Fire chief fired after gay comments in book

[Jose Fly]

it does if you're going to assume the complaint came from one of the very few who got a copy of the book

Who actually filed the complaint doesn't change the facts or the reasons why he was suspended and fired.

the same doesn't apply to the chief?

Of course it does. He was suspended and fired for what he did.

 

[rexlunae]

it does if you're going to assume the complaint came from one of the very few who got a copy of the book

Who else could it have come from? People who bought the book through ordinary channels aren't going to know that he was passing it out at work.

I'd bet someone who got a copy of the book at work filed a complaint with the HR department, who then took up a disciplinary action. The original complainant has a right to privacy, and the book speaks for itself.

 

[Jose Fly]

Who else could it have come from? People who bought the book through ordinary channels aren't going to know that he was passing it out at work.

I'd bet someone who got a copy of the book at work filed a complaint with the HR department, who then took up a disciplinary action. The original complainant has a right to privacy, and the book speaks for itself.

We know that the original complaint was filed with the union, which means it had to have come from a member of the union, which means it had to have come from someone working for the City Fire Dept.

 

[Dialogos]

Yes, quite right. He, as a manager and public servant, is not entitled to discriminate against his employees. Distributing the book at work certainly seems to qualify, to me.

In what way were his employees discriminated against?

All the sources I have read said that he had not treated any employees unfairly.

If he'd kept it at church, or at least not brought it to work, he would probably not have been in trouble at work.

I'm sure that if all Christians would just keep our religious expressions for Sunday then all the problems would be solved, and our First Amendment rights would be limited to approx 4 hours per week.

Tell me, as a Christian, if your boss made it known that he thought that Christianity was an unclean perversion, would you feel that he could treat you with respect and fairness? Would you feel that you had to hide your identity from him or risk consequences?

Two thoughts.

I've worked for bosses that were open and honest about their disdain for religion in general and Christianity in particular. I had to learn what people in previous generations learned before they finished high school which is that the world does not revolve around my feelings and that going to work is not about developing my self esteem its about providing for one's self and one's family.

Second, all have said that Cochran was completely fair and treated all of his associates with professional respect.

That's absolutely absurd. Bosses are accountable for what they say to people who work for them,..

Of course they are. But Cochran wasn't addressing any employee specifically, he was exposing what the bible says about homosexuality.

Those who didn't care to know what he thought didn't have to read the book, they didn't even have to accept it the book.

..and those employees have every right to expect to be treated with respect.

They were, pay attention.

ATLANTA (CBS46) - The City of Atlanta's Investigative Report into Chief Kelvin Cochran's book publishing shows that many of his command staff, and firefighters were disgusted with the views expressed in the book Who Told You That You Were Naked.

Atlanta fire chief suspended for book with 'disturbing' LGBT sentiments

City of Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran has been suspended.

This comes after Cochran reportedly published a paperback book with what Mayor Kasim Reed calls "disturbing sentiments about the LGBT community."

The book contained anti-gay language leading the city to open the investigation.

Cochran was fired by Mayor Kasim Reed on Tuesday.

According to the report there was little evidence the chief used his views to discriminate against his employees. The report states, "There is currently no indication that Chief Cochran allowed his religious beliefs to compromise his disciplinary decisions."

Read the full article here

There's nothing privileged about it, and the same principle would apply on any number of other attributes as well.

Baloney. If the chief were a gay man handing out fliers for the gay pride parade, and a Christian protested it would still be the Christian who fell under criticism.

The fact that the chief wouldn't comply with the city's efforts to rehabilitate him left the mayor with no choice.

Rehabilitate him from what?

Hmmm?

Sensitivity training is focused on what an employee does at work, to ensure that they are able to function without necessitating further disciplinary proceedings.

There is no evidence that Cochran wrote the book at work for for work, he didn't teach the material at work, he gave them a gift that they could read at their leisure or not.

It's going to be about how he conducts himself, as a person in a position of authority, on the job.

Which, all reports indicate he did with fairness and respect toward all his subordinates.

If you think that's a communist-style re-education camp, you trivialize the people who were placed into real ones.

It's headed that way.

Bottom line, if he was sent for sensitivity training, it was an attempt by the mayor to save his job. The city is entitled to require it of him, and most public servants, especially ones in managerial positions, are required to take something similar.

As you stated, his was designed to rehabilitate him from something that didn't need rehabilitation.

And when you go, you roll your eyes at it, because 95% of managers aren't stupid enough to do most of the things that are warned against anyway, and you deal with it, because it is making sure that you understand the rights of everyone who you hold power over.

I've been. I took a sensitivity training course on my own dime just to see what it was like.

I was asked to leave because I challenged the instructor on his hypocrisy.

He was making religious claims and then telling everyone that they needed to leave religion out if it.
:chuckle:

I did get my money back though.

 

[resodko]

Of course it does. He was suspended and fired for what he did.

there's no rules about receiving non-job related material?

 

[resodko]

Who else could it have come from? People who bought the book through ordinary channels aren't going to know that he was passing it out at work.

I'd bet someone who got a copy of the book at work filed a complaint with the HR department, who then took up a disciplinary action. The original complainant has a right to privacy, and the book speaks for itself.

but we don't know, so it was wrong for jo to assume


besides, my money's on the complainer being someone outside the small circle of recipients

 

[Jose Fly]

there's no rules about receiving non-job related material?

Not that I'm aware of.

but we don't know, so it was wrong for jo to assume

besides, my money's on the complainer being someone outside the small circle of recipients

Who actually filed the complaint is irrelevant. Whether it was someone he gave the book to, or someone who just heard about it doesn't change the facts of the case or the reasons why Cochran was suspended and then fired.

 

[TracerBullet]

How did he discriminate?

Cochran is a in a government that has pledged not to discriminate, by publishing and distributing his book where he puts gays on the same level as those who abuse children or animals he is saying that discrimination is justifiable.

Would he have been fired if he self published and distributed a book calling blacks perverts and comparing them to child abusers? Yes he would have and rightly so. The same holds true if he made the same sad sick statements about Jews or the handicapped or any other minority.

 

[resodko]

Not that I'm aware of.

well, there should be!

Who actually filed the complaint is irrelevant.

not to me :idunno:

if they weren't involved or affected, they should have minded their own beeswax

 

[resodko]

Cochran is a in a government that has pledged not to discriminate, by publishing and distributing his book where he puts gays on the same level as those who abuse children or animals he is saying that discrimination is justifiable.

so what?


he still didn't (apparently) discriminate

 

[Jose Fly]

if they weren't involved or affected, they should have minded their own beeswax

So if you see a fellow employee being abused by a supervisor, since you were neither involved nor affected, you just ignore it?

The things you fundies will advocate out of your hatred of gays....

 

[resodko]

So if you see a fellow employee being abused by a supervisor ...

:doh:


nobody was being abused

nobody was being discriminated against

 

[TracerBullet]

In what way were his employees discriminated against?

All the sources I have read said that he had not treated any employees unfairly.


I'm sure that if all Christians would just keep our religious expressions for Sunday then all the problems would be solved, and our First Amendment rights would be limited to approx 4 hours per week.

No one is infringing on your right to free speech. You are free to say any hateful, bigoted thing you wish about any minority, however you are not exempt from the consequences of saying those hateful, bigoted things.

Second, all have said that Cochran was completely fair and treated all of his associates with professional respect.

not the gay ones

Of course they are. But Cochran wasn't addressing any employee specifically, he was exposing what the bible says about homosexuality.

And if he were just saying what the bible says about the racial inferiority of black people would that make racist statements a good thing?

Baloney. If the chief were a gay man handing out fliers for the gay pride parade, and a Christian protested it would still be the Christian who fell under criticism.

handing out a gay pride parade flier isn't comparing Christians to pedophiles

Which, all reports indicate he did with fairness and respect toward all his subordinates.

how is stating that an employee is on a par with a child abuser or someone who engages in bestiality respectful?

 

[Jose Fly]

nobody was being abused

nobody was being discriminated against

So we can add "hypotheticals based on what you said" to the list of things you just don't get.

 

[TracerBullet]

:doh:


nobody was being abused

publishing a book that states blacks are perverts and the same as child molesters is abuse to everyone and not just black employees

 

[Angel4Truth]

So if you see a fellow employee being abused by a supervisor, since you were neither involved nor affected, you just ignore it?

Who did he abuse and in what way did he abuse someone?

 

[Dialogos]

We know that the original complaint was filed with the union, which means it had to have come from a member of the union, which means it had to have come from someone working for the City Fire Dept.

BTW,

The NYT disagrees with you.

They think Cochran was fired for the language in the book.

He was fired on Jan. 6 by Atlanta’s mayor, Kasim Reed, for homophobic language in the book, “Who Told You That You Were Naked?”

Is the Times wrong on this?

 

[resodko]

So we can add "hypotheticals based on what you said" to the list of things you just don't get.

it's not a valid hypothetical unless it mirrors the actual case :idunno:

publishing a book that states blacks are perverts and the same as child molesters is abuse to everyone and not just black employees

you realize, of course, that you just went full retard, right?

 

[Jose Fly]

Who did he abuse and in what way did he abuse someone?

Geez....you fundies are something else.

Resodko speculated someone who didn't actually receive Cochran's book filed the complaint, and then stated that such people should just mind their own business, since they were neither affected nor involved.

To demonstrate the absurdity (and selfishness) of that, I took his "if you're not affected or involved" approach and applied it to a situation where someone sees a supervisor abusing another employee, and posed it to resodko.

And just like you, the entire thing went right over his head.

 

[Jose Fly]

BTW,

The NYT disagrees with you.

They think Cochran was fired for the language in the book.


Is the Times wrong on this?

Yes. The City's report is extremely clear. I've posted excerpts from it and stated its conclusions multiple times, so I'm not going to repeat it yet again.