Man Fired For WHO He Married.

[celtic_crippler]

WHO you marry can cost you your job!?!?!? WTF?

Scott, who married Anabela in October, was fired at an emergency meeting Tuesday after the mayor and council members learned the nature of her employment. Scott, the town manager for 15 months, was unanimously voted out, terminated with six months pay.

Story: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/24/earlyshow/main5185751.shtml

 

[Big Don]

He married a prostitute. He is in a very public job and what he does and what his wife does reflects on the town.

 

[blackxpress]

He married a prostitute. He is in a very public job and what he does and what his wife does reflects on the town.

She's a porn actress. Technically speaking, you could say she's a prostitute but the one difference is that prostitution's illegal. There's no law against being a porn actress.

And please explain to me why his wife's occupation reflects on the town. He's a politician, not a priest.

 

[jks9199]

In some cases -- absolutely you can be fired for who you marry.

For example, anyone with a security clearance has to have their prospective spouse checked out, before they marry. Depending on what comes up, they may be advised that if they marry, they lose their clearance. No clearance may well equal no job...

Or if I were to have married into a mob family... My bosses may just have had a problem with that, y'know.

In this case... he probably served at the pleasure of the town counsel/mayor. He displeasured them, he's gone.

 

[Big Don]

She's a porn actress. Technically speaking, you could say she's a prostitute but the one difference is that prostitution's illegal. There's no law against being a porn actress.

And please explain to me why his wife's occupation reflects on the town. He's a politician, not a priest.

EXACTLY! He's a POLITICIAN, you're old enough to know that 90% of politicians are unrepentant whores, marrying someone who gets paid to have sex is just pushing the envelope a little...
Yeah, he makes the other whores (politicians) look bad

 

[celtic_crippler]

She's a porn actress. Technically speaking, you could say she's a prostitute but the one difference is that prostitution's illegal. There's no law against being a porn actress.

And please explain to me why his wife's occupation reflects on the town. He's a politician, not a priest.

Exactly.

More infringement into someone's life where it doesn't belong.

Put it in context:
He's not privy to top secret documents that could jeopardize national security and married to someone who routinely gives donations to Hezbollah. He's a (was) a town manager.

Some occupations "WHO" you marry can matter, but I don't think it does in this case. In this case, I see it as some self-righteous nazi's forcing their morality on a man because of his spouse's occupation.

Show me how being married to her endangers anyone?

The town's reputation? I don't think it's enough. They didn't even know until someone pointed it out to them. And just how did they know? Must've been watching some porn! LOL

EXACTLY! He's a POLITICIAN, you're old enough to know that 90% of politicians are unrepentant whores, marrying someone who gets paid to have sex is just pushing the envelope a little...
Yeah, he makes the other whores (politicians) look bad

Yeah...I guess if he didn't marry her and just kept her "under the table" it would've been more acceptable, right? LOL

 

[Ken Morgan]

He’s not a politician, he’s a manager employed by the city.

Regardless, he should have the right to marry or even associate with whoever he likes. I’ve worked with more then a few people who’s personal lifestyles I disagreed with, and as long as it didn’t affect their work, who cares?

I’d like to see his employment contract. I would be surprised if a law suit didn’t come out of this one.

 

[Frostbite]

Isn't marital status a protected class in the state of Florida? Granted, he wasn't fired because he was married but because of who he married but I expect a lawsuit will be forthcoming.

 

[celtic_crippler]

He’s not a politician, he’s a manager employed by the city.

Regardless, he should have the right to marry or even associate with whoever he likes. I’ve worked with more then a few people who’s personal lifestyles I disagreed with, and as long as it didn’t affect their work, who cares?

I’d like to see his employment contract. I would be surprised if a law suit didn’t come out of this one.

Who cares?

Primarily those that prefer to force everyone to think the same way they do. And if you don't, you're evil and must be destroyed! :snipe2:SINNER!

 

[CoryKS]

Who cares?

Primarily those that prefer to force everyone to think the same way they do. And if you don't, you're evil and must be destroyed! :snipe2:SINNER!

If I had to guess, it's probably primarily those who would rather not see the normalization of the pr0n industry, so as to prevent their daughters from seeing it as a respectable occupational track. Parents are funny like that.

I prefer Ted Danson's Becker character's take on it: "I think when you take the guilt and shame out of sex, it cheapens the act." :rofl:

 

[celtic_crippler]

If I had to guess, it's probably primarily those who would rather not see the normalization of the pr0n industry, so as to prevent their daughters from seeing it as a respectable occupational track. Parents are funny like that.

I prefer Ted Danson's Becker character's take on it: "I think when you take the guilt and shame out of sex, it cheapens the act." :rofl:

I see your point, but I don't necessarily think people look to the town manager as a role model.

And why wouldn't it be a respectable occupation? Perhaps that's another thread...

 

[JDenver]

It may not matter to some of US, but the issue is that it does matter to other people.

I'm a teacher. What I do reflects on my school. They could absolutely fire me if I hung around with a biker gang or married a pornstar or got arrested for theft. It's because I represent the school. I chose the job and the responsibilities.

An 'infringement' on his life? Hardly. More like people need to see that not everyone sees things the way they do.

 

[Ken Morgan]

Town sounds very small, very white, very old and reasonably well off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Myers_Beach,_Florida

And dare I throw some gasoline into the mix??? Probably very Christian.

Regardless, no one has the right to terminate an employee based on the occupation of one spouse.

If I worked in the military on very classified stuff and I married someone who was from another country and was at one time employed by that country’s National security force, I would expect to be transferred, not fired. In fact it would be my duty to request the transfer.

 

[JDenver]

Regardless, no one has the right to terminate an employee based on the occupation of one spouse.

They absolutely do if you take a job that you know carries with it the burden of representing your employer; business, school, municipality.

 

[punisher73]

When you are employed by the gov't (local, state, federal) in any capacity, many of them have a "Code of Conduct" that covers things like this situation. It spells out exactly what behavior is expected and what behavior is not allowed. I would also be willing to bet that he was considered an "at will" employee and can be let go for any reason.


When you go into public service you make certain sacrifices that you don't have to as a regular citizen whether you agree with it or not.

 

[arnisador]

Regardless, no one has the right to terminate an employee based on the occupation of one spouse.

I don't think that's true, though it sounds like a good idea in most cases. Security clearances come to mind, but also, for example, religious colleges with codes of conduct that ban all sorts of things. I can imagine that if this marriage took place and he worked in a small, conservative town then whatever business he worked at could view him as a liability, since their customers are free to act as they wish. If he worked for Joe's Koran Printers Inc. and people stopped ordering from Joe's because of it, what could Joe do? For a small business it could be a matter of survival, even if it's distasteful.

Still, after Carville-Matalin, you'd think we could get beyond this...and I don't like the idea of the govt. firing someone for marrying someone who is legally employed.

 

[celtic_crippler]

It may not matter to some of US, but the issue is that it does matter to other people.

I'm a teacher. What I do reflects on my school. They could absolutely fire me if I hung around with a biker gang or married a pornstar or got arrested for theft. It's because I represent the school. I chose the job and the responsibilities.

An 'infringement' on his life? Hardly. More like people need to see that not everyone sees things the way they do.

When you are employed by the gov't (local, state, federal) in any capacity, many of them have a "Code of Conduct" that covers things like this situation. It spells out exactly what behavior is expected and what behavior is not allowed. I would also be willing to bet that he was considered an "at will" employee and can be let go for any reason.


When you go into public service you make certain sacrifices that you don't have to as a regular citizen whether you agree with it or not.

I don't think that's true, though it sounds like a good idea in most cases. Security clearances come to mind, but also, for example, religious colleges with codes of conduct that ban all sorts of things. I can imagine that if this marriage took place and he worked in a small, conservative town then whatever business he worked at could view him as a liability, since their customers are free to act as they wish. If he worked for Joe's Koran Printers Inc. and people stopped ordering from Joe's because of it, what could Joe do? For a small business it could be a matter of survival, even if it's distasteful.

Still, after Carville-Matalin, you'd think we could get beyond this...and I don't like the idea of the govt. firing someone for marrying someone who is legally employed.

Good points. You guys got me there...I hadn't considered there may have been a "code of conduct" violation.

If he signed something to that effect, then he knew what the consequences might be by marrying a porn star.

I gave some effort to trying to locate the actual code of conduct for Fort Myers employees but couldn't find anything specific. I did find some tid-bits here and there that would lead me to believe that if he indeed signed a code of conduct agreement it would more than likely hold up that he violated it by marrying a porn-star.

I personally don't agree that it's a big deal, but if he signed a code of conduct agreement then he knew there could be negative repercussions from his marriage and therfore accepted that risk.

 

[crushing]

What? Sorry, I was googling "Jazella Moore". Well, at least it wasn't as dirty as googling "NJ Mayors".

 

[RandomPhantom700]

The town's reputation? I don't think it's enough. They didn't even know until someone pointed it out to them. And just how did they know? Must've been watching some porn! LOL

Well, according to the article, the person who originally let the cat out of the bag was an adult film magazine editor, so was kind of part of his job.

Regarding the whole firing thing, Florida is an at-will employment state, which means that, barring discrimination or cases of employment contracts, both the employer and employee can terminate employment for whatever reason. I do not believe (and I'll have to double-check this) that there are any further restrictions on government employment other than free speech, which this doesn't qualify as.

That being said, I do agree that firing him is just a BS excuse for pushing an agenda. He's not the mayor, he's a town manager; his wife being a porn star doesn't tarnish the city's reputation, nor is there really any risk to his job involved. In short, he got fired for not keeping her under the table, which is apparently where the council believes porn stars belong.

 

[MA-Caver]

My thought was ... they fired him because his wife is a porn star... okay well... who are they trying to protect? The kids? I always thought the idea was that kids don't get to see porn films anyway until they're 18 (legally any how) and if they are seeing them YOUNGER than that then the fault lies with the parents for not keeping a better eye on the kids to ensure that they don't see this lady at the Walmart and say "Hey! I know her... even with her clothes on!"
With literally thousands of porn actresses out there and practically 60% of them blonde, big busted... good luck in making a straight away ID of the woman you see in the produce aisle of the supermarket. You'd only recognize her if you've already SEEN her... even in an ad.

Whose fault is it... probably the guy who dug around and said "Oh boys! Lookie what I got here!"