- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Jamie Bergeron fired from Acadian Ambulance
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:10 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:10 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
quote:
disagreeing in the public domain
That’s a gentle way of putting it. He posted a meme that showed people driving into protestors with the caption “All Lives Splatter.”
2
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:11 pm to NIH
quote:
He’s great
Oh you too.
Maybe you can go back to law school and figure out the difference of law and facts, or get your money back.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:12 pm to Steadmans Cheddar
Regardless of the political implications, that’s poor taste in general for an EMS worker tbh.
I don’t have sympathy in this specific instance
I don’t have sympathy in this specific instance
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:12 pm to Steadmans Cheddar
quote:
That’s a gentle way of putting it. He posted a meme that showed people driving into protestors with the caption “All Lives Splatter.”
Oh yeah, but obviously had to do with BLM as they put it in their post, that would be factual and he would still have to prove it.
quote:
Regardless of the political implications, that’s poor taste in general for an EMS worker tbh.
Oh agree there. I know two hospital worker through a friend that got fire for posting ALL LIVES MATTER. I recommended an attorney I know that specializes in EEOC actions.
This post was edited on 6/23/20 at 5:15 pm
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:12 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
Where did you go to law school?
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:13 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
quote:
Oh yeah, but most probably they would not fire him for post DOA-KKK right?
Lol. World-class goalpost moving.
We’ve gone from “his desire to publicly advocate for murder puts him in a protected class under law” to “well of course they could fire him, but they wouldn’t if it were about the KKK”
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:15 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
He would have a long row to hoe to prove his case in court. But if he was the vindictive type, a couple hours research on Social Media on his colleagues could possibly get him a list to take to corporate to ask when these other guys / gals will be fired.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:15 pm to NIH
quote:
Where did you go to law school?
Who said I did, apparently good enough to know the difference between law and facts.
When all else fails you can go back to calling me names.
This post was edited on 6/23/20 at 5:16 pm
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:17 pm to Steadmans Cheddar
quote:
Lol. World-class goalpost moving. We’ve gone from “his desire to publicly advocate for murder puts him in a protected class under law” to “well of course they could fire him, but they wouldn’t if it were about the KKK”
Actually, what you posted is exactly what the EEOC will look at, if people are treated different under similar situations. He would still have to prove it, of course the tell is in their post i.e. BLM.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:18 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
What’s your understanding of the summary judgment standard? Thanks.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:18 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
Please don’t confuse laws and facts. They generally don’t mix all that well.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:20 pm to NIH
quote:
What’s your understanding of the summary judgment standard? Thanks.
What is yours?
You haven't provide anything of real substance, so you went from name calling to name calling in verb form, to trying to compare law schools.
My guess, if you don't know the difference between law and facts, which to me was fairly obvious... it would be a waste of time.
quote:
Please don’t confuse laws and facts. They generally don’t mix all that well.
I think you're speaking to the wrong party.
This post was edited on 6/23/20 at 5:21 pm
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:21 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
quote:
what you posted is exactly what the EEOC will look at
Pretty sure they’ll just stop at “of course they can fire him.” You generally don’t need to go past there.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:22 pm to Steadmans Cheddar
quote:
Pretty sure they’ll just stop at “of course they can fire him.” You generally don’t need to go past there.
Who said they can't fire him?
Obviously they did. Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:22 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
quote:
real substance
I indulged you about the BFOQ exception to Title VII claims. Care to tell us how you think that would apply? Of course, you’re probably familiar with those lines of cases.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:24 pm to Steadmans Cheddar
quote:
I indulged you about the BFOQ exception to Title VII claims. Care to tell us how you think that would apply? Of course, you’re probably familiar with those lines of cases.
Learn to use google, or maybe go to a law library.
This post was edited on 6/23/20 at 5:25 pm
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:24 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
quote:
Compare
So, you did attend law school? Where?
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:25 pm to NIH
Unless your black. Cant touch em no matter how incompetent.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:26 pm to NIH
quote:
So, you did attend law school? Where?
Who said I did? Why does that matter?
I mean, I know enough to know you didn't know the difference between law and facts. I mean you're over there arguing facts and that had been decided.
Boy I bet you can't even explain to your clients why you lose.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 5:34 pm to GeauxFightingTigers1
quote:
Who said they can't fire him? Obviously they did.
Earlier you said
quote:
You can't fire people
Apologies, I thought the phrase “legally entitled to” would be implied. I didn’t realize you thought the debate was about the employer’s physical ability to say “You’re fired.”
You said this guy probably has a discrimination claim, then alluded to Title VII. I mistakenly thought you meant the employer would be prohibited from firing him, as those cases can have injunctive relief.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News