not sure this is ultimately a good precedent if he did it on his own time, and there were no charges filed.
I suspect they’d had other problems with him, and this was the final straw.
As a business owner, you are now on notice that this guy is willing to commit such acts in public. It might be your other employees or even your own customers who are the next target.
Charges were filed by the kid.
Plus, the company he worked for probably didn’t want to get The Red Hen treatment.
I’ll bet The Red Hen won’t open anymore this summer.
Initially, I thought the same, but if I were the owner of the business where this jerk worked, I would not want this guy working at my place of business either - if he attacked a customer while working for me, who’s going to pay? Me, the business owner!
So, I think his employer had good grounds for firing him. He didn’t just argue, or give and opinion, he stole personal property and threw a drink in a teenage kids face just because he disagreed with him.
“not sure this is ultimately a good precedent if he did it on his own time, and there were no charges filed.”
Ah, so CFO Adam Smith, who bullied the Chik-Fil-A employee should still be pulling in $200k a year.
http://www.businessinsider.com/ex-cfo-unemployed-after-chick-fil-a-rant-2015-3
NO business wants a person known for attacking a child on their payroll....................even left wing ones..............
I hear ya. But consider that law enforcement and prosecutors are being handed criminal evidence that is practically gift wrapped. If this guy isn’t arrested and charged today, what will he & his confederates attempt tomorrow?
He did it on his own time, however, consider this. At his employment, does he have extensive dealings with the public? If yes, could the publicity of his actions, even if they were done on his own time, put the business’s image in a bad light?
Now, I am referring to an employee committing a criminal assault. This does not apply to an individual making a political contribution, like what was done to Brendan Eich, formerly of Mozilla. The operative term is “criminal assault”, or other such illegal act. But the SJW Stalinists about us would like to see not toeing the CPUSA party line as criminal act, like Article 58 of the great penal code of the Soviet Union.
WHY WEREN’T CHARGES FILED???
I thought I read that charged were filed...?
I hear you about being fired for being an activist on your own time. This guy’s actions crossed the line from active to actionable, IMHO.
Nope, it would be bad if it were say a government agency, but your fair game in the business word. Who was the first victim of this mentality? Wasn’t it a very high level executive for google or ESPN?
A private company sees a video of one of their employees assaulting a kid. The private company fires the assaulter.
What exactly do you think is not good?
>>not sure this is ultimately a good precedent
Post on your FB or twitter, that you slightly disagree with LGBT and gay marriage. See if you keep your job. There is already a precedent.
So, you want to do a full “FBI” and wait until he goes out and commits mass murder?
“not sure this is ultimately a good precedent if he did it on his own time, and there were no charges filed.”
Past behavior is absolutely a concern of an employer.
Imagine your response if he assaulted a patron of the establishment, you would complain the employer should have known of his abusive and criminal behaviors and not hired the guy.
The owner of the bar, can fire any employee, any time for any reason, or for no reason.
What precedent are you yakking about?
I once owned a bar and if one of my bartenders pissed me off, regardless of the circumstance, I'd fire them in a NY City minute, and piss on their lawyers or their rights.
My bar, my rules.
Show up, work hard, get paid, STFU, yunz got an opinion or a complaint, write to your local paper or see your Priest.
I didn't want to hear about your bitchen and moanen, I was married and had my own personal bitcher and moaner.
If you owned a business, and knew this employee was capable of this behavior, because he had done this before, would you hire him?