made for an indifferent passive society for the most part. People are so attached to what they own, they're afraid to get active for the change they carp about wanting to see in the world because they're afraid of what they'll lose if they go for it.
The political is personal, the personal is political. Radicals, those who have nothing to lose, gain concessions because of that very thing. They act out as if they have nothing to lose. Not even their freedom or life.
You can't inspire courage to rise in a people who have none. However, for the majority of Americans all it takes for the push back against radical terrorists is for their behaviors to become personal enough that they too arrive at the decision, if they don't do something they're going to lose everything. More than what they've already lost.

That's when we'll see people fight back. We'll see, rather than negotiating with the mob of terrorists, firetrucks driving straight through the human blockade that positioned itself across a street so that the house they had set on fire continues to burn. With a family, including a child, inside.

Domestic Terrorists in this country like to think they have nothing to lose. I assure you, when they're no longer pandered to, placated, given concessions, tolerance even as they occupy a terror-tory they've taken and then kept by force , even using arms (AR-15's), while holding retailers hostage$ , and after begging the police for port-a-potties and food so they could survive, (Let them live in their own filth and starve for their poor planning), and instead are removed by force, are shot when they shoot unarmed innocents, the equation of having nothing to lose will become reconfigured as they gaze on the corpses of their fellows.
Everybody thinks they are ready for the fight until they get punched in the face.

The Terrorist Racist Anarchist uprising of ANTIFA and BLM that we witness today and still, I assure you would have never happened in 1945, 1957. Nor in the 60's all the way to 2016. It would have never jumped off during Obama's terms in office.

The reason this is happening now, on the coattail of the near national lock down due to Covid-19, is because it is a vehicle to not only further impact the economy, but to make Trump look bad.

Automated guarded gates are all well and good but for as long as some people need to get in and out you've got a weakness. If people are allowed in and out in cars you can't stop a person on foot getting through while the gate is open unless you're prepared to use force, possibly deadly force. And if you go there, sooner or later you'll take out a non-white person and provide the mob with all the proof they need that you're racist to the core. If only people on foot can get in, those people become targets between their vehicle and the gates.
Guarded gates work spectacularly at military bases and the White House, and at government installations, and other corporate properties. Furthermore, all one need do is post signs on the company property at entry points and on the fence itself that warns against Trespassing, promises prosecution, and warns of deadly force.
All issues are covered because the warnings are universal, not racially exclusive.



Yes, to a point, as long as you can be confident the police and courts have your back.
Well, when they don't, there's always the God given right of self-defense.




In which case how does the guy have a wrongful termination case - if it could be argued that he brought a problem to the company and they fired him what basis does he have to fight it?
At will employment in the U.S. means an employer does not need a specific reason to dismiss an employee. However, if the employee is fired for a specified cause or reason that is unlawful, the employee has recourse.
In the case in question, the employee should seek legal council. An employer thinking someone cracking their knuckles, or even making the age old "OK" sign with their fingers, is cause for dismissal, is wrong.
Further, what should be suspect for anyone, especially the employer in this case, is that someone followed this employee/driver so closely that they photographed his hand while it was outside the cab of his vehicle as he cracked one finger at a time. He would have started with his thumb. The punitive complaint that was made against the employee pertained to his index finger being the next one to be cracked.
If someone is caught in a still photo picking their nose while they drive for UPS, should we then expect them to be fired because the person capturing the image claims the driver was giving them the bird? If the camera perspective does not make clear it is the index finger, not the middle finger, up the nose?

IF that did happen and an employee with UPS did lose the ability to continue to pay the mortgage and feed themselves and/or their family, and it all makes news, where does it stop?
Were I the offended in question, I'd go so far as to see if I could file against the person who took the picture and started the liable and defamation assault against my character, and that caused me my job.
 

tango

... and you shall live ...
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
9,465
Location
Realms of chaos
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
And if that narrative remains in place in action, radicals will continue to think they have the upper hand.
... which is presumably why they are rioting, and also presumably why they haven't carried through with their alleged promises to visit suburbia and rural areas.

When I first became involved in political activism, addressing one subject in particular at that time, I thought as soon as people heard about these certain abuses they'd stand up and demand change. That's what got me involved.
Then I grew to realize rather quickly that the dumbing down of America campaign activated shortly WW2 to date, has made for an indifferent passive society for the most part. People are so attached to what they own, they're afraid to get active for the change they carp about wanting to see in the world because they're afraid of what they'll lose if they go for it.
The political is personal, the personal is political. Radicals, those who have nothing to lose, gain concessions because of that very thing. They act out as if they have nothing to lose. Not even their freedom or life.
You can't inspire courage to rise in a people who have none. However, for the majority of Americans all it takes for the push back against radical terrorists is for their behaviors to become personal enough that they too arrive at the decision, if they don't do something they're going to lose everything. More than what they've already lost.
It's often been said that the most dangerous man you can fight is the man with nothing to lose. Hence welfare systems give people something to lose, even if it's very little, even it's not enough to offer any hope for the future, it's something that can be taken away unless they comply. It's part of the reason government can maintain power over the people, because people are afraid of losing something if they step out of line.

That's when we'll see people fight back. We'll see, rather than negotiating with the mob of terrorists, firetrucks driving straight through the human blockade that positioned itself across a street so that the house they had set on fire continues to burn. With a family, including a child, inside.
https://www.policeone.com/george-floyd-protest/articles/va-police-chief-rioters-blocked-firefighters-from-burning-home-with-child-inside-OBxLwtKVzfgrFQmp/

At some point, most likely. It's not inconceivable that what's happening now will spark huge unrest that will result in unimaginable bloodshed, especially if the rioters decide to descend onto more heavily armed rural areas. I'm sure there's a reason they have yet to do that. I can only imagine what happens if they decide to attack an area where lots of hunters have lots of powerful rifles, and homeowners have pump action shotguns.

Guarded gates work spectacularly at military bases and the White House, and at government installations, and other corporate properties. Furthermore, all one need do is post signs on the company property at entry points and on the fence itself that warns against Trespassing, promises prosecution, and warns of deadly force.
All issues are covered because the warnings are universal, not racially exclusive.
They work well because everybody knows that if you race onto the military base you will be shot. It's hard to see the same happening at an office owned by an engineering firm or similar. Soldiers with machine guns guard the military base, the guy guarding the corporate office will have a pistol at most and may or may not be trained and willing to use it.

Well, when they don't, there's always the God given right of self-defense.
Yes, if you're confident the courts will have your back and not send you to Club Feb for the rest of your life.

At will employment in the U.S. means an employer does not need a specific reason to dismiss an employee. However, if the employee is fired for a specified cause or reason that is unlawful, the employee has recourse.
In the case in question, the employee should seek legal council. An employer thinking someone cracking their knuckles, or even making the age old "OK" sign with their fingers, is cause for dismissal, is wrong.
You can't have those two together. Either you can be fired for any reason, or you can't. Whatever you or I might think is a valid reason (and I agree that this case is absurd), if you can be fired for any reason then you can be fired for cracking your knuckles.

Further, what should be suspect for anyone, especially the employer in this case, is that someone followed this employee/driver so closely that they photographed his hand while it was outside the cab of his vehicle as he cracked one finger at a time. He would have started with his thumb. The punitive complaint that was made against the employee pertained to his index finger being the next one to be cracked.
If someone is caught in a still photo picking their nose while they drive for UPS, should we then expect them to be fired because the person capturing the image claims the driver was giving them the bird? If the camera perspective does not make clear it is the index finger, not the middle finger, up the nose?
If you pull up next to someone at a light you're close enough to take pictures. Presumably the driver in question was stopped at the time, or they wouldn't have had both hands off the steering wheel. If he was driving with no hands on the steering wheel that would most likely be cause for dismissal, no?

IF that did happen and an employee with UPS did lose the ability to continue to pay the mortgage and feed themselves and/or their family, and it all makes news, where does it stop?
Were I the offended in question, I'd go so far as to see if I could file against the person who took the picture and started the liable and defamation assault against my character, and that caused me my job.
It's ridiculous without a doubt. But good luck going after a random stranger when you lost your job and can't pay the lawyer. Not that many lawyers would be likely to want to take a case defending someone fired for racism who can't pay them, given they don't want to be at the center of the next Twitter storm.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
9,853
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
What I SUSPECT (just suspect)....

Whether this man is a racist or not.... whether he made a racist jesture or not.... is entirely, completely irrel evant. San Diego Gas and Election is terrified by the possibility of being called a racist country. If avoided that by firing a (likely) innocent man, well as the Chief Priest said of Jesus, "don't you realize it is better for one man to die rather than the whole country?" The unjust firing of this man is simply necessary.... better to throw HIM under the bus than to have people posting on facebook that San Diego Gas and Electric is racist for not firing this man.

There is an enormous FEAR of anyone and anything not Black of being labeled as "racist." So signs are held, T-Shirts distributed to employees, ad put on TV, innocent employees fired.... all in the hope of avoiding this label.

Sorry, it's how I see some of this....




.
 

Lazy Suesun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
140
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
No
... which is presumably why they are rioting, and also presumably why they haven't carried through with their alleged promises to visit suburbia and rural areas.



It's often been said that the most dangerous man you can fight is the man with nothing to lose. Hence welfare systems give people something to lose, even if it's very little, even it's not enough to offer any hope for the future, it's something that can be taken away unless they comply. It's part of the reason government can maintain power over the people, because people are afraid of losing something if they step out of line.

https://www.policeone.com/george-fl...ning-home-with-child-inside-OBxLwtKVzfgrFQmp/

At some point, most likely. It's not inconceivable that what's happening now will spark huge unrest that will result in unimaginable bloodshed, especially if the rioters decide to descend onto more heavily armed rural areas. I'm sure there's a reason they have yet to do that. I can only imagine what happens if they decide to attack an area where lots of hunters have lots of powerful rifles, and homeowners have pump action shotguns.



They work well because everybody knows that if you race onto the military base you will be shot. It's hard to see the same happening at an office owned by an engineering firm or similar. Soldiers with machine guns guard the military base, the guy guarding the corporate office will have a pistol at most and may or may not be trained and willing to use it.



Yes, if you're confident the courts will have your back and not send you to Club Feb for the rest of your life.



You can't have those two together. Either you can be fired for any reason, or you can't. Whatever you or I might think is a valid reason (and I agree that this case is absurd), if you can be fired for any reason then you can be fired for cracking your knuckles.



If you pull up next to someone at a light you're close enough to take pictures. Presumably the driver in question was stopped at the time, or they wouldn't have had both hands off the steering wheel. If he was driving with no hands on the steering wheel that would most likely be cause for dismissal, no?



It's ridiculous without a doubt. But good luck going after a random stranger when you lost your job and can't pay the lawyer. Not that many lawyers would be likely to want to take a case defending someone fired for racism who can't pay them, given they don't want to be at the center of the next Twitter storm.
Thanks for re-posting the link to the Police One article that I had shared in my reply. That's a great help.
 

tango

... and you shall live ...
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
9,465
Location
Realms of chaos
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Thanks for re-posting the link to the Police One article that I had shared in my reply. That's a great help.
The quote tags glitched somewhere. I'm glad you found the rest of the post so helpful.
 
Top Bottom