ArmitageShanks wrote:EA CO AS wrote:L-188 wrote:
What complicates that a bit Aesma is that he is a sitting state legislator also. Companies can get it trouble if they fire people who make statements in their official capacity, which he was in this case, and then fire them because of that. Essentially it is punishing that elected official for representing the folks that elected him not the company line.
This is an interesting point. On one hand, he's likely violated UA's social media policy, which can be a terminable offense. On the other hand, he may have been speaking in his official capacity as a legislator. Where do you draw the line?
Say for example this wasn't about Sec. Clinton, but instead, he loudly voiced opposition to Obergefell v. Hodges. UA, like other carriers, came out strongly in favor of the ruling; would his statements in social media be an issue at that point, or not?
And lets ad to this...what about bumper stickers or t-shirts worn around town? Or giving money to anti-gay groups? Should employees be fired for that? Once we start where does it end?
This whole story is a non-issue. Firing the guy won't accomplish a thing other than the 8 minutes of self-congratulations some will feel that someone was silenced for what they said.
Exactly. A public lawmaker representing the people. If the Streisand effect doesn't help his career at UA, it will his legislative.
He is lead sponsor of WV house bill HB4724. The bill sounds like it is intended to reenact and amend §Chapter 61 of the Code of West Virginia for Crimes and their Punishment..