Posted on 11/07/2005 2:44:49 AM PST by Dane
I guess, by tomorrow, they'll be saying the Frogs haven't had their butts kicked like this since Agincourt.
ROFL!
gee, that sure sounds American.. (sarcasm) Are you an American or a Communist ? (question, not rhetorical)
5870? Thx. Lost a bet.
"Are you an American or a Communist ? (question, not rhetorical)"
I am American and I am French both.
You are citing the law and then stating factual assumptions that have nothing to do with those facts.
1)Fact: In practical terms, it means you can be fired for virtually any reason not specifically protected by law
Besides the fact that this is true in every state in the Union, do you not see that this is counter to every thing that you have just stated after this prior sentence?
Nonsense and stipulating facts and law not in evidence.
Or, to translate to you:
"Bait and switch.'
That line of reasoning would be speedily disposed of in summary judgment if that was the crux of your case.
Since you never went to law school, let me tell you one of the first things that I learned at Seton Hall:
"If you have the law, beat on the law.
"If you have the facts, beat on the facts.
"If you have nothing. beat on the table.
Guess what you are beating on.
There is nothing different in Florida vs. employees than in any other state as far as no union activities, other than details, and the case that you referred to is not a sex discrimination case, and was not protected by such Federal law.
It was simple misrepresentation.
You are right. I haven't been to law school. I apologize if I overstepped my bounds or misstated something. You, sir, haven't been to charm school. If you'd like to educate me, you can do so quite well without jumping down my throat.
You are the one who originally brought up Hooters. The case to which I was referring was the one reported about men wanting to be hired as Hooters girls. That wasn't argued under sex discrimination? I'll take your word for it.
Besides the fact that this is true in every state in the Union, do you not see that this is counter to every thing that you have just stated after this prior sentence?
Is it really true in every state in the Union? Why is there so much complaining here, then, about employers who fire at will? People seem surprised that an employer can fire them without "a good reason." Maybe the complainers were protected by a labor agreement in their former jobs in former states? I only have anecdotal evidence -- this is something I've heard all my life while living here.
My original point was this -- Vicomte13 believes that a huge part of the unemployment problem in France (affecting the disgruntled youths) is that employers have difficulty getting rid of an employee once hired. Because of this, he concludes, employers are very reluctant to hire. It isn't like that here, I think you would agree.
Please try to be a little more judicious in your comments. I'm always taking flack for defending lawyers on Free Republic, and you're making my efforts more difficult.
Watch newspaper sales drop again. People who are asked, "Did you hear about the Paris Riots?" and get blindsided feel pretty embarassed.
" In French, the word for rifle is "fusil". And the word for shotgun is "fusil". "
I appreciate your take. Now I have to ask, aren't those nutbar reporters a bit curious? Don't they know that rifles don't shoot pellets? No one should cover a riot unless that person has basic knowledge about weapons and violence, for goodness sake.
"In French, the word for rifle is "fusil". And the word for shotgun is "fusil". "
"I appreciate your take. Now I have to ask, aren't those nutbar reporters a bit curious? Don't they know that rifles don't shoot pellets? No one should cover a riot unless that person has basic knowledge about weapons and violence, for goodness sake."
I blame the editors of the English publications. Clearly, they used a French article, which made eminent sense in French, and translated it word-for-word, creating nonsense in English. A "rifle" that shoots pellets? What is that? A high powered bee-bee gun? In French, a fusil shoots pellets or bullets, depending on whether the fusil is a rifle or a shotgun. But in English, there are two words, and a good editor would have caught this.
"How come us in America aren't hearing about the nightly terror happening now on French streets?"
We are...but with the usual MSM biased slant.
It's the Muslim insurgency in Europe...mostly France and Denmark. However, according to MSM, it's poverty and discrimination.
rioters scream allah ahkbar
thereligionofpeace.com
Muslims in Denmark want the same thing Muslims in France want...their own country within the borders of those countries.
"But in English, there are two words, and a good editor would have caught this."
The brits need to hire American consultants when there's a riot. Better yet, they should hire British criminals. British criminals know more about guns than us yanks.
I greatly enjoyed my one trip to France in 1992. Even in Paris I found the people to be kind and courteous. The amount of free wine given to me in Normandy, just for being an American, almost gave me alcohol poisoning. The first two new phrases I learned were gueule de bois and coup de soleil.
Thank you for the kind words.
Can't wait until they start using real weapons in France.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.