'Sacked' for opposing same-sex marriage

First topic message reminder :

Teenager 'sacked' for opposing same-sex marriage speaks out

The teenager who claims to have been sacked over her Facebook post opposing same-sex marriage has spoken out, saying she did not "expect to lose her job."



Madeline, who has not revealed her last name, said she was sacked as a camerawoman from an entertainment business in Canberra after she put the slogan “it’s okay to vote no," on her Facebook profile picture.

The owner of children's entertainmet company, Madlin Sims, said she fired the staff member for being “homophobic” and she couldn’t have someone working for “posting hate speech online”.

"I definitely wasn't expecting to lose a job over that opinion," Madeline told 7 News.

"I used the one available profile photo filter which says it's ok to vote no," she said referring to her Facebook profile picture.

"My views are against the [same sex] marriage, but I don't hate anyone or discriminiate against anyone who believes otherwise."

The 18-year-old said she is considering taking legal action.

On Wednesday, a spokesperson for the Fair Work Ombudsman said they want to interview both Madeline and Ms Sims to "form an assessment as to whether any workplace laws have been breached," The Australian reported.

The spokesperson confirmed they would be attempting to get in contact with both parties, but said the ombudsman would not be able to do much if the teenager was a contract worker.

“To assert that voting 'no' is homophobic as claimed by the employer is demonstrably false and indicative of the unacceptable bullying and name-calling engaged in by the 'yes' campaign," Senator Eric Abetz said.

Opposition leader Bill Shorten said people should not be dismissed from their employment for having different views on marriage equality.

Madeline told Triple J’s Hack that while she believes in equality, she could not vote yes based on her Christian values.

“I have been raised a Christian my whole life and in the bible God clearly states that a man and a man, and a woman and a woman, are not to be together,” she said.

“I love everyone, I'm not a hateful person at all and I do believe everyone should have equality, but to vote yes to me is something I can't do.”


Ms Sims has since posted a statement on Instagram which says: "I have acknowledged my bigotry in this situation. I truly hope that my actions haven't impacted the campaign for equality."

Madeline told The Bolt Report on Tuesday night she did not deserve to lose her job over her opinion on same sex marriage.

“This is a democracy and we were given the options and asked as Australians to vote yes or no and it is my opinion to vote no,” she said.

"I don't think my job should be taken away from me just because I have an opinion that someone disagrees with."

Earlier, Ms Sims had posted in a Facebook post, which has been deleted, that she did not fire Madeline because of her views on marriage equality.

“She was let go because her actions showed she is extremely out and proud about her views on homosexuals,” she posted.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/a/37162958/teen-sacked-for-opposing-marriage-equality-speaks-out/

@Ben

since I havnt specifically defende homophobia, but the principles at work here , I find that offensive.

I thought the left wanted bosses powers curtailed and controlled, and yet here you are handing them absolute power on a plate

all they need say is "your attitude to (whatever) brings the company into disrepute (in their opinion...and not its is ONLY opinion"" and out the door you go....

what you say and do (except for certain specific actions/circumstances) outside of the company should have NO bearing on how the company treats you.

except between the hours contracted, the company should have NO lien on you...they employ you...you didnt marry them

so for instance we have banned far right groups, membership of which is illegal, for that yes, you should be able to be sacked (your a criminal)
BUT

what if a company decided to sack all UKIP supporters/members who revealed themselves on social media?

Lord Foul wrote:since I havnt specifically defende homophobia, but the principles at work here , I find that offensive.

I thought the left wanted bosses powers curtailed and controlled, and yet here you are handing them absolute power on a plate

all they need say is "your attitude to (whatever) brings the company into disrepute (in their opinion...and not its is ONLY opinion"" and out the door you go....

what you say and do (except for certain specific actions/circumstances) outside of the company should have NO bearing on how the company treats you.

except between the hours contracted, the company should have NO lien on you...they employ you...you didnt marry them

so for instance we have banned far right groups, membership of which is illegal, for that yes, you should be able to be sacked (your a criminal)
BUT

what if a company decided to sack all UKIP supporters/members who revealed themselves on social media?

Or Labour supporters.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:since I havnt specifically defende homophobia, but the principles at work here , I find that offensive.

I thought the left wanted bosses powers curtailed and controlled, and yet here you are handing them absolute power on a plate

all they need say is "your attitude to (whatever) brings the company into disrepute (in their opinion...and not its is ONLY opinion"" and out the door you go....

what you say and do (except for certain specific actions/circumstances) outside of the company should have NO bearing on how the company treats you.

except between the hours contracted, the company should have NO lien on you...they employ you...you didnt marry them

so for instance we have banned far right groups, membership of which is illegal, for that yes, you should be able to be sacked (your a criminal)
BUT

what if a company decided to sack all UKIP supporters/members who revealed themselves on social media?

Or Labour supporters.

well quite

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:since I havnt specifically defende homophobia, but the principles at work here , I find that offensive.

I thought the left wanted bosses powers curtailed and controlled, and yet here you are handing them absolute power on a plate

all they need say is "your attitude to (whatever) brings the company into disrepute (in their opinion...and not its is ONLY opinion"" and out the door you go....

what you say and do (except for certain specific actions/circumstances) outside of the company should have NO bearing on how the company treats you.

except between the hours contracted, the company should have NO lien on you...they employ you...you didnt marry them

so for instance we have banned far right groups, membership of which is illegal, for that yes, you should be able to be sacked (your a criminal)
BUT

what if a company decided to sack all UKIP supporters/members who revealed themselves on social media?

Or Labour supporters.

I have repeatedly asked both questions, only I have wished to see Republicans and conservative deported to a fenced-in reserve in Brazil.

The problem is, it would take a government to do the same, not a company.  When it is a government, you are up against the same civil rights (Constitutional) restrictions and prohibitions.

Tommy Monk wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

I've just posted that, ya twonk

Yes I know, you twonk...!!!


I was highlighting that part just in case anyone missed it in your post by 'skim reading' etc...

I see. I'll let you off then.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Thanks, Quill. I was thinking of another way you could characterize what has happened in this case -- would anybody support an employer being forced by the government to retain a bigot on their staff?

I don't think anyone would support the government forcing an employer to retain a black separatist or a member of NAMBLA on their staff -- their freedom of thought be damned.

So what we see here is actually no defense of freedom of thought in general, but rather a defense of homophobia, and coming from people who have expressed homophobic views here well before this thread.

Unless such a person lets it influence their job, they have a right to not be sacked for their views.

it is similar here, you can't be sacked for political view.
with the exception of social media but they have to state it in the employment contract (which most do).


and to address some of LFs points there is a difference in social media in that if you have ever mentioned your employer (even if not in that post) it can be treated as association. all Facebook posts are treated as a single document so if you have ever identified as an employee all you posts are now under the employer's media communication policies.