Iowa Boss Fires Worker For Being "Too Attractive"

[preachinjesus]

I am a proponent of "right to work" laws and find the coercive tactics unions where they guard jobs of underperforming or bad employees as troubling. However, in this situation the employee apparently was exemplary and had a track record of consistent work. While the employer does, and should, have to the right to release employees in this instance he seems to be setting himself up for a pretty expensive harassment lawsuit.

If the court brief and reporting documents are accurate he said some things to her that should never be said, even in jest. This kind of behavior is inexcusable and unChristian.

If he fires her it better be for an actual job related issue and not his personal failings. Otherwise he should have given her plenty of severance and a good reference. If she desires to sue him for harassment she will probably win a good settlement.

Though I don't live in this community, if I did you better believe I wouldn't frequent this business.

 

[Baptist Believer]

You quoted me:
3) "You just have to want to avoid lust. If that is your intent, you will receive assistance from God to avoid it."

If that was the case Christians would have no sin problems - but the Devils main job is to work on our weakness.

Frankly, most people don't want to avoid sin - even Christians.

Furthermore, most churches don't actually teach people how to trust God and cooperate with the Spirit in personal transformation. Mainstream churches (including and especially most Baptist churches) have reduced the gospel to the minimum standards by which you can be assured of going to heaven when you die - that's a massive distortion of the message of Jesus and the New Testament writers.

Jesus taught the availability of the Kingdom of the Heavens/God (that is, the rule of God) to all people who are willing to receive it. When we place ourselves under the rule of God and resign managing our personal kingdoms according to our selfish desires and instead manage our personal kingdoms under the authority and guidance of God, we are transformed, bit by bit, so that desire to sin is eventually no longer our first and natural response to temptation. We can look at things from a sane and godly perspective and realize that to indulge in sin is incredibly destructive. This side of the grave/new creation, we will not achieve moral perfection, but we can make enormous progress in that direction by cooperating with the Spirit of God and training in righteousness through simple and time-tested methods and actions.

Do you really think that God is not interested in helping us change from naturally lustful people to people who value and respect each other as people made in the image of God - not just objectify someone else for their physical attributes?

 

[Scarlett O.]

I understand that in Iowa, these types of employee terminations are legal. So the matter of the law was upheld by the all male Iowa Supreme Court. Cased firmly closed.

But what about the matter of ethics and Christian accountability?



I've been reading about this for a few days and here's the gist of what I have read on multiple sites.

• He's old enough to be her father (20 year difference).
• They've worked together for 10 years along with the wife working there too - the wife who apparently saw no problem with the woman's clothing. The wife only insisted on the woman's termination when she found her husband was texting vulgar things to the employee.
• According to fired employee, she always wore scrubs.
• According to dentist, she did not respond to his vulgar texts messages.
• According to his attorney, Mrs. Nelson did "nothing wrong".
• According to the Iowa Supreme Court, Mrs. Nelson "did not act in a flirtatious manner nor did she do anything wrong."
• According to the husband of Mrs. Nelson - the dentist said that "he was afraid that HE would initiate an affair".

Mrs. Nelson has sued for gender discrimination and lost. Justice Edward Mansfield of the ISC wrote that no Iowas Civil Rights were violated because the dentist's actions were based on "feeling and emotion and not gender". I don't even know what that means.

I am all for husbands protecting their marriages even to the point of changing jobs, shuffling employees schedules, requesting transfers, but on the surface - and only based on what I've read over the past few days - protecting his marriage doesn't appear to be what he was doing.

He appears to be appeasing a ticked off wife - rightly so ticked off.

And with only 1 month's serverance pay after 10 years of doing nothing wrong - well, something just isn't right here.

The wrong person paid the price for marital protection.

 

[Baptist Believer]

The wrong person paid the price for marital protection.

Frankly my dear Scarlett, don't you know it is always the woman's fault?

If men behave badly, we need to get the women under control because they are clearly causing the problem.

 

[mont974x4]

No one has blamed the woman.

 

[kyredneck]

"He also once allegedly remarked about her infrequent sex life...."

How'd he come about knowing something like that?

[edit to add] Ah, I was finally able to link to the interview, she seems nice enough, don't see anything irresistable about her though. As much attention as this has gotten this probably will be turned into 'a positive' for her.

 

[Arbo]

Does the dentist own the practice, or just work for it?

As I understand Scripture, we are told to flee youthful lusts (II Tim 2:22). There is also the example of Joseph fleeing Potipher's (sp?) wife when tempted by her.

If he simply works for the office, it may have been more honorable to resign, but if he owns the practice it would be pretty hard to flee.

 

[Baptist Believer]

No one has blamed the woman.

Not explicitly, but it is clear that her presence in the office is "the problem."

How could that not be interpreted as blame?

I have known some women who have faced similar issues with unwanted and unsolicited sexual attention from male authority figures in both work and religious settings. What often happens is that the woman - when they do not respond affirmatively to these overtures, find themselves threatened with losing their job or being put into a very difficult position at church.

If they don't believe that she is at least part of the problem, why do they insist on firing her? Why doesn't he work out his issues with her in the office - since everyone claims she has done nothing to encourage or promote this behavior?

 

[Baptist Believer]

As I understand Scripture, we are told to flee youthful lusts (II Tim 2:22).

"Youthful lusts" involves much more than sexual lust. He could enter into a partnership with another dentist and she could work primarily with the other dentist. That way he could manage his exposure to her while he works out his issues.

There is also the example of Joseph fleeing Potipher's (sp?) wife when tempted by her.

But Potipher's wife was the aggressor. That's not the case here.

 

[webdog]

No one has blamed the woman.

So she was just punished for nothing? Makes it even worse. Since the problem is in the Dr's heart, he should have removed himself from the situation by moving out of the city or selling the practice.

 

[StefanM]

It sounds to me like a case of sexual harassment. I believe she could still sue on those grounds.

As for the dentist, because the issue was not the lady's fault, I think he should have given her a much more generous severance package, perhaps even paying her until she could find another position.

 

[Salty]

It sounds to me like a case of sexual harassment. I believe she could still sue on those grounds.

The courts did rule it was not a case of sexual discrimination

 

[Winman]

A thread like this you have to have pics!

The assistant

The dentist and his wife

Carry on :tongue3:

 

[Scarlett O.]

As for the dentist, because the issue was not the lady's fault, I think he should have given her a much more generous severance package, perhaps even paying her until she could find another position.

That's the very least he could do, I agree. He could probably have helped her find gainful employment elsewhere in that same field.

But being fired makes it difficult for others to hire you - or to want to hire you.

 

[Salty]

That's the very least he could do, I agree. He could probably have helped her find gainful employment elsewhere in that same field.

But being fired makes it difficult for others to hire you - or to want to hire you.

But with all the free publicity - how many job offers has she received?

 

[mont974x4]

She will have no shortage of job offers.

 

[Scarlett O.]

Salty, you and mont974x4 have missed the point if you feel that "oh, well, somebody will give her job..."

I'm sure she will get a job because of the publicity. But - are they going to count her 10 years into their retirement plan? I doubt it. She will have to start over seniority wise. 10 years - professionally speaking - down the drain.

Someone will give her a job, but that doesn't take away that dentist's accountability for his actions and his poor, poor judgment. And I'm being as kind as I can.

 

[kyredneck]

Who knows, there could be a book in the making here, maybe even a photo shoot or a movie down the road....
(it'd be a good rumor to start anyway)

 

[Salty]

...I'm sure she will get a job because of the publicity. But - are they going to count her 10 years into their retirement plan? I doubt it. She will have to start over seniority wise. 10 years - professionally speaking - down the drain.

Likewise, suppose a person quits after 10 years on the job - should that former employee be required to help pay for the training of a new employee?

Employment should be at-will -
An employee should plan for his own retirment.

 

[webdog]

A thread like this you have to have pics!

The assistant

The dentist and his wife

Carry on :tongue3:

I wonder if the doctor has ever seen a lamborghini before.