OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 31, 2014, 02:34:11 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Dentist Who Fired Attractive Assistant to Prevent Adultery Did Not Discriminate  (Read 1755 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,413


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« on: January 04, 2013, 09:35:52 AM »

Quote
The Iowa State Supreme Court ruled last week that a male dentist who fired his attractive female assistant did not discriminate against her or violate the state's civil rights law.

James Knight, a dentist in Fort Dodge, Iowa, fired dental assistant Melissa Nelson after he and his wife became worried that, in response to Nelson's attractiveness, Knight was "getting too personally attached to her" and "feared he would try to have an affair with her down the road." Nelson filed suit, alleging that Knight had discriminated against her on the basis of her gender and arguing that her situation arose only because of her gender.

However, the all-male state Supreme Court voted 7-0 in Knight's favor, finding that Knight did not violate the Iowa Civil Rights Act, which ensures equal treatment for employees regardless of their gender.
Uh, not to sure about this one. Roll Eyes
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,197


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2013, 09:50:31 AM »

Oh, for a decent workers' union, to rip the good doctor a new one... Roll Eyes
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,211


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2013, 10:07:35 AM »

Better to be discriminating than to be adulterous.



Selam
Logged

"If you stop to throw stones at every dog that barks at you along the way, you will never reach your goal." [Turkish Proverb]
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,539


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2013, 10:16:12 AM »

If she was so "dangerously" attractive, then why did the dentist choose to employ her in the first place?
Logged
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,197


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #4 on: January 04, 2013, 10:17:41 AM »

If she was so "dangerously" attractive, then why did the dentist choose to employ her in the first place?

For several years, to boot.

Better to be discriminating than to be adulterous.

So depriving your employee of their livelihood because you can't control your hormones is okay? Nice.

Supreme Court, at least, should have manned up and admitted that it was discrimination.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2013, 10:18:13 AM by Arachne » Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Faith: Agnostic
Posts: 29,564



« Reply #5 on: January 04, 2013, 10:26:25 AM »

Not that I agree with what happened, but technically I think the decision by the court was correct in that it wasn't discrimination based on gender. The court can't find for the woman just because she was wronged, she had to be wronged for a certain reason or in a certain way. The court of public opinion will also have it's day in judgment, however, and we shall see...
« Last Edit: January 04, 2013, 10:27:21 AM by Asteriktos » Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,211


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 04, 2013, 10:27:42 AM »

If she was so "dangerously" attractive, then why did the dentist choose to employ her in the first place?

For several years, to boot.

Better to be discriminating than to be adulterous.

So depriving your employee of their livelihood because you can't control your hormones is okay? Nice.

Supreme Court, at least, should have manned up and admitted that it was discrimination.

Discriminating or adulterous? Who cares what the world thinks or does?



Selam
Logged

"If you stop to throw stones at every dog that barks at you along the way, you will never reach your goal." [Turkish Proverb]
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,197


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #7 on: January 04, 2013, 10:32:41 AM »

Discriminating or adulterous? Who cares what the world thinks or does?

I don't know how you view work relationships over there, but here employers are bound by an antiquated notion called 'duty of care' towards their employees. Which means you work things out with them, rather than kick them to the curb. (One month's pay as severance? Ridiculous.)

If the shoe was on the other foot, and a female boss fired a male employee for the same reason, she would be branded a slut for the rest of her life.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,539


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #8 on: January 04, 2013, 10:33:59 AM »

I'm with Arachne on this one. I can think of no other occupation where a (usually) young woman works at such close proximity to a (usually) older man. Perhaps theater nurses and surgeons would be comparable. Yet this proximity is no excuse whatsoever for impropriety.

I remember my own (in practice for more than 40 years, and a true gentleman) dentist once telling me: Dentistry is the only profession where a fifty-something man can lock knees with a twenty-something woman, under the head of a total stranger, and not get arrested.  Shocked laugh laugh
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,671



« Reply #9 on: January 04, 2013, 10:42:41 AM »

If she was so "dangerously" attractive, then why did the dentist choose to employ her in the first place?

For several years, to boot.

Better to be discriminating than to be adulterous.

So depriving your employee of their livelihood because you can't control your hormones is okay? Nice.

Supreme Court, at least, should have manned up and admitted that it was discrimination.

Discriminating or adulterous? Who cares what the world thinks or does?



Selam

Better to discriminate than be inefficient...

Either way, it's a right to work state.  That's what this is about.  A company can fire someone for any reason or no reason at all.  The dentist is a verifiable dong, but what he did was legal.  He should have just used tact and said that "her services were no longer required."  Then this would be a non-issue.
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,671



« Reply #10 on: January 04, 2013, 10:44:18 AM »

Discriminating or adulterous? Who cares what the world thinks or does?

I don't know how you view work relationships over there, but here employers are bound by an antiquated notion called 'duty of care' towards their employees. Which means you work things out with them, rather than kick them to the curb. (One month's pay as severance? Ridiculous.)

If the shoe was on the other foot, and a female boss fired a male employee for the same reason, she would be branded a slut for the rest of her life.

Don't worry, once the feminazi's get a hold of him he's probably off to Auschwitz. 
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,929


"My god is greater."


« Reply #11 on: January 04, 2013, 10:46:58 AM »

If she was so "dangerously" attractive, then why did the dentist choose to employ her in the first place?

For several years, to boot.

Better to be discriminating than to be adulterous.

So depriving your employee of their livelihood because you can't control your hormones is okay? Nice.

Supreme Court, at least, should have manned up and admitted that it was discrimination.

Discriminating or adulterous?

As if those are the only options. To imply that not firing her would have inevitably resulted in adultery is just plain stupid.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,197


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #12 on: January 04, 2013, 10:50:01 AM »

Don't worry, once the feminazi's get a hold of him he's probably off to Auschwitz.

I wonder if his new (female) assistant is a Rosa Klebb lookalike...

Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,539


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #13 on: January 04, 2013, 10:51:11 AM »

Quote
To imply that not firing her would have inevitably resulted in adultery is just plain stupid.

Indeed. It would also be proof that this man's brain was not between his ears.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,486



« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2013, 11:10:19 AM »

If she was so "dangerously" attractive, then why did the dentist choose to employ her in the first place?

For several years, to boot.

Better to be discriminating than to be adulterous.

So depriving your employee of their livelihood because you can't control your hormones is okay? Nice.

Supreme Court, at least, should have manned up and admitted that it was discrimination.

Discriminating or adulterous? Who cares what the world thinks or does?



Selam

Do you work?
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,486



« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2013, 11:11:12 AM »

If she was so "dangerously" attractive, then why did the dentist choose to employ her in the first place?

For several years, to boot.

Better to be discriminating than to be adulterous.

So depriving your employee of their livelihood because you can't control your hormones is okay? Nice.

Supreme Court, at least, should have manned up and admitted that it was discrimination.

Discriminating or adulterous? Who cares what the world thinks or does?



Selam

Better to discriminate than be inefficient...

Either way, it's a right to work state.  That's what this is about.  A company can fire someone for any reason or no reason at all.  The dentist is a verifiable dong, but what he did was legal.  He should have just used tact and said that "her services were no longer required."  Then this would be a non-issue.

LOL @ right to work.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,671



« Reply #16 on: January 04, 2013, 11:28:31 AM »

If she was so "dangerously" attractive, then why did the dentist choose to employ her in the first place?

For several years, to boot.

Better to be discriminating than to be adulterous.

So depriving your employee of their livelihood because you can't control your hormones is okay? Nice.

Supreme Court, at least, should have manned up and admitted that it was discrimination.

Discriminating or adulterous? Who cares what the world thinks or does?



Selam

Better to discriminate than be inefficient...

Either way, it's a right to work state.  That's what this is about.  A company can fire someone for any reason or no reason at all.  The dentist is a verifiable dong, but what he did was legal.  He should have just used tact and said that "her services were no longer required."  Then this would be a non-issue.

LOL @ right to work.

I'm lolling too, though I assure you it's mirthless.

One positive side, since an employee can also quit for any reason or without reason or notice, it technically makes indentured servitude all the harder...
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,671



« Reply #17 on: January 04, 2013, 11:28:59 AM »

Don't worry, once the feminazi's get a hold of him he's probably off to Auschwitz.

I wonder if his new (female) assistant is a Rosa Klebb lookalike...



No.  Rosie O'Donnell. 
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,944


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #18 on: January 04, 2013, 11:33:04 AM »

One assumption I see made throughout this thread is that Dr. Knight's assistant was just as attractive at the end of her employment as she was at the beginning and that he therefore should never have hired her in the first place if he thought she was so attractive. The one problem with this assumption, though, is that Dr. Knight's assistant may very easily have started her employment dressing more modestly, only to dress in an increasingly revealing manner as she continued working for him. If this is true, then this becomes more of a workplace behavior problem in my estimation. If this is true, then the question we should really be asking is if Dr. Knight was right to fire his assistant for dressing in a manner he and his wife deemed increasingly inappropriate for their work environment.
Logged
Tallitot
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jewish
Jurisdiction: United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism
Posts: 2,590



WWW
« Reply #19 on: January 04, 2013, 11:34:36 AM »

maybe heterosexuals shouldn't be employers if they can't leave their sexuality at home. laugh
Logged

Proverbs 22:7
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,413


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #20 on: January 04, 2013, 11:35:59 AM »

Dr. Knight's assistant may very easily have started her employment dressing more modestly, only to dress in an increasingly revealing manner as she continued working for him.
If she was, why not simply ask her to dress more appropriately?
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,467


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #21 on: January 04, 2013, 11:43:09 AM »

maybe heterosexuals shouldn't be employers if they can't leave their sexuality at home. laugh

One of the saner posts in this thread.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,467


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #22 on: January 04, 2013, 11:44:07 AM »

Dr. Knight's assistant may very easily have started her employment dressing more modestly, only to dress in an increasingly revealing manner as she continued working for him.
If she was, why not simply ask her to dress more appropriately?

Indeed, if he did not, he doesn't have a pot to pee in under Federal anti-discrimination laws. 

Also, regarding "right to work" states, they still have to comply with Federal anti-discrimination laws. 
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,944


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #23 on: January 04, 2013, 11:44:36 AM »

Dr. Knight's assistant may very easily have started her employment dressing more modestly, only to dress in an increasingly revealing manner as she continued working for him.
If she was, why not simply ask her to dress more appropriately?
Do we know enough about this case to say that he didn't?
Logged
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,197


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #24 on: January 04, 2013, 11:46:34 AM »

Dr. Knight's assistant may very easily have started her employment dressing more modestly, only to dress in an increasingly revealing manner as she continued working for him.
If she was, why not simply ask her to dress more appropriately?
Do we know enough about this case to say that he didn't?

How 'revealing' can a lab coat get? Or don't doctors and nurses bother with professional attire over there?
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,944


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #25 on: January 04, 2013, 11:47:31 AM »

Dr. Knight's assistant may very easily have started her employment dressing more modestly, only to dress in an increasingly revealing manner as she continued working for him.
If she was, why not simply ask her to dress more appropriately?
Do we know enough about this case to say that he didn't?

How 'revealing' can a lab coat get? Or don't doctors and nurses bother with professional attire over there?
Do you know what dental assistants wear over here? Do you know specifically what Melissa Nelson would wear to work before Dr. Knight fired her?
« Last Edit: January 04, 2013, 11:48:36 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,413


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #26 on: January 04, 2013, 11:49:38 AM »

Dr. Knight's assistant may very easily have started her employment dressing more modestly, only to dress in an increasingly revealing manner as she continued working for him.
If she was, why not simply ask her to dress more appropriately?
Do we know enough about this case to say that he didn't?
He did complain to her about her clothing, and according to the court records, she put on a lab coat whenever he asked her to cover up what he considered to be clothing too revealing:

Quote
Nelson recalls that Dr. Knight said her clothing was too “distracting” and that he “may have” asked her to put on her lab coat. In any event, she testified that she put on a coat whenever Dr. Knight complained to her about her clothing.

Additional information about Dr. Knight's wife:

Quote
In late 2009, Dr. Knight took his children to Colorado for Christmas vacation. Dr. Knight’s wife Jeanne, who was also an employee in the dental practice, stayed home. Jeanne Knight found out that her husband and Nelson were texting each other during that time. When Dr. Knight returned home, Jeanne Knight confronted her husband and demanded that he terminate Nelson’s employment. Both of them consulted with the senior pastor of their church, who agreed with the decision.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2013, 11:52:00 AM by Jetavan » Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,197


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #27 on: January 04, 2013, 12:01:54 PM »

Do you know what dental assistants wear over here? Do you know specifically what Melissa Nelson would wear to work before Dr. Knight fired her?

I don't, and that's why I asked. I wasn't being snarky, nor rhetorical. UK society is very uniform-oriented and no medical personnel that I've come in contact with was ever in 'civilian' clothing.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2013, 12:02:23 PM by Arachne » Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,671



« Reply #28 on: January 04, 2013, 12:22:31 PM »

Do you know what dental assistants wear over here? Do you know specifically what Melissa Nelson would wear to work before Dr. Knight fired her?

I don't, and that's why I asked. I wasn't being snarky, nor rhetorical. UK society is very uniform-oriented and no medical personnel that I've come in contact with was ever in 'civilian' clothing.

I've seen a dental assistant or two in my time that were solid 7's or 8's, even in scrubs.  There was this one...oh she was dreamy.  I had to stop going to that dentist because her beauty caused my mind to stray.  She'd say, "you really need to start flossing more" but all I'd hear "I want to marry you and have your legitimate children".  I just couldn't take it anymore and had to stop going.

Other minor concerns were that the dentist tried to drill to China when dealing with a cavity.  It really hurt.

Oh, and I haven't had a raise since 2009 so I had to choose between going to the dentist and drinking and made my choice after careful consideration.
Logged
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,904



WWW
« Reply #29 on: January 04, 2013, 12:30:31 PM »


Additional information about Dr. Knight's wife:

Quote
In late 2009, Dr. Knight took his children to Colorado for Christmas vacation. Dr. Knight’s wife Jeanne, who was also an employee in the dental practice, stayed home. Jeanne Knight found out that her husband and Nelson were texting each other during that time. When Dr. Knight returned home, Jeanne Knight confronted her husband and demanded that he terminate Nelson’s employment. Both of them consulted with the senior pastor of their church, who agreed with the decision.

The texting shows too great an interest in an employee.  Unless they were texting about work, schedules, etc...  However, since wifey was in a tizzy and hubby agreed that he shouldn't be doing it, one assumes the texts were "inappropriate" - whatever that means.

So, one might deduce that they were already forming something more than a mere work relationship.

Having said that, he may have explained it to her, given her a letter of recommendation and helped her find new employment....in order to save both of them from an indiscretion. 

However, firing, or not hiring, a woman (or man) because the employer "might" get interested in them in the future is ludicrous!  Seriously, can there not be a work relationship between a man and a woman that doesn't go south?  Can't both parties control themselves?

I'm not a "femi-nazi" by any stretch of the imagination....however, this particular judgment....that she was too pretty....just stings...because I get flashes of women having to wear burkas in order not to excite males anywhere within a mile from them. 



Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Faith: Agnostic
Posts: 29,564



« Reply #30 on: January 04, 2013, 12:45:01 PM »

Do you know what dental assistants wear over here? Do you know specifically what Melissa Nelson would wear to work before Dr. Knight fired her?

I don't, and that's why I asked. I wasn't being snarky, nor rhetorical. UK society is very uniform-oriented and no medical personnel that I've come in contact with was ever in 'civilian' clothing.

I've seen a dental assistant or two in my time that were solid 7's or 8's, even in scrubs.  There was this one...oh she was dreamy.  I had to stop going to that dentist because her beauty caused my mind to stray.  She'd say, "you really need to start flossing more" but all I'd hear "I want to marry you and have your legitimate children".  I just couldn't take it anymore and had to stop going.

Other minor concerns were that the dentist tried to drill to China when dealing with a cavity.  It really hurt.

Oh, and I haven't had a raise since 2009 so I had to choose between going to the dentist and drinking and made my choice after careful consideration.

You made the right decision!  Cool
« Last Edit: January 04, 2013, 12:45:23 PM by Asteriktos » Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,467


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #31 on: January 04, 2013, 01:24:06 PM »


Additional information about Dr. Knight's wife:

Quote
In late 2009, Dr. Knight took his children to Colorado for Christmas vacation. Dr. Knight’s wife Jeanne, who was also an employee in the dental practice, stayed home. Jeanne Knight found out that her husband and Nelson were texting each other during that time. When Dr. Knight returned home, Jeanne Knight confronted her husband and demanded that he terminate Nelson’s employment. Both of them consulted with the senior pastor of their church, who agreed with the decision.

The texting shows too great an interest in an employee.  Unless they were texting about work, schedules, etc...  However, since wifey was in a tizzy and hubby agreed that he shouldn't be doing it, one assumes the texts were "inappropriate" - whatever that means.

So, one might deduce that they were already forming something more than a mere work relationship.

Having said that, he may have explained it to her, given her a letter of recommendation and helped her find new employment....in order to save both of them from an indiscretion. 

However, firing, or not hiring, a woman (or man) because the employer "might" get interested in them in the future is ludicrous!  Seriously, can there not be a work relationship between a man and a woman that doesn't go south?  Can't both parties control themselves?

I'm not a "femi-nazi" by any stretch of the imagination....however, this particular judgment....that she was too pretty....just stings...because I get flashes of women having to wear burkas in order not to excite males anywhere within a mile from them. 


As often happens, the most sane response of all.  Thank you, Liza! Smiley
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,839


« Reply #32 on: January 04, 2013, 01:57:20 PM »

This woman better be prepared to receive a lot of job offers from sleazy old dentists.   Undecided
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,671



« Reply #33 on: January 04, 2013, 02:48:53 PM »


Additional information about Dr. Knight's wife:

Quote
In late 2009, Dr. Knight took his children to Colorado for Christmas vacation. Dr. Knight’s wife Jeanne, who was also an employee in the dental practice, stayed home. Jeanne Knight found out that her husband and Nelson were texting each other during that time. When Dr. Knight returned home, Jeanne Knight confronted her husband and demanded that he terminate Nelson’s employment. Both of them consulted with the senior pastor of their church, who agreed with the decision.

The texting shows too great an interest in an employee.  Unless they were texting about work, schedules, etc...  However, since wifey was in a tizzy and hubby agreed that he shouldn't be doing it, one assumes the texts were "inappropriate" - whatever that means.

So, one might deduce that they were already forming something more than a mere work relationship.

Having said that, he may have explained it to her, given her a letter of recommendation and helped her find new employment....in order to save both of them from an indiscretion. 

However, firing, or not hiring, a woman (or man) because the employer "might" get interested in them in the future is ludicrous!  Seriously, can there not be a work relationship between a man and a woman that doesn't go south?  Can't both parties control themselves?

I'm not a "femi-nazi" by any stretch of the imagination....however, this particular judgment....that she was too pretty....just stings...because I get flashes of women having to wear burkas in order not to excite males anywhere within a mile from them. 


As often happens, the most sane response of all.  Thank you, Liza! Smiley

There is no times for sanity in times of madness.  For what is sanity if not the troubled nightmares of a psychopath.
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,671



« Reply #34 on: January 04, 2013, 02:50:25 PM »

This woman better be prepared to receive a lot of job offers from sleazy old dentists.   Undecided

From the information I have gleaned from both women I have known in the dental profession (their combined experience accounts for 0.000X% of all women employed in this field) all dentists are sleazy. 
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #35 on: January 04, 2013, 03:01:33 PM »

The funniest thing here is that they will say the all-male court ruled in favor of the man, so the solution really is to have females who will rule in favor of the female.  There is discrimination either way.
Logged
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,413


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #36 on: January 04, 2013, 03:38:08 PM »

The funniest thing here is that they will say the all-male court ruled in favor of the man, so the solution really is to have females who will rule in favor of the female.  There is discrimination either way.
On the other hand, perhaps by having *some* female judges on the court, the male judges will gain a wider perspective on which to base their decision.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,108


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #37 on: January 04, 2013, 03:48:57 PM »

Better to be discriminating than to be adulterous.



Selam

Unless you have reason to believe that the dental assistant is such a horrible woman that she would have an affair with her boss, you should have said "Better to be discriminating than to be raping."
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Faith: Agnostic
Posts: 29,564



« Reply #38 on: January 04, 2013, 03:53:36 PM »

If this woman had been in the kitchen instead of in a dentist office she wouldn't have this problem. See what I'm saying?
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,671



« Reply #39 on: January 04, 2013, 04:03:39 PM »

The funniest thing here is that they will say the all-male court ruled in favor of the man, so the solution really is to have females who will rule in favor of the female.  There is discrimination either way.
On the other hand, perhaps by having *some* female judges on the court, the male judges will gain a wider perspective on which to base their decision.

Perspective is not important.  The law is to be equally applied regardless of sex. 

The thing is, he was within his rights as an employer.  The problem is not the court, but that the guy was stupid.  He'll probably go out of business as a result.  He should either have A) not listened to his wife, who was the creator of this stupidity, or B) he should have used some tact and exercised his right to not have given her a reason.  As it is, people will probably stop supporting his business and go to another dentist and his developmentally disabled wife will probably divorce him and alimony-rape him since he won't have any g-money.
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #40 on: January 04, 2013, 04:15:13 PM »

The funniest thing here is that they will say the all-male court ruled in favor of the man, so the solution really is to have females who will rule in favor of the female.  There is discrimination either way.
On the other hand, perhaps by having *some* female judges on the court, the male judges will gain a wider perspective on which to base their decision.

Some or all, the expectation is that the female judge will rule in favor of the woman, not to rule on what is right.
Logged
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,301



« Reply #41 on: January 04, 2013, 04:45:40 PM »

Either way, it's a right to work state.  That's what this is about.  A company can fire someone for any reason or no reason at all.  The dentist is a verifiable dong, but what he did was legal.  He should have just used tact and said that "her services were no longer required."  Then this would be a non-issue.

Having been a Union Steward for 18 of my 31 years of full time employment, I can vouch for the above statements.  In a state that has "employment at will" as its labor doctrine, she has no leg to stand on without a bargaining agreement that specifies "just cause" or, in the case of my company "prejudiced, arbitrary or discriminatory".  Federal law has no bearing in this because what he did is simply NOT descrimination as defined by the law.  Had he said that he was firing her because she is a woman, that would be a different matter.  However, he was terminating her because she was pretty and he was attracted to her.  There is no protection under the law for that.  Were she an ugly woman who he had no intrest in, she would still be employed (so this is not sexual descrimination).  Were he gay, this would not be a problem.  In my opinion, somewhat educated in these matters, the court found correctly according to the law. 
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,301



« Reply #42 on: January 04, 2013, 04:49:20 PM »

ps on my post above - since my company has a bargaining agreement with a Union, getting her job back would have been one of the easiest cases that I would have won.  I once worked with one of the top attorneys in Omaha, and he told me the first question that he asks when someone calls him about a matter such as above, the first question that he asks is "do you have a Union".  If the answer is "no", he will not bother to waste his time or their money.  She must not have had a very honest attorney since any good labor attorney would have warned her that her chances were minimal.
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,197


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #43 on: January 04, 2013, 04:54:31 PM »

Perspective is not important.  The law is to be equally applied regardless of sex. 

The thing is, he was within his rights as an employer.  The problem is not the court, but that the guy was stupid.  He'll probably go out of business as a result.  He should either have A) not listened to his wife, who was the creator of this stupidity, or B) he should have used some tact and exercised his right to not have given her a reason.  As it is, people will probably stop supporting his business and go to another dentist and his developmentally disabled wife will probably divorce him and alimony-rape him since he won't have any g-money.

The text exchange bit is interesting. It takes two to exchange anything, texts or bodily fluids. I suspect he wasn't minding the attraction one bit until his wife found out. If he'd minded from the start, he could have fired her earlier, or counter-sued for sexual harassment. But I'm a cynic.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Miaphysite Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,252



« Reply #44 on: January 05, 2013, 12:28:24 AM »

However, firing, or not hiring, a woman (or man) because the employer "might" get interested in them in the future is ludicrous!  Seriously, can there not be a work relationship between a man and a woman that doesn't go south?  Can't both parties control themselves?
I think this is somewhat relevant on why women and men can't be friends (or successful workmates?) from When Harry Met Sally:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8kpYm-6nuE  laugh
« Last Edit: January 05, 2013, 12:29:02 AM by Nephi » Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.159 seconds with 73 queries.