Subway calls cops over drink-sharing by aspie employee.

Page 2 of 4 [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,011
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

06 May 2007, 2:23 pm

shadexiii wrote:

There was also no need for her diagnosis to be in the article. What purpose does that serve?


The Union organiser Bill Clark speaking for Jackie Lang mentioned it to the press and I assume the press picked the story up from the Union press release. So its been mentioned likely because Ms Lang wants it mentioned. It serves to gain public sympathy.



natty
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 318

06 May 2007, 2:35 pm

I have Dugg it , thank you for posting the Link , I am highly suspicious that this lady was fired not because of the drink she shared but possibly because of issues surrounding her apsergers , to fire her for something relating to that would have amounted to disability discrimination , hence they trumped up this charge to get rid of her , i think it has backfired somewhat because now everyone is just thinking what a malicious twit that manager must be to fire someone over something so rediculous , which if what they are saying about the employees manual is true she actually hasnt broken any rules . i hope the business responsable loses thousands in revenue and is forced to make a public apology to the person concerned .



Cade
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Aug 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 894

06 May 2007, 2:38 pm

TheMachine1 wrote:
shadexiii wrote:

There was also no need for her diagnosis to be in the article. What purpose does that serve?


The Union organiser Bill Clark speaking for Jackie Lang mentioned it to the press and I assume the press picked the story up from the Union press release. So its been mentioned likely because Ms Lang wants it mentioned. It serves to gain public sympathy.


This actually pisses me of more than the firing. It's exploiting her condition for public sympathy.

Anyhow, I believe that people should just stop patronizing fast food businesses altogther anyhow. There's no bargain in it, seeing it's overpriced for the insanely low quality food you get, their stores are blights and eyesores, and how they generally treat their employees like dirt has become an industry standard of how to treat minimum wage personnel. But it's our addiction to convenience and sens eof entitlement that lets them thrive, so if crap like this happens, don't blame the industry, blame all teh fools that are keeping the industry alive and thriving. Seriously, would it kill people to make their own damn sandwiches?



TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,011
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

06 May 2007, 2:51 pm

Cade wrote:
TheMachine1 wrote:
shadexiii wrote:

There was also no need for her diagnosis to be in the article. What purpose does that serve?


The Union organiser Bill Clark speaking for Jackie Lang mentioned it to the press and I assume the press picked the story up from the Union press release. So its been mentioned likely because Ms Lang wants it mentioned. It serves to gain public sympathy.


This actually pisses me of more than the firing. It's exploiting her condition for public sympathy.



Something does not add up with a person being fired and arrested for this. Aspergers is likely the unknown variable in this.



TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,011
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

06 May 2007, 3:24 pm

F***! it was Dugg down aka buried. Maybe because all the votes were coming from wrongplanet referral link.

Copy the link in a new window/tab or turn off referral logging in your web browser if your still going to vote (I'm not sure if it can be unburied).

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

Here is another story on it.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Subway ... 29483.html

I know you people are not going to want to try it again but please do. This time put the bottem link in a new tab / window or turn off link referal in your browser and digg this story.

http://www.digg.com/politics/Subway_Sac ... h_A_Friend



Last edited by TheMachine1 on 06 May 2007, 3:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

shadexiii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,545

06 May 2007, 3:39 pm

TheMachine1 wrote:
Something does not add up with a person being fired and arrested for this. Aspergers is likely the unknown variable in this.


I didn't see any indication of it in the article, in terms of how she acted. It was made to sound as if the firing was over the one mentioned incident. If that is the case, AS had nothing to do with it. The stupidity of the management in how they decided to handle the situation had a great deal to do with it.

Throwing in a diagnosis was unnecessary, at least as far as I can tell at this point. There was no need for "additional" sympathy. I don't believe most people would view how the situation was handled as just. Had something about her behavior been brought into question, past being sympathetic towards another human, and it was definitively something that could be attributed to AS, then it would make more sense to me.



maldoror
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 946
Location: Denver

06 May 2007, 3:41 pm

Ticker wrote:
If the cops have nothing better to do than jail a young lady over two Cokes then something is wrong. Why don't they go track down some murderers, rapists and drug dealers for heaven sake!


Heh, that's New Zealand for you.



TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,011
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

06 May 2007, 3:49 pm

shadexiii wrote:
TheMachine1 wrote:
Something does not add up with a person being fired and arrested for this. Aspergers is likely the unknown variable in this.


I didn't see any indication of it in the article, in terms of how she acted. It was made to sound as if the firing was over the one mentioned incident. If that is the case, AS had nothing to do with it. The stupidity of the management in how they decided to handle the situation had a great deal to do with it.

Throwing in a diagnosis was unnecessary, at least as far as I can tell at this point. There was no need for "additional" sympathy. I don't believe most people would view how the situation was handled as just. Had something about her behavior been brought into question, past being sympathetic towards another human, and it was definitively something that could be attributed to AS, then it would make more sense to me.


Well I do not need to know any details about her other than the fact she had aspergers to decode that it was likely a factor.

In the second story the Union organizer said:

Quote:
Ms Lang has Asperger's syndrome, which can sometimes make her interrelations with people a challenge, and Mr Clark said the condition made her even more susceptible to Subway's abuse of process.



shadexiii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,545

06 May 2007, 3:51 pm

bah, you post more info on to it that makes your stance make more sense after I post. Not fair. :P



TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,011
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

06 May 2007, 3:53 pm

shadexiii wrote:
TheMachine1 wrote:
Well I do not need to know any details about her other than the fact she had aspergers to decode that it was likely a factor.


Wouldn't that be assuming that anyone with AS would be incapable of performing successfully in the workplace, or that any time someone with AS is fired, it must be due to AS, and not something else? Both of those seem unfair to me.


People do not get fired for sharing a drink.



shadexiii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,545

06 May 2007, 3:55 pm

TheMachine1 wrote:

People do not get fired for sharing a drink.


Shouldn't be, but that's assuming that everywhere maintains fair business and management practices. Like I said, didn't see the second story.



snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

06 May 2007, 4:14 pm

Oh, but it's ok to discriminate against us because we haven't blown open a nation or world wide civil rights movement yet :roll:



snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

06 May 2007, 4:16 pm

People are just too f*****g stupid to learn from history. These same people would have likely dropped their teeth if they seen someone discriminating on race, or religion, or nationality, or possibly even sexual orientation (possibly, because there's a trend to support being open minded towards gays and bi's).



shadexiii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,545

06 May 2007, 4:18 pm

snake321 wrote:
Oh, but it's ok to discriminate against us because we haven't blown open a nation or world wide civil rights movement yet :roll:


...who is arguing this?



TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,011
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

06 May 2007, 4:40 pm

Well the second story was buried on Digg to. Looks like the bad guys win :(



cecilfienkelstien
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2006
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,763
Location: Ontario Canada

06 May 2007, 4:41 pm

Very sad situation :evil: I think this logic is ass backwords! Its this kind of logic that makes me want to scream :twisted: