re: SCOTUS Reasoning

quote:

---

It is accepting something that if a female does it is OK but if a male does it you don’t.

define "something"

---

Wearing a dress, having long hair and a vagina.

quote:

---

Yea, it's kinda a reach, but just bc a dude smokes pole or a chick munches carpet they shouldn't have employer consequences

---

If I run a small town quick stop and my employee of 5 years has an epiphany that not only do they wish to partake of dick but they want to stretch the limit of the other sex’s dress code it hurts my business. Rural small town America doesn’t want to pay an obvious tranny for their bag of chips and gas. I can no longer fire or move him from being the face of my store despite the fact he is killing my business. I cannot put in place a more restrictive dress code, cannot change their shift to one when the store is closed or less busy based on him dressing as a female.

I don't take issue with Gorsuch's reasoning. However, if applied evenly it may actually negatively impact some of the other protected classes. For example, if a white person at a job can in no context ever use the word "n****" without being fired, then that employer must also fire any black employee who uses the word, because doing otherwise would be discrimination based on race.

quote:

---

Employment lawyers got aroused reading that.

---

LOL

They basically blew up the statute, imo.

So, if I hate black people or brown people or white people, how the hell can they get rid of me?

Say I hate straight people or gay people, if it has to do with that... the employer is now unable to discriminate... it has to do with sex.

They've basically made millions of potential protected classes.... anyone that has an opinion on race, sex, religion, etc are now protected classes.

quote:

---

If they were a good and valued employee, why would it matter?

---

Let’s say you hire a guy to be your funeral director in a rural town where there’s two funeral homes. And then, a few years later, he insists he’s actually a she (despite looking nothing like a she). And he starts dressing and acting as a woman. Can you imagine any potential negative impact on your business? Think very carefully. I know you can.

quote:

---

If they were a good and valued employee, why would it matter? I don't hire my employees based on their sexual orientation. I hire them based on their potential to earn or produce for my business.

---

And if you hire someone who you think will be a good employee, and it turns out they suck, good luck getting rid of them if they're a protected class.

Here's a novel idea: let you hire and fire the people for your business using your criteria.

Lol. You don’t think the trans dude running the funeral home was going to negatively impact revenue? You think the employer let him go because of the heebie jeebies?

This ruling actually makes it almost impossible to get rid of anyone which the statute was trying to protect to start with.

Dave - Hey, Glenn, how was your weekend?
Glenn - None of your business, remember I'm not gay.

(Dave goes to HR)
Dave - I'm a protected class, what are you going to do about Glenn?
HR - Nothing. Glenn is in a protected class as well.
Dave - WTF?

------------

Dave - Hey, Glenn, how was your weekend?
Glenn - I went to a kick arse KKK rally.
Dave - Do you like black people?
Glenn - You think I would be at a KKK rally if I did?

(Dave goes back to HR)

Eventually.

Dave shows up on casual Friday with his Black Power shirt, and Glenn shows up with his white KKK shirt.

Harmony.

quote:

---

funeral director in a rural town

---

I know you’re making a point, but do you think this phenomenon exists only in rural towns?

quote:

---

LOL

They basically blew up the statute, imo.

So, if I hate black people or brown people or white people, how the hell can they get rid of me?

Say I hate straight people or gay people, if it has to do with that... the employer is now unable to discriminate... it has to do with sex.

They've basically made millions of potential protected classes.... anyone that has an opinion on race, sex, religion, etc are now protected classes.

---

that isn't what they are saying though

they are saying you can't keep one person who hates black or brown people because and fire another one for the same reason.

I don't understand why it's so hard to get. If you are okay with what someone does in the privacy of their own home then should be okay with everyone else that does that same thing in the privacy of their own home regardless of race, sex, etc.

no one part of this applies to dress codes either. If you don't want dudes wearing dresses. Implement a dress code of no dresses in the office regardless of sex.