NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/28/city.sexchange.ap/


LARGO, Florida (AP) -- The City Commission voted to begin the process of firing a top official less than a week after he announced plans to pursue a sex-change operation.

The 5-to-2 vote Tuesday started a three-step process to remove City Manager Steve Stanton from the job he's held for 14 years.

Stanton, 48, confirmed last week that he is a transsexual. With a solid reputation as a forceful and energetic leader, he had hoped to keep his $140,000-a-year job as he underwent the gender reassignment process.

"It's just painful to know seven days ago I was a good guy and now ... I have no integrity,"

Doesn't anyone else see this as horribly wrong? That we for some reason cannot accept a competent individual just because they are different from us? A sex change operation should not be grounds for dismissal. This is just another example of simple intolerance.

Doesn't anyone else see this as horribly wrong?I would think pretty much everybody does.
I would even go so far as to say that this thread won't even be trolled very heavily, since it's rather obvious, really.

Doesn't anyone else see this as horribly wrong?

Yes.

Wow... I don't know what to say. That's just ridiculous.

Intolerance is such a bitch.

It is intolerance, plain and simple.

Does anyone have any idea if there is a Human Rights Code in Florida? Or one in the city itself?

This also raises a question for me as to Constitutional protection of transgendered/transsexuals... sexual orientation is protected under the Charter in Canada, but I have no idea about TG/TS. And no offence, but I kind of doubt there is any protection in the US, though I'd be happy to eat my words if someone could prove me wrong

The Florida constitution explicitly has the word "Homosexual" in it when banning same-sex couple adoption. I wouldn't expect much from Florida regarding human rights.

<Devil's Advocate>

Well, gender reallignment is a very long and complicated process. This person could essentially be on and off the operating tables for years, and taking countless months off for recuperation in between. In short, they would not be fulfilling the role that they were hired to fill.

</Devil's Advocate>

<Devil's Advocate>

Well, gender realignment is a very long and complicated process. This person could essentially be on and off the operating tables for years, and taking countless months off for recuperation in between. In short, they would not be fulfilling the role that they were hired to fill.

</Devil's Advocate>

You could say the same thing about a woman who wants to have a job and two or three children. She would be in and out of work for a while because she is caring for the child until her maternity leave is up, then is pregnant again in the future because that was her choice.

Or perhaps if someone fell ill with Cancer, and they had a relapse...

I fail to see how it would be different for someone who wants to have a sex change.

It is intolerance, plain and simple.

Does anyone have any idea if there is a Human Rights Code in Florida? Or one in the city itself?

This also raises a question for me as to Constitutional protection of transgendered/transsexuals... sexual orientation is protected under the Charter in Canada, but I have no idea about TG/TS. And no offence, but I kind of doubt there is any protection in the US, though I'd be happy to eat my words if someone could prove me wrong

It's generally perceived as falling under the broad auspices of the fourteenth amendment.

Its legal, given that the article says the contract enabled firing without any reason at any time. Morally, however, this stinks. Shame on those ignorant bigots who cast the votes:(

How come he/she can't sue them for discrimination?

How come he/she can't sue them for discrimination?

I'd imagine that he (as the individual in question is pre-operative at the moment) could sue.

Are you people insane?! This so-called person is clearly a disgusting freak who should never have been allowed to work there in the first place, let alone be able to complain about being fired! Good riddance, I say.
And if you believe that, I've a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Are you people insane?! This so-called person is clearly a disgusting freak who should never have been allowed to work there in the first place, let alone be able to complain about being fired! Good riddance, I say.
And if you believe that, I've a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

A bridge you say?


To shreds you say?

It is intolerance, plain and simple.

Does anyone have any idea if there is a Human Rights Code in Florida? Or one in the city itself?

This also raises a question for me as to Constitutional protection of transgendered/transsexuals... sexual orientation is protected under the Charter in Canada, but I have no idea about TG/TS. And no offence, but I kind of doubt there is any protection in the US, though I'd be happy to eat my words if someone could prove me wrong

There are no protections in the US in most states. Odds are this asshattery is perfectly legal.

How come he/she can't sue them for discrimination?

Because apparently the contract had a clause in there that he/she can be fired without a reason.

Florida is full of old people nuff said

They don't even pretend to give an actual reason. Of course...

Stanton can appeal the decision, though his contract says he can be fired without cause at any time.
...Means they don't have to.

Who in their right mind signs a contract like that?

They don't even pretend to give an actual reason. Of course...


...Means they don't have to.

Who in their right mind signs a contract like that?

Anybody that gets hired in the world in various industries.

They don't even pretend to give an actual reason. Of course...


...Means they don't have to.

Who in their right mind signs a contract like that?

Most Americans. Lot of jobs you operate under the understanding that you can be fired at any time for any reason or for no reason at all.

Most Americans. Lot of jobs you operate under the understanding that you can be fired at any time for any reason or for no reason at all.

Bloody hell...

Most Americans. Lot of jobs you operate under the understanding that you can be fired at any time for any reason or for no reason at all.

Right, I'm never going to work in America.

It's an old joke of sorts in the U.S. Basically, people used to scam others into thinking they could buy the Brooklyn Bridge, so people eventually started using it as a joking phrase for suckers who'll believe anything. "And if you believe THAT, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell yah!"

So, in other words, I was joking, and used an Americanism to make it apparent. My apologies.

In all seriousness, this kind of thing should be protected under the Fourteenth Amendment. Admittedly the contract said they could fire him for any reason, but I'd rule that kind of contract is unconstitutional, if that argument can be used in this instance.

No, I got it.

A bridge you say?


To shreds you say?

It's an old joke of sorts in the U.S. Basically, people used to scam others into thinking they could buy the Brooklyn Bridge, so people eventually started using it as a joking phrase for suckers who'll believe anything. "And if you believe THAT, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell yah!"

So, in other words, I was joking, and used an Americanism to make it apparent. My apologies.

In all seriousness, this kind of thing should be protected under the Fourteenth Amendment. Admittedly the contract said they could fire him for any reason, but I'd rule that kind of contract is unconstitutional, if that argument can be used in this instance.

Most Americans. Lot of jobs you operate under the understanding that you can be fired at any time for any reason or for no reason at all.

how do they strike?

In any white collar job in the US you earn significantly more than in most of the world and pay significantly less tax with lower living costs than you will find in most of the west.

Not worth signin a contract letting them fire me for no reason at all. I like my rights and would prefer not to sign them away.

Right, I'm never going to work in America.

In any white collar job in the US you earn significantly more than in most of the world and pay significantly less tax with lower living costs than you will find in most of the west.

No, I got it.

Oh, okay.

Interestingly enough, when I worked for Wendy's, I didn't sign that kind of contract. I was told that they had to have a legitimate reason for firing me. (I eventually quit of my own accord though.)

Who in their right mind signs a contract like that?

God only knows....what does Florida employment law say I wonder?

Anybody that gets hired in the world in various industries.

Not really anybody in the world...Germany and the Netherlands have very strict employment laws. I am sure the same is true in France and the Scandinavian countries.

Most Americans. Lot of jobs you operate under the understanding that you can be fired at any time for any reason or for no reason at all.

Pure unfettered capitalism...dontchya lurve it?

Bloody hell...

Post of the day!

Right, I'm never going to work in America.

2nd post of the day!

Seriously, what about being transgendered makes this person any less capable of doing their job? Ignorance and bigotry, pure and simple.

how do they strike?

You get enough workers to band together to make it unfeasible to fire them all. That's how unions work. That's also why American employers love illegals, they won't strike no matter how little you pay them.

It is intolerance, plain and simple.

Does anyone have any idea if there is a Human Rights Code in Florida? Or one in the city itself?

This also raises a question for me as to Constitutional protection of transgendered/transsexuals... sexual orientation is protected under the Charter in Canada, but I have no idea about TG/TS. And no offence, but I kind of doubt there is any protection in the US, though I'd be happy to eat my words if someone could prove me wrong

Not sure if TG/TS is protected as a "sexual orientation" in the US.

Not sure if TG/TS is protected as a "sexual orientation" in the US.

No such animal in the US anyway. Such laws differ by state, and most (~39 as I recall) have none.

I don't think it's right unless the employer can explain a good reason of why a person having a sex change would cause a problem within their line of work.

Also, it's difficult to go for the sexual orientation part because not every person who has a sex change is gay. Although if they are born a man, have a sex change while then being a woman but still liking other women in a sense I suppose it would. I suppose it depends on whether or not you classify a person who changed their sex as their born gender or their new gender.

Not sure if TG/TS is protected as a "sexual orientation" in the US.

Not that it's actually a "sexual orientation" anyway...

how do they strike?

I don't know about other jobs, but teachers in Florida aren't allowed to. So my teachers protested by not coming in until maybe ten minutes before school started and not staying late to do any work after school for a week when they had a dispute. I can't remember what the dispute was exactly about this time, but their contracts weren't very fair and still may not be fair.

I remember reading about this story a week or so ago when it was first announced. I thought they said at first that his decision to get a sex change was supported and that he would keep his job afterwards.:(

No such animal in the US anyway. Such laws differ by state, and most (~39 as I recall) have none.

At least in Federal employment and service, you can't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation - but IIRC, that does not include TG/TS.

Federal employment and service also recognizes only a handful of "races".

The military only recognizes what it calls "established religions". So making up your own religion is out.

He's probably screwed, unless he wants to try a civil suit.

<Devil's Advocate>

Well, gender reallignment is a very long and complicated process. This person could essentially be on and off the operating tables for years, and taking countless months off for recuperation in between. In short, they would not be fulfilling the role that they were hired to fill.

</Devil's Advocate>

And if that were actually the reason being given for this, they might have a point. Of course, people undergo surgery and such all the time and manage to be competent at their jobs, so it wouldn't be a very good point.

At least in Federal employment and service, you can't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation - but IIRC, that does not include TG/TS.

Federal employment and service also recognizes only a handful of "races".

The military only recognizes what it calls "established religions". So making up your own religion is out.

He's probably screwed, unless he wants to try a civil suit.

What do you think about all of this, though? The recognizing of only a handful of "races," "established religions," and all that. I ask because I am curious. For me, it's all bullshit. Transgendered people should be protected like everyone else. All ethnicites should be recognized, and the military should also recognize that everyone has the right to their own religious beliefs--or none at all, should they choose, and should respect them accordingly.

Most Americans. Lot of jobs you operate under the understanding that you can be fired at any time for any reason or for no reason at all.

Although, interestingly enough, if that "reason" involves ethnicity, religion, or biological sex, it is still illegal - contract or no. In many states, this same rule applies to sexual orientation, although only a few have any protections for transgendered individuals.

The funny thing is that, without a direct statement of such, it can be very difficult to prove that you've been fired for any of these reasons - as the company doesn't have to give a reason at all. But if they're stupid enough to come right out and say it....

I don't know about other jobs, but teachers in Florida aren't allowed to. So my teachers protested by not coming in until maybe ten minutes before school started and not staying late to do any work after school for a week when they had a dispute. I can't remember what the dispute was exactly about this time, but their contracts weren't very fair and still may not be fair.

I remember reading about this story a week or so ago when it was first announced. I thought they said at first that his decision to get a sex change was supported and that he would keep his job afterwards.:(

That's a work-to-rule. Irish Nurses are going on one next week I think. The idea is that the workers do only what they're required to do and absolutely no more. Our teachers did it too, they weren't getting paid to supervise us for free classes or during break times, so they didn't.

I cant see this holding up in courts. He should challenge the decision on the grounds of harassment. If he loses the case, there may indeed be some call for people being removed from positions of power, but it shouldn't be him.

Not worth signin a contract letting them fire me for no reason at all. I like my rights and would prefer not to sign them away.

In many states, that is the standard. According to the state, a person can be fired without any reason or any notice. Said person technically can also quite a job for any reason and without any notice, but the employer can basically then refuse to refer them or give them a poor referral, which will block their further employment.

So called "right-to-work" states (IIRC) essentially give all power to the employer.

What do you think about all of this, though? The recognizing of only a handful of "races," "established religions," and all that. I ask because I am curious. For me, it's all bullshit. Transgendered people should be protected like everyone else. All ethnicites should be recognized, and the military should also recognize that everyone has the right to their own religious beliefs--or none at all, should they choose, and should respect them accordingly.

It's bullshit. There has been slight movement - during the last census, you could self-describe your "race", or your perception of the mix thereof.

It's about as silly as the German government's laws on what you can name your child - you have to get permission to use a "good" name.

If someone was a male model, and on contract to a company that wanted him to wear men's clothes, and he refused to wear the clothes because he wanted to wear dresses during the photo shoots, I could see firing him. Or not hiring him in the first place.

But, his social and sexual proclivities have nothing to do with government work. So it's wrong to fire him.

I don't think it's right unless the employer can explain a good reason of why a person having a sex change would cause a problem within their line of work.

Also, it's difficult to go for the sexual orientation part because not every person who has a sex change is gay. Although if they are born a man, have a sex change while then being a woman but still liking other women in a sense I suppose it would. I suppose it depends on whether or not you classify a person who changed their sex as their born gender or their new gender.

Well that's the thing, you know, a persons orientation really has nothing to do with their gender beyond the labels we give said orientations. Actually, I vaguely remember reading a study that claimed the majority of MTF transsexuals were attracted to women.

The real outrage is that the manager of some pissant town in florida makes nearly as much as the Mayor of NYC.

No wonder people bitch about property taxes exploding down there.

Are you people insane?! This so-called person is clearly a disgusting freak who should never have been allowed to work there in the first place, let alone be able to complain about being fired! Good riddance, I say.
And if you believe that, I've a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

You, sir, are speaking gibberish.

EDIT: Damn, you're good.

That's a work-to-rule. Irish Nurses are going on one next week I think. The idea is that the workers do only what they're required to do and absolutely no more. Our teachers did it too, they weren't getting paid to supervise us for free classes or during break times, so they didn't.

Yeah, that's what they called it. I remember that last year they were teaching an extra class than what their contracts said on Mondays (due to the way our schedules worked) and were not getting paid for it. I think it was something different recently, though, but probably something somewhat similar.