[POLL] Security Guard Fired for Seeing Ghosts

[Amused]

Did a search for ghosts, found nothing related to this. So bite me repost nazis.

Security Guard Fired for Seeing Ghosts

DES MOINES, Iowa (Nov. 10) - A judge ruled that a former security guard who was fired for seeing ghosts cannot be denied unemployment benefits.

According to a court ruling released this week, the former guard's allegation of apparitions does not constitute misconduct.

The issue started on Sept. 11, when Wade Gallegos alerted his supervisor at Neighborhood Patrol of Urbandale that ghosts were haunting a neighborhood he was guarding.

The supervisor arrived at the scene, where Gallegos showed him where the ghosts were still apparently standing.

The supervisor claimed he saw nothing and fired Gallegos five hours later.

The company found no signs of drug use or alcohol.

Neighborhood Patrol challenged Gallegos' application for unemployment benefits, arguing he was guilty of misconduct.

"Such beliefs do render the claimant unfit to act as a security guard," Judge G. Ken Renegar ruled. "The employer cannot have security guards who see ghosts and apparitions and inform the employer, and then the employer sends out the patrol cars."

However, the judge ruled, seeing ghosts is not the type of misconduct that can disqualify Gallegos from receiving benefits.

 

[aidanjm]

Of course he should. However the employer should be taken to task for unfair dismissal.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Of course he should. However the employer should be taken to task for unfair dismissal.

Um, why? And there is no such thing as "unfair dismissal." If an employee can quit for any reason, an employer should be able to fire for any reason.

Unless, of course, you support laws allowing for "unfair quitting" lawsuits.

Anyhow, that's neither here nor there. How effective is a deluded security guard?

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Of course he should. However the employer should be taken to task for unfair dismissal.

Um, why? And there is no such thing as "unfair dismissal." If an employee can quit for any reason, an employer should be able to fire for any reason.

Unless, of course, you support laws allowing for "unfair quitting" lawsuits.

Anyhow, that's neither here nor there. How effective is a deluded security guard?

Yeah, seriously. Security guard seeing ghosts?
What happens if next time it's something worse, and he ends up shooting at *something*?

 

[Pepsei]

even if ghosts exist, he's a security guard.

 

[tami]

what if he is seeing real ghosts? then everyone else is stupid.

/thread

😛

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Of course he should. However the employer should be taken to task for unfair dismissal.

Um, why? And there is no such thing as "unfair dismissal."

In my opinion there are plenty of situations that can reasonably be described as "unfair dismissal".

In general it is "unfair" (unacceptable) in my opinion to fire someone based on skin color/ ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, gender. I'd probably class this as a dismissal based on religious belief. Yes, I do believe that is unacceptable. The company's actions should attract a significant (multi-hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly in the millions) penalty in order to discourage other employees from behaving in a similar disgraceful action.

Originally posted by: Amused
If an employee can quit for any reason, an employer should be able to fire for any reason.

I don't agree with that. Your scenario just doesn't contribute to the kind of stable social fabric we all want.

Originally posted by: Amused
Unless, of course, you support laws allowing for "unfair quitting" lawsuits.

I think we ('society') structure employment legislation in such a way as to promote a certain type of society. Access to stable employeement is pretty much a fundamental requirement in building a healthy, successful life, and in turn promoting a healthy society. I want a society where individuals are not going to be penalized in their access to employment due to things like skin color/ ethnicity, sexual orioentation, & religious belief. I think laws preventing firing based solely on things like ethnicity, religious belief, and sexual orientation are absolutely essential to ensure reasonably equal access to employment. The idea that people could be fired (or never hired) because they are e.g., black is repugnant.

I've never heard of unfair firing laws. Maybe you can explain their purpose for existence, and then I'll let you know if I support them.

Originally posted by: Amused
Anyhow, that's neither here nor there. How effective is a deluded security guard?

Was this guard fired based on incompetence? No he was not. He was fired based on his unconventional religious beliefs pertaining to the afterlife. That is not acceptable in my book. In a decent society, a business would simply not be allowed to behave in that way, imo.