Panel Recommends Firing Gay Fire Chief

[Brutuskend]

Panel Recommends Firing Gay Fire Chief
By Associated Press
2 hours ago

MINNEAPOLIS - A city panel recommended Tuesday that officials fire Bonnie Bleskachek, the nation's first openly lesbian big-city fire chief, in the wake of firefighter lawsuits accusing her of harassment and discrimination.

Bleskachek had earlier agreed to step down. But the city's executive council unanimously rejected a negotiated deal after a closed-door meeting.

"She was pretty stunned because it was a complete surprise," said Bleskachek's attorney, Jerry Burg.

Mayor R.T. Rybak had announced the agreement in a letter to the city's executive council in which he wrote that he no longer had confidence in Bleskachek as chief. Neither Rybak nor City Council members would immediately explain why the deal was blocked.

Bleskachek, 43, was hailed as a trailblazer when she was promoted to the top job two years ago, but her tenure has been troubled.

Three female firefighters have sued, alleging various acts of discrimination and sexual harassment. Two of the lawsuits were settled, but this month a male firefighter brought another lawsuit alleging he was denied advancement because he is male and not gay.

A city investigation is still under way. This summer, a separate investigation by the city's Department of Civil Rights into a 2003 complaint by a male firefighter _ brought when Bleskachek was a battalion chief _ found it "likely" that the department gave preferential treatment to lesbians or those who socialized with them.

Bleskachek was ill with the flu Tuesday and unavailable for comment on the severance agreement. She has denied wrongdoing in the past.

Her attorney, Jerry Burg, said the chief's employment agreement calls for her to be reassigned as battalion chief. She would then request a demotion to captain, he said. The agreement, Burg said, included a cash payment of $30,000 to $40,000 _ the difference in annual pay between a chief and captain.

Rybak aide Jeremy Hanson said before the panel's meeting it was not a "certainty" that Bleskachek would remain with the department.

The city has spent more than $410,000 on the investigation, legal settlements and compensation of Bleskachek during her paid leave, which began March 22.

----------------------------------------
Given that our resident comic is handicapped in determining the difference between P&N and OT (gossip vs news); the standard P&N rules for commentary will be ignored.

This thread has been moved between trash dumps


Anandtech Moderator

 

[Number1]

If the allegations are true, I can't see how she could remain with the department at any level.

 

[Pepsei]

regardless of her sexual orientation.... if the allegations are true.... she should be fired.

 

[SmoochyTX]

It's weird that the press used underscores instead of dashes in the article.

 

[aidanjm]

Why would this lady behave in this way when she is aware of how "high profile" her position is? Why would she suddenly start harrassing people after a distinguished career? It sounds a bit fishy.

In other news, gay marriage is now fully legal in Spain and South Africa. Over 8000 same sex couples have married in Massachucetts, over 12,000 in Canada. The march of progress never stops.

 

[PokerGuy]

Anyhow, there should be no "deal" or "settlement" of any kind. If any of the allegations are true, she should be booted out the door with nothing, and never be allowed to hold a position of authority again. I don't think her sexual preference should be considered at all, it sounds like she's scum and should be held accountable.

Originally posted by: aidanjm
In other news, gay marriage is now fully legal in Spain and South Africa. Over 8000 same sex couples have married in Massachucetts, over 12,000 in Canada. The march of progress never stops.

That's "progress"? Not in my book, sounds like the further spread of sickness.

 

[imported_Mike]

How is this not flame bait? No pun intended.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
it sounds like she's scum and should be held accountable.

then again, maybe the allegations are false. Maybe the employees who are suing see her as an easy target because she is a lesbian (some people will believe all sorts of crazy stories about gay people). I guess we'll have to wait and see what the outcome of the investigation is.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Why would this lady behave in this way when she is aware of how "high profile" her position is? Why would she suddenly start sexually harrassing people after a distinguished career? It sounds a bit fishy.

They might have come forward after being harrassed some time ago

 

[Brutuskend]

Originally posted by: Mike
How is this not flame bait? No pun intended.

It's not meant to be flame bait.

While I was in H/S I was in something called the Jr. Fire Dept. along with my best friend (Black BTW not that THAT makes any difference. Shortly after I joined the Marines, so did he. I never saw him again until I went back to Missouri for my 1972 class reunion in 02. Turns out that after he got out of the service, after holding down a few other jobs for awhile, he ended back "home" and on the local F.D. He was there for YEARS and YEARS, then shortly before I went back, he and several others were kicked out for some initiation prank (not an uncommon thing to do in quite a few organizations like the fire dept.)

All I know for sure is that it involved a "hot dog" and eventually a harassment suit that ended his and a few others careers. No demotion, or any such thing as they are suggesting this person get, just a "You're Fired!"

It's also nice to see the shoe on the other foot for a change as far as sexual harassment suits. Still, it seems if the Perp. is a MAN, it almost ALWAYS goes worse for them than if the Perp. is a woman, gay or not....

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
it sounds like she's scum and should be held accountable.

then again, maybe the allegations are false. Maybe the employees who are suing see her as an easy target because she is a lesbian (some people will believe all sorts of crazy stories about gay people). I guess we'll have to wait and see what the outcome of the investigation is.

True, I don't presume to know if she's actually done anything wrong or not, but based on the story as presented, I think it's highly likely that she's made the wrong choices. The fact that several previous suits were settled for cash tells me there was probably something going on. The fact that she's a lesbian makes her a target for certain folks, and it's innocent until proven guilty. If indeed she's proven to have done these things, she needs to get booted, not paid to leave.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Why would this lady behave in this way when she is aware of how "high profile" her position is? Why would she suddenly start sexually harrassing people after a distinguished career? It sounds a bit fishy.

So... is there some sort of gay newsletter where you're told how to think or are you simply as blind and stupid as the bigots that hate gays?

Could it possibly just be that people in positions of power, regardless of sex, race, religion or orientation, got their position by being forceful people? And that those same people with forceful personalities may exhibit that force in ways other than simply career furtherance?

Aidanjm is like a gay Pat Robertson. "Gays can do no harm! Those straighties are out to get us! Down with straighty!" It seems the denial keeps right on going with you, even after coming out of the closet.

 

[mugs]

You know, you don't have to use the article's headline as your topic title - you could use a less misleading title. The title implies that she is being fired because she is gay, which doesn't appear to have anything to do with it (other than that the people she is accused of sexually harassing are the same sex as her).

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Why would this lady behave in this way when she is aware of how "high profile" her position is? Why would she suddenly start sexually harrassing people after a distinguished career? It sounds a bit fishy.

So... is there some sort of gay newsletter where you're told how to think or are you simply as blind and stupid as the bigots that hate gays?

Could it possibly just be that people in positions of power, regardless of sex, race, religion or orientation, got their position by being forceful people? And that those same people with forceful personalities may exhibit that force in ways other than simply career furtherance?

Aidanjm is like a gay Pat Robertson. "Gays can do no harm! Those straighties are out to get us! Down with straighty!" It seems the denial keeps right on going with you, even after coming out of the closet.

You are completely misrepresenting my comments - I do not say this fire chief is innocent of the charges/ allegations. I am however open to the possibility that she is innocent, and being taken advantage of by a spiteful former partner or under-performing employees with grudges. Seems to me that it is you with the closed mind.

 

[KarenMarie]

Gay, straight... who cares? She can do whatever she wants.

But if she is trying to use the "oh poor me is being picked on because I am gay" crap... she should be punsihed twice as hard.

It is like playing the race card. There is enough racial tension, enough gay/straight tension ... and so on... and ppl who use it to their advantage, just to skate on crap... that REALLY pisses me off.

:|

PPl who think it is ok to 'make up' for what they think is the world's faults by promoting only a certain type of ppl (ppl of color, sexual orientation, religion) and being less than fair to the rest is the WORST kind of bigotry! and it does nothing for their cause but justify those who are against them.

If she is guilty of this, she needs to be punished.... twice as hard.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
PPl who think it is ok to 'make up' for what they think is the world's faults by promoting only a certain type of ppl (ppl of color, sexual orientation, religion) and being less than fair to the rest is the WORST kind of bigotry! and it does nothing for their cause but justify those who are against them.

I think it is OK to promote the people you are able to work best with (given candidates of roughly equal ability). I would probably promote a gay man or a woman over a heterosexual man (all things being equal) because I think I could work better with the gay man or woman than with the heterosexual man. This is what happens in most places of employment anyway. Job fit is always an important consideration, and part of job fit is whether the people managing you are going to like you or get along with you.

The mistake this woman made was working with her partner (or ex-partner). It might be OK when the relationship is fine, but if the relatiopnship ends badly, it is going to contaminate the work environment.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
PPl who think it is ok to 'make up' for what they think is the world's faults by promoting only a certain type of ppl (ppl of color, sexual orientation, religion) and being less than fair to the rest is the WORST kind of bigotry! and it does nothing for their cause but justify those who are against them.

I think it is OK to promote the people you are able to work best with (given candidates of roughly equal ability). I would probably promote a gay man or a woman over a heterosexual man (all things being equal) because I think I could work better with the gay man or woman than with the heterosexual man. This is what happens in most places of employment anyway. Job fit is always an important consideration, and part of job fit is whether the people managing you are going to like you or get along with you.

The mistake this woman made was working with her partner (or ex-partner). It might be OK when the relationship is fine, but if the relatiopnship ends badly, it is going to contaminate the work environment.

That's because you're a bigot.

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
PPl who think it is ok to 'make up' for what they think is the world's faults by promoting only a certain type of ppl (ppl of color, sexual orientation, religion) and being less than fair to the rest is the WORST kind of bigotry! and it does nothing for their cause but justify those who are against them.

I think it is OK to promote the people you are able to work best with (given candidates of roughly equal ability). I would probably promote a gay man or a woman over a heterosexual man (all things being equal) because I think I could work better with the gay man or woman than with the heterosexual man. This is what happens in most places of employment anyway. Job fit is always an important consideration, and part of job fit is whether the people managing you are going to like you or get along with you.

The mistake this woman made was working with her partner (or ex-partner). It might be OK when the relationship is fine, but if the relatiopnship ends badly, it is going to contaminate the work environment.

If anyone hires/promotes someone because they are gay...just because you get along with them better.. then they are no better than the racist/KKK guy who will promote/hire the white guy because that is what he gets along with best.

All things being equal should mean that color and sexual orientation should NOT come into it as a factor at all.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
PPl who think it is ok to 'make up' for what they think is the world's faults by promoting only a certain type of ppl (ppl of color, sexual orientation, religion) and being less than fair to the rest is the WORST kind of bigotry! and it does nothing for their cause but justify those who are against them.

I think it is OK to promote the people you are able to work best with (given candidates of roughly equal ability). I would probably promote a gay man or a woman over a heterosexual man (all things being equal) because I think I could work better with the gay man or woman than with the heterosexual man. This is what happens in most places of employment anyway. Job fit is always an important consideration, and part of job fit is whether the people managing you are going to like you or get along with you.

The mistake this woman made was working with her partner (or ex-partner). It might be OK when the relationship is fine, but if the relatiopnship ends badly, it is going to contaminate the work environment.

That's because you're a bigot.

the simple fact is that women and men are different in some ways, and gay men and straight men are also different in some ways. I find it is less of a hassle relating to gay males. I don't have to put on a butch act or do all the other things that straight men do in order to be respected. It's got nothing to do with bigotry on my part. It's more about a lack of patience with the macho schtick that so many heterosexual men adopt.

 

[PrinceofWands]

If she did something wrong (harrassment, etc) then she should be canned. If it's just gay bashing then those responsible should be raped by horses until dead.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
PPl who think it is ok to 'make up' for what they think is the world's faults by promoting only a certain type of ppl (ppl of color, sexual orientation, religion) and being less than fair to the rest is the WORST kind of bigotry! and it does nothing for their cause but justify those who are against them.

I think it is OK to promote the people you are able to work best with (given candidates of roughly equal ability). I would probably promote a gay man or a woman over a heterosexual man (all things being equal) because I think I could work better with the gay man or woman than with the heterosexual man. This is what happens in most places of employment anyway. Job fit is always an important consideration, and part of job fit is whether the people managing you are going to like you or get along with you.

The mistake this woman made was working with her partner (or ex-partner). It might be OK when the relationship is fine, but if the relatiopnship ends badly, it is going to contaminate the work environment.

If anyone hires/promotes someone because they are gay...just because you get along with them better.. then they are no better than the racist/KKK guy who will promote/hire the white guy because that is what he gets along with best.

All things being equal should mean that color and sexual orientation should NOT come into it as a factor at all.

if you have to choose between two job applicants who are equally qualified on paper (which is what I mean by "all things being equal") then OF COURSE you are going to choose the person you get along with best. To not do so would be lunacy. Poor relationships with work colleagues means your life is unpleasant for a good majority of your waking hours.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
PPl who think it is ok to 'make up' for what they think is the world's faults by promoting only a certain type of ppl (ppl of color, sexual orientation, religion) and being less than fair to the rest is the WORST kind of bigotry! and it does nothing for their cause but justify those who are against them.

I think it is OK to promote the people you are able to work best with (given candidates of roughly equal ability). I would probably promote a gay man or a woman over a heterosexual man (all things being equal) because I think I could work better with the gay man or woman than with the heterosexual man. This is what happens in most places of employment anyway. Job fit is always an important consideration, and part of job fit is whether the people managing you are going to like you or get along with you.

The mistake this woman made was working with her partner (or ex-partner). It might be OK when the relationship is fine, but if the relatiopnship ends badly, it is going to contaminate the work environment.

That's because you're a bigot.

the simple fact is that women and men are different in some ways, and gay men and straight men are also different in some ways. I find it is less of a hassle relating to gay males. I don't have to put on a butch act or do all the other things that straight men do in order to be respected. It's got nothing to do with bigotry on my part. It's more about a lack of patience with the macho schtick that so many heterosexual men adopt.

No, you're a bigot, and nobody else should be punished for a problem you have. Nobody I work with is at all like me. They're all 20+ years older than me. Some are women, some are black or latino, some are asian, some may be gay. I manage to work with all of them without issues.

 

[zoiks]

Gay people suck. When they're mean that is.

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
PPl who think it is ok to 'make up' for what they think is the world's faults by promoting only a certain type of ppl (ppl of color, sexual orientation, religion) and being less than fair to the rest is the WORST kind of bigotry! and it does nothing for their cause but justify those who are against them.

I think it is OK to promote the people you are able to work best with (given candidates of roughly equal ability). I would probably promote a gay man or a woman over a heterosexual man (all things being equal) because I think I could work better with the gay man or woman than with the heterosexual man. This is what happens in most places of employment anyway. Job fit is always an important consideration, and part of job fit is whether the people managing you are going to like you or get along with you.

The mistake this woman made was working with her partner (or ex-partner). It might be OK when the relationship is fine, but if the relatiopnship ends badly, it is going to contaminate the work environment.

That's because you're a bigot.

the simple fact is that women and men are different in some ways, and gay men and straight men are also different in some ways. I find it is less of a hassle relating to gay males. I don't have to put on a butch act or do all the other things that straight men do in order to be respected. It's got nothing to do with bigotry on my part. It's more about a lack of patience with the macho schtick that so many heterosexual men adopt.

Well, straight men who are all masculine and stuff don't get relate to gays well.... so by your logic... all things being equal... they will only hire straight men, cause they get along better with them.

that flies in the face of everything that the gay movement is saying. what they are shouting is that they are here to stay, like it or lump it, and anyone who doesnt like it needs to move over.

then you say that you would do the very thing that the gay movement bitches against.

i just dont get it.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
PPl who think it is ok to 'make up' for what they think is the world's faults by promoting only a certain type of ppl (ppl of color, sexual orientation, religion) and being less than fair to the rest is the WORST kind of bigotry! and it does nothing for their cause but justify those who are against them.

I think it is OK to promote the people you are able to work best with (given candidates of roughly equal ability). I would probably promote a gay man or a woman over a heterosexual man (all things being equal) because I think I could work better with the gay man or woman than with the heterosexual man. This is what happens in most places of employment anyway. Job fit is always an important consideration, and part of job fit is whether the people managing you are going to like you or get along with you.

The mistake this woman made was working with her partner (or ex-partner). It might be OK when the relationship is fine, but if the relatiopnship ends badly, it is going to contaminate the work environment.

That's because you're a bigot.

the simple fact is that women and men are different in some ways, and gay men and straight men are also different in some ways. I find it is less of a hassle relating to gay males. I don't have to put on a butch act or do all the other things that straight men do in order to be respected. It's got nothing to do with bigotry on my part. It's more about a lack of patience with the macho schtick that so many heterosexual men adopt.

No, you're a bigot, and nobody else should be punished for a problem you have. Nobody I work with is at all like me. They're all 20+ years older than me. Some are women, some are black or latino, some are asian, some may be gay. I manage to work with all of them without issues.

I wonder why this supposed bigotry of mine is such a problem for you.

Practically every post you make in response to me contains an accusation of bigotry. Who exactly do you think I am bigoted towards? How does this bigotry manifest itself, do you think? Would it make you feel better if I announce to the world than I hold bigoted views?