Total Posts:19|Showing Posts:1-19
Jump to topic:

What would you do if you were the boss?

brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 9:43:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Most companies these days are committed to employee diversification programmes and are happy to hire people of all ethnic backgrounds and of any sexual orientation – indeed, they would be breaking the law if they discriminated against candidates on the basis of race or sexuality.

However, employees are similarly obliged not to discriminate against candidates on the basis of faith, and further to make reasonable accommodation for existing employees' religious beliefs and practices.

This can leave an employer between a rock and a hard place.

Say, for example, a corporate travel company has a vacancy for travel counsellor and the most suitable candidate happens to be a lesbian and they give her the job.

However, the account that had the vacant position requires two counsellors and the existing counsellor happens to be a devout Christian who, on discovering her new co-worker's sexuality, refused to work with her because she believes homosexuality is immoral and it would be against God's word to work with a lesbian.

So, given that it's not possible to juggle staff around so that the lesbian and Christian don't work together on the same account, what would you do if you were the boss?
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 9:44:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 9:55:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I think the part of the video that best addresses your specific question is

"Promote Synergy!!" Like a Boss.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 12:11:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 9:43:56 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
Most companies these days are committed to employee diversification programmes and are happy to hire people of all ethnic backgrounds and of any sexual orientation – indeed, they would be breaking the law if they discriminated against candidates on the basis of race or sexuality.

However, employees are similarly obliged not to discriminate against candidates on the basis of faith, and further to make reasonable accommodation for existing employees' religious beliefs and practices.

This can leave an employer between a rock and a hard place.

Say, for example, a corporate travel company has a vacancy for travel counsellor and the most suitable candidate happens to be a lesbian and they give her the job.

However, the account that had the vacant position requires two counsellors and the existing counsellor happens to be a devout Christian who, on discovering her new co-worker's sexuality, refused to work with her because she believes homosexuality is immoral and it would be against God's word to work with a lesbian.

So, given that it's not possible to juggle staff around so that the lesbian and Christian don't work together on the same account, what would you do if you were the boss?

Basically, not much because it's against the law. End affirmative action if possible. Rant against the global fascist dictatorship for controlling my life and screwing it up.

There is no positive to affirmative action and a lot of negatives.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 12:12:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 9:43:56 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
Most companies these days are committed to employee diversification programmes and are happy to hire people of all ethnic backgrounds and of any sexual orientation – indeed, they would be breaking the law if they discriminated against candidates on the basis of race or sexuality.

However, employees are similarly obliged not to discriminate against candidates on the basis of faith, and further to make reasonable accommodation for existing employees' religious beliefs and practices.

This can leave an employer between a rock and a hard place.

Say, for example, a corporate travel company has a vacancy for travel counsellor and the most suitable candidate happens to be a lesbian and they give her the job.

However, the account that had the vacant position requires two counsellors and the existing counsellor happens to be a devout Christian who, on discovering her new co-worker's sexuality, refused to work with her because she believes homosexuality is immoral and it would be against God's word to work with a lesbian.

So, given that it's not possible to juggle staff around so that the lesbian and Christian don't work together on the same account, what would you do if you were the boss?

Inform the Christian that they can either work with this person or find a new job. This will lead to several different options.

1) They put it behind them and do their work
2) They quit out their job because of it.
3) They refuse to work and have to get fired because they are not willing to do their job.

I'm not sure how things work in England, but options 2 and 3 here in Oregon will result in them not being eligible for unemployment benefits (so no burden to the state).

I suppose a 4th option would be that they work while looking for another job and quit once they find that other job.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 12:24:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 12:15:35 PM, gerrandesquire wrote:
At 8/24/2011 9:44:54 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:


I saw this one coming.

Never seen that before. Funny. Not very helpful, but funny.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 12:28:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 12:11:35 PM, seraine wrote:
At 8/24/2011 9:43:56 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
Most companies these days are committed to employee diversification programmes and are happy to hire people of all ethnic backgrounds and of any sexual orientation – indeed, they would be breaking the law if they discriminated against candidates on the basis of race or sexuality.

However, employees are similarly obliged not to discriminate against candidates on the basis of faith, and further to make reasonable accommodation for existing employees' religious beliefs and practices.

This can leave an employer between a rock and a hard place.

Say, for example, a corporate travel company has a vacancy for travel counsellor and the most suitable candidate happens to be a lesbian and they give her the job.

However, the account that had the vacant position requires two counsellors and the existing counsellor happens to be a devout Christian who, on discovering her new co-worker's sexuality, refused to work with her because she believes homosexuality is immoral and it would be against God's word to work with a lesbian.

So, given that it's not possible to juggle staff around so that the lesbian and Christian don't work together on the same account, what would you do if you were the boss?

Basically, not much because it's against the law. End affirmative action if possible. Rant against the global fascist dictatorship for controlling my life and screwing it up.

There is no positive to affirmative action and a lot of negatives.

You do know that Affirmative Action =/= racial quotas (or any other quotas).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 3:52:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 12:12:32 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 9:43:56 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
Most companies these days are committed to employee diversification programmes and are happy to hire people of all ethnic backgrounds and of any sexual orientation – indeed, they would be breaking the law if they discriminated against candidates on the basis of race or sexuality.

However, employees are similarly obliged not to discriminate against candidates on the basis of faith, and further to make reasonable accommodation for existing employees' religious beliefs and practices.

This can leave an employer between a rock and a hard place.

Say, for example, a corporate travel company has a vacancy for travel counsellor and the most suitable candidate happens to be a lesbian and they give her the job.

However, the account that had the vacant position requires two counsellors and the existing counsellor happens to be a devout Christian who, on discovering her new co-worker's sexuality, refused to work with her because she believes homosexuality is immoral and it would be against God's word to work with a lesbian.

So, given that it's not possible to juggle staff around so that the lesbian and Christian don't work together on the same account, what would you do if you were the boss?

Inform the Christian that they can either work with this person or find a new job. This will lead to several different options.

1) They put it behind them and do their work
2) They quit out their job because of it.
3) They refuse to work and have to get fired because they are not willing to do their job.

I'm not sure how things work in England, but options 2 and 3 here in Oregon will result in them not being eligible for unemployment benefits (so no burden to the state).

I suppose a 4th option would be that they work while looking for another job and quit once they find that other job.

Thanks for this advice but in England options 2 and 3 would lead to legal action against the Company on the basis of "constructive dismissal".

It is the responsibility of the employer to resolve the problem to the satisfaction of the employee because their working conditions were changed involuntarily.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 3:56:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Even though the contract of employment might state that the employee needs to be flexible in certain respects it is sub judice to English and European employmeent legislation.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 4:06:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 3:52:52 PM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:12:32 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 9:43:56 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
Most companies these days are committed to employee diversification programmes and are happy to hire people of all ethnic backgrounds and of any sexual orientation – indeed, they would be breaking the law if they discriminated against candidates on the basis of race or sexuality.

However, employees are similarly obliged not to discriminate against candidates on the basis of faith, and further to make reasonable accommodation for existing employees' religious beliefs and practices.

This can leave an employer between a rock and a hard place.

Say, for example, a corporate travel company has a vacancy for travel counsellor and the most suitable candidate happens to be a lesbian and they give her the job.

However, the account that had the vacant position requires two counsellors and the existing counsellor happens to be a devout Christian who, on discovering her new co-worker's sexuality, refused to work with her because she believes homosexuality is immoral and it would be against God's word to work with a lesbian.

So, given that it's not possible to juggle staff around so that the lesbian and Christian don't work together on the same account, what would you do if you were the boss?

Inform the Christian that they can either work with this person or find a new job. This will lead to several different options.

1) They put it behind them and do their work
2) They quit out their job because of it.
3) They refuse to work and have to get fired because they are not willing to do their job.

I'm not sure how things work in England, but options 2 and 3 here in Oregon will result in them not being eligible for unemployment benefits (so no burden to the state).

I suppose a 4th option would be that they work while looking for another job and quit once they find that other job.

Thanks for this advice but in England options 2 and 3 would lead to legal action against the Company on the basis of "constructive dismissal".

It is the responsibility of the employer to resolve the problem to the satisfaction of the employee because their working conditions were changed involuntarily.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

I don't think that will be an issue (again, opperating off Oregon law). An employee must show that the changes were intentionally targeted towards them (like making a religious person take the sunday shift) to make their job difficult. Since (at least in Oregon) it is illegal for a company to even ask your sexuality during an interview (they're not even allowed to ask if you're married), it cannot be shown that the employer willingly put the two together with the intent of making the religious person's job harder.

According to UK law, "An employer must not, without reasonable or proper cause, conduct himself in a manner calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence between the employer and the employee."

The "reasonable or proper cause" would be that he did not know. Now I'm assuming that the employer would make some effort to adjust the schedules and find that he is unable, rather than simply saying "deal with it you git!"
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 4:23:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 4:06:05 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 3:52:52 PM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:12:32 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 9:43:56 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
Most companies these days are committed to employee diversification programmes and are happy to hire people of all ethnic backgrounds and of any sexual orientation – indeed, they would be breaking the law if they discriminated against candidates on the basis of race or sexuality.

However, employees are similarly obliged not to discriminate against candidates on the basis of faith, and further to make reasonable accommodation for existing employees' religious beliefs and practices.

This can leave an employer between a rock and a hard place.

Say, for example, a corporate travel company has a vacancy for travel counsellor and the most suitable candidate happens to be a lesbian and they give her the job.

However, the account that had the vacant position requires two counsellors and the existing counsellor happens to be a devout Christian who, on discovering her new co-worker's sexuality, refused to work with her because she believes homosexuality is immoral and it would be against God's word to work with a lesbian.

So, given that it's not possible to juggle staff around so that the lesbian and Christian don't work together on the same account, what would you do if you were the boss?

Inform the Christian that they can either work with this person or find a new job. This will lead to several different options.

1) They put it behind them and do their work
2) They quit out their job because of it.
3) They refuse to work and have to get fired because they are not willing to do their job.

I'm not sure how things work in England, but options 2 and 3 here in Oregon will result in them not being eligible for unemployment benefits (so no burden to the state).

I suppose a 4th option would be that they work while looking for another job and quit once they find that other job.

Thanks for this advice but in England options 2 and 3 would lead to legal action against the Company on the basis of "constructive dismissal".

It is the responsibility of the employer to resolve the problem to the satisfaction of the employee because their working conditions were changed involuntarily.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

I don't think that will be an issue (again, opperating off Oregon law). An employee must show that the changes were intentionally targeted towards them (like making a religious person take the sunday shift) to make their job difficult. Since (at least in Oregon) it is illegal for a company to even ask your sexuality during an interview (they're not even allowed to ask if you're married), it cannot be shown that the employer willingly put the two together with the intent of making the religious person's job harder.

According to UK law, "An employer must not, without reasonable or proper cause, conduct himself in a manner calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence between the employer and the employee."

The "reasonable or proper cause" would be that he did not know. Now I'm assuming that the employer would make some effort to adjust the schedules and find that he is unable, rather than simply saying "deal with it you git!"

You're good, Ore_Ele, thanks again for your input, and that would probably be an adequate defence. But it would be so much better to find an amicable solution. It may not be possible though.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 10:38:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 9:43:56 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
Most companies these days are committed to employee diversification programmes and are happy to hire people of all ethnic backgrounds and of any sexual orientation – indeed, they would be breaking the law if they discriminated against candidates on the basis of race or sexuality.

However, employees are similarly obliged not to discriminate against candidates on the basis of faith, and further to make reasonable accommodation for existing employees' religious beliefs and practices.

This can leave an employer between a rock and a hard place.

Say, for example, a corporate travel company has a vacancy for travel counsellor and the most suitable candidate happens to be a lesbian and they give her the job.

However, the account that had the vacant position requires two counsellors and the existing counsellor happens to be a devout Christian who, on discovering her new co-worker's sexuality, refused to work with her because she believes homosexuality is immoral and it would be against God's word to work with a lesbian.

So, given that it's not possible to juggle staff around so that the lesbian and Christian don't work together on the same account, what would you do if you were the boss?

This is why I don't think the government should interfere with hiring decisions. If I start a business, it's my butt on the line financially, and it's my time going into it. I should be able to decide for myself, who I want to hire as the public face of my organization. If I make mistakes in hiring, I'll either adjust or go out of business. Either way the decision should be the business owner's.

In this situation, as long as there are other consellors available, the easiest thing for everyone might simply be to go ahead and switch so they aren't working together.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 7:27:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'd ignore the problem, and wait for the inevitable excuses to discipline the Christian until I can sack her.

Her religion does not provide such a caveat and so is irrelevant.

Mind you if I employed people I would ignore the equal opportunity laws. Secretly of course.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 8:57:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
OKAY if I were the boss...

Let us assume both employees are equal in ability.

When you break down the relevant differences you now have to decide between an experienced intolerant employee versus a relatively new and (assuming) tolerant new lesbian employee.

If my company is looking to expand and grow, I would ditch the Christian.
If my company was looking to weather the storm in a bad economic climate (like the one e have now) I would ditch the Lesbian.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 9:30:57 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I have been "the boss" for decades. I'll admit the high tech world is different from some other businesses because many of the people are smarter, and possibly more focused on the job ... possibly, but not certainly. I've never encountered anything close to the situation you hypothesize. It's difficult to imagine the variety of strange people in Silicon Valley, but that's not a problem. However, I'll accept your hypothetical.

The answer is that if A refuses to work with B without a very good job-related reason, then I'd give A an opportunity to seek employment elsewhere. It's not possible to get a job done if every employee is allowed to invent their own obstacles to working.

The real problem with modern-day employees is that they view the world as an entertainment device. The tend not to view work as work, and often don't much care if it gets done or not.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:46:22 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 4:23:02 PM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 8/24/2011 4:06:05 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 3:52:52 PM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:12:32 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 9:43:56 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
Most companies these days are committed to employee diversification programmes and are happy to hire people of all ethnic backgrounds and of any sexual orientation – indeed, they would be breaking the law if they discriminated against candidates on the basis of race or sexuality.

However, employees are similarly obliged not to discriminate against candidates on the basis of faith, and further to make reasonable accommodation for existing employees' religious beliefs and practices.

This can leave an employer between a rock and a hard place.

Say, for example, a corporate travel company has a vacancy for travel counsellor and the most suitable candidate happens to be a lesbian and they give her the job.

However, the account that had the vacant position requires two counsellors and the existing counsellor happens to be a devout Christian who, on discovering her new co-worker's sexuality, refused to work with her because she believes homosexuality is immoral and it would be against God's word to work with a lesbian.

So, given that it's not possible to juggle staff around so that the lesbian and Christian don't work together on the same account, what would you do if you were the boss?

Inform the Christian that they can either work with this person or find a new job. This will lead to several different options.

1) They put it behind them and do their work
2) They quit out their job because of it.
3) They refuse to work and have to get fired because they are not willing to do their job.

I'm not sure how things work in England, but options 2 and 3 here in Oregon will result in them not being eligible for unemployment benefits (so no burden to the state).

I suppose a 4th option would be that they work while looking for another job and quit once they find that other job.

Thanks for this advice but in England options 2 and 3 would lead to legal action against the Company on the basis of "constructive dismissal".

It is the responsibility of the employer to resolve the problem to the satisfaction of the employee because their working conditions were changed involuntarily.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

I don't think that will be an issue (again, opperating off Oregon law). An employee must show that the changes were intentionally targeted towards them (like making a religious person take the sunday shift) to make their job difficult. Since (at least in Oregon) it is illegal for a company to even ask your sexuality during an interview (they're not even allowed to ask if you're married), it cannot be shown that the employer willingly put the two together with the intent of making the religious person's job harder.

According to UK law, "An employer must not, without reasonable or proper cause, conduct himself in a manner calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence between the employer and the employee."

The "reasonable or proper cause" would be that he did not know. Now I'm assuming that the employer would make some effort to adjust the schedules and find that he is unable, rather than simply saying "deal with it you git!"

You're good, Ore_Ele, thanks again for your input, and that would probably be an adequate defence. But it would be so much better to find an amicable solution. It may not be possible though.

That is most definately true, that it would be better to find some kind of solution. I'm just assuming that we tried that, were unable to find one and were going to the next options.

Though I like what companies do with their higher ups (though it sucks that lower employees don't get the same benefits), they given them a 3 month warning that they are going to lose their job so they have plenty of time to find a new job and train their replacement.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 1:51:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 12:28:55 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:11:35 PM, seraine wrote:
At 8/24/2011 9:43:56 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
Most companies these days are committed to employee diversification programmes and are happy to hire people of all ethnic backgrounds and of any sexual orientation – indeed, they would be breaking the law if they discriminated against candidates on the basis of race or sexuality.

However, employees are similarly obliged not to discriminate against candidates on the basis of faith, and further to make reasonable accommodation for existing employees' religious beliefs and practices.

This can leave an employer between a rock and a hard place.

Say, for example, a corporate travel company has a vacancy for travel counsellor and the most suitable candidate happens to be a lesbian and they give her the job.

However, the account that had the vacant position requires two counsellors and the existing counsellor happens to be a devout Christian who, on discovering her new co-worker's sexuality, refused to work with her because she believes homosexuality is immoral and it would be against God's word to work with a lesbian.

So, given that it's not possible to juggle staff around so that the lesbian and Christian don't work together on the same account, what would you do if you were the boss?

Basically, not much because it's against the law. End affirmative action if possible. Rant against the global fascist dictatorship for controlling my life and screwing it up.

There is no positive to affirmative action and a lot of negatives.

You do know that Affirmative Action =/= racial quotas (or any other quotas).

I don't see much of a difference.