Looks like I will be shoppinhg for a new insurer when my policy is up in a few months. And I will give th is as the reason no matter how the case comes out.
Nice move WA. I would do the same if they were my insurer.
You’re right. It’s a free market.
Hi Kay Cee!
And we have the right not to do business with comanies that engage in viewpoint discrimination. What he did, he did on his own time. He did not do it on the company’s time. And it looks like the state if Illinois agrees:
PF
Hi TPJCatholic!
Hi TPJCatholic!
Hi TPJCatholic!Other Eric,
Hello to you.
Employers’ functions should be bound to the product and/or services they provide. They should not be able to stretch their hands into our private affairs. The man in question was voicing his own opinion in a perfectly legal and MORAL manner, yet he was fired for doing something legal and moral just because the company does not agree with his personal views. I would agree with you if he was handing out his column at work, or if he said he was speaking for the company, etc…yet he did not do any of that, he was merely voicing a personal opinion in a legal and moral way.
Tell me, what if the same company has a problem with families who have more then two kids? According to your point of view that company should be able to dump employees who have too many children (in their eyes), or hold a strong religious view, or do any number of things the company execs may not agree with…should they all lose their jobs simply because they hold personal views their company does not like? What if certain public company execs start to hate Catholics, should all of their Catholics be fired?
At will employees can be dumped, we all know that. However, in this case the employee was quite obviously discriminated against for a holding a person view the company did not like–that is discrimination, plain and simple and it is also a clear breking of the man’s right to free speech.
Let us reverse the scenario. Let us say the man wrote a personal column that strongly supports gays and their lifestyles. Let’s say the company execs were strong Christians and found that man’s opinions to be out of line, so the Christian execs fire the man. Do you not realize that there would be a huge uproaor over such a firing?
It seems the problem in this case was the unfortunate addition of a byline to the writer’s work, identifying him as an Allstate employee. It wasn’t his fault; he didn’t even know about it. In light of that, I think Allstate acted too hastily. When business corporations try to control their employees’ thoughts (outside the workplace, no less), they go too far. But this is where “employment at will” has led us; it is only the logical result of such a policy.
You present a very false analogy and it is dangerous because it equates sexual actions that lack procreative and unitive love with ethnicity, which is a statement of a physical characteristic. Race and ethnicity are part of a person’s being. Performing homosexual acts or lobbying for same sex marriage is an * action * and a sinful one at that.No sympathy here… If the employee did not agree with the employer’s policies, he should not have been outraged by termination.
Substitute homosexuality with Black or Muslim or Jew or woman.
The now ex-Allstate employee is still free to write whatever he wishes. I am sure he will be able to find a place of employment where his views on life are shared and protected.
I am keeping my Allstate insurance.