Our BetterMost Community > Chez Tremblay

Verizon Wireless --USED TO-- Hate Gay People (???) maybe

(1/3) > >>

TheStudDuck!:
I was in my Sociology of Women class today and my professor ended up talking about this extremely depressing story regarding another one of her students.  I figured that everyone here might be interested to know.

She didn't go too much in depth during class, but afterwards, I approached her and we ended up talking about it and apparently this male student of hers that happened to be gay had been working for Verizon Wireless.  And I guess he had been working there for some time and was actually a very good employee, and his sexual orientation had been something that he had just kept to himself.  However, one day he was at his own little space and he happened to be reading some magazine targeted towards homosexuals -- it wasn't like gay porn, it was something along the lines of like The Advocate -- and one of his co-workers saw him.  This, as you have probably already guessed, led to a huge deal where he was constantly harassed by everyone... but he had decided that he wasn't going to let it get the best of him and he was going to continue with his job.

But this would not be the case, because Verizon Wireless actually ended up firing him, citing that his sexual orientation did not align with the corporate image that they were trying to convey.

Ugh.  We both just talked about our disgust with such an absurd policy and got it out of our system.  I'm thinking about writing the company and telling them what I think of their corporate image policy.  Luckily no one in my family uses their service -- everyone uses Cingular.  So I don't feel too dirty.

Peace, David.

starboardlight:
thanx for the report, David. I'm going to look into this. My parents do use Verizon as their phone and internet service, so if this turns out to be true. I will certainly discontinue the account, pay what ever fine for ending a contract with them to make a point that I don't think this is acceptable. Unfortunately, in the US, sexual orientation is not a protected right. People can still be fired or denied jobs for their sexual orientation. I believe only certain states like California or New York, are people protected. I imagine that he doesn't have legal recourse for this. If you can forward me any mention of his case in any publications, I'd appreciate it.

dot-matrix:
This is horrible, unbelievable in this day and age, If true and not some random rumor .  I'm surpirzed that some enter prizing  young ACLU lawyer isn't champing at the bit to take on this kind of flaggarant civil rights violation. 

Discrimination against, the elderly, women, blacks, etc wasn't recognized until someone stood up and said enough it stops now.  Quite frankly I'm equally surprised that the victim in this ugly story is not seeking some kind of legal recourse.  If his work record and performance reviews are good at the very least he has a case for the local labor board since according to the story he was dismissed for reading a magazine.

I definitely would be very interested in more info on this and more concrete evidence to back up the rumor because if it is true every intelligent fair minded person should boycott Verizon.

Kazza:

--- Quote from: starboardlight on October 26, 2006, 05:13:53 pm --- Unfortunately, in the US, sexual orientation is not a protected right. People can still be fired or denied jobs for their sexual orientation.

--- End quote ---

Wow - that really surprised me. I know that there is legislation in place over here (in the UK) to ensure that no one is discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. I would have thought that your consitution, whilst not mentioning this issue specifically, would at least provide the foundations for something of this nature.

In the US you seem to have some quite differing laws and legislation inplace from state to state. Does this not make the implimentation of some laws difficult? Is there often an instance where the Government introduce new or amended legislation which state governers choose not to impliment?

Please forgive my ignorance...

Karen

Kelda:

--- Quote from: Kazza on October 27, 2006, 07:50:58 am ---Wow - that really surprised me. I know that there is legislation in place over here (in the UK) to ensure that no one is discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. I would have thought that your consitution, whilst not mentioning this issue specifically, would at least provide the foundations for something of this nature.

In the US you seem to have some quite differing laws and legislation inplace from state to state. Does this not make the implimentation of some laws difficult? Is there often an instance where the Government introduce new or amended legislation which state governers choose not to impliment?

Please forgive my ignorance...

Karen

--- End quote ---

Karen - i didn't know this either - and they say the US is a progressive society. perhaps bush should be worrying about oppression at home beforre fighting wars based on opression elsewhere. 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page