Sexual discrimination...?

[kabob]

So the boss basically just screwed up by saying he wants a man in the position and not a women because Texas is a right to work start he could have told her that your doing great but Im going to replace you he is not obligated to have a reason to fire her

[akey]

I was just writing that. Dude, you can't reason with him. He has his script and he sticks to it

It's pointless to argue with someone who displays their ignorance so publicly.

[Bill]

Lawyer up!
Find one that specializes in labor law (at minimum) and discrimination cases (better). Just don't punch him out beforehand.

[Bill]

So the boss basically just screwed up by saying he wants a man in the position and not a women because Texas is a right to work start he could have told her that your doing great but Im going to replace you he is not obligated to have a reason to fire her

1st, I'm not a lawyer nor qualified to give legal advise.
2nd, I'm no expert.

But there are federal and state laws that make 'right to work' not mean you can't terminate anybody, anytime, for any reason.

What little I know about labor law is you or I can read the text of the written laws all day long, and say what we think they mean. Prior court cases (tort law) have a large bearing on how things like this are dealt with in legal proceedings.

Federal and Texas wrongful termination laws specifically prohibit:

Wrongful discharge as a result of employer discrimination;
Retaliation for reporting employer wrongdoing or refusing to participate in unlawful practices, which is a violation of whistleblower laws;
Firing or otherwise retaliating against an employee for reporting sexual harassment or participating in an investigation;
Termination for reporting discrimination based on race, gender, pregnancy, sex, age, religion or disability;
Firing an employee for participating in an investigation or serving as a witness in an employment discrimination proceeding;
Termination for reporting wage or overtime pay violations; and
Firing an employee who is a spouse or close relative of someone who reported wrongdoing or participated in employment litigation

(Source: www.eeoc.gov )

[sir shovelhands]

Considering the source of that article I can see why they are rejoicing.

I definitely agree with RR in the aspect what the hell makes her deserve $186 MIlLION dollars? She would never make that kind of money in multiple lifetimes. For this very reason I fully support tort reform.

I guess it just shows you can find someone, somewhere that is stupid enough to award that kind of money.

I think the judgement probably would have been less had the company not had a history of the practice (as spelled out in the article). Possibly the judge felt the need to make an example.

Though I am surprised they dropped their challenge, usually with that sum in mind, they'll appeal the heck out of a judgement like that. Guess they must have thought their case was pretty weak.

[perfectstorm]

Just pointing out OP, based on what you've presented, the boss is an ahole no doubt but hasn't broke the law. Based on everything he's done, Ild be willing to bet he's smarter than yall think & he's doing everything possible within his legal rights to make her quit.

I too am wondering how he hired a woman if he hates them. Probably doesn't hate them. Probably really really "likes" them but saw your wife wasn't up for that & wants her out now. Why else do you choose to hire a woman & claim to want her out for a man when she's making you money. Your lawyer should probably check with past female employees there. I bet there's something to that.

[westexasagent]

Thanks again for all the input! My wife is actually relieved from hearing all the help! She filed a complaint with the EEOC and will wait to hear from them and findings. Thanks Green screen!

[RiverRat1]

I agree that much $ is WAY overboard.

If you think that is true, for one and that pregnancy should give an employer the right to discriminate, then you need help...

Do women get pregnant? You obviously never owned and ran a business. You can sit behind a keyboard and act like everyone's equal all day and night long if you want. Facts are employers look at facts and trends to determine who they hire. Women who will get pregnant just plain cost money and problems. Sorry if that offends you.

So the boss basically just screwed up by saying he wants a man in the position and not a women because Texas is a right to work start he could have told her that your doing great but Im going to replace you he is not obligated to have a reason to fire her

Yes. If he stayed quiet it was all good. But because he said he wanted to hire a man she should sue for craptons of money for some reason and he should be taught a lesson

[sir shovelhands]

Yes. If he stayed quiet it was all good. But because he said he wanted to hire a man she should sue for craptons of money for some reason and he should be taught a lesson

Regardless of your opinion on the merit of anti-discrimination laws, it is an illogical argument that a law is flawed merely because it is possible break it without providing enough evidence to be punished. Any law can suffer from this: murder, rape, arson, theft. It does not make those laws any less useful to society.

[ZZ Pops]

Thanks again for all the input! My wife is actually relieved from hearing all the help! She filed a complaint with the EEOC and will wait to hear from them and findings. Thanks Green screen!

Thanks for the follow up. Hopefully, this will work out for the best!

[sir shovelhands]

You can sit behind a keyboard and act like everyone's equal all day and night long if you want.

Once you begin considering other humans unworthy of equality, it becomes easier and easier to consider them chattel. That's a road I wouldn't tread down.

[EarleyBird]

I just read through every post in this thread and can see RiverRat1's logic, and support his thought process.

I typically agree with the vast majority of his sentiments/opinions on this site.

Very few members here in recent years seem to hold the same conservative/country values that I was raised on and live and die by.

Just my 2 cents. Carry on.

[Ætheling]

I just read through every post in this thread and can see RiverRat1's logic, and support his thought process.

I typically agree with the vast majority of his sentiments/opinions on this site.

Very few members here in recent years seem to hold the same conservative/country values that I was raised on and live and die by.

Just my 2 cents. Carry on.

Are you saying discrimination is a conservative value? In this context are you saying the OPs wife is wrong to sue in this matter? Maybe I'm reading your post wrong but if that's the case you are sorely mistaken. With all due respect.

[sethcros]

Are you saying discrimination is a conservative value? In this context are you saying the OPs wife is wrong to sue in this matter? Maybe I'm reading your post wrong but if that's the case you are sorely mistaken. With all due respect.

My thoughts exactly

[wtx223]

Are you saying discrimination is a conservative value? In this context are you saying the OPs wife is wrong to sue in this matter? Maybe I'm reading your post wrong but if that's the case you are sorely mistaken. With all due respect.

What is she going to sue for?