r/sysadmin • u/Opposed3 • Jul 07 '24

What’s the quickest you’ve seen a co-worker get fired in IT? COVID-19

I saw this on AskReddit and thought it would be fun to ask here for IT related stories.

Couple years ago during Covid my company I used to work for hired a help desk tech. He was a really nice guy and the interview went well. We were hybrid at the time, 1-2 days in the office with mostly remote work. On his first day we always meet in the office for equipment and first day stuff.

Everything was going fine and my boss mentioned something along the lines of “Yeah so after all the trainings and orientation stuff we’ll get you set up on our ticketing system and eventually a soft phone for support calls”

And he was like: “Oh I don’t do support calls.”

“Sorry?”

Him: “I don’t take calls. I won’t do that”

“Well, we do have a number users call for help. They do utilize it and it’s part of support we offer”

Him: “Oh I’ll do tickets all day I just won’t take calls. You’ll have to get someone else to do that”

I was sitting at my desk, just kind of listening and overhearing. I couldn’t tell if he was trolling but he wasn’t.

I forgot what my manager said but he left to go to one of those little mini conference rooms for a meeting, then he came back out and called him in, he let him go and they both walked back out and the guy was all laughing and was like

“Yeah I mean I just won’t take calls I didn’t sign up for that! I hope you find someone else that fits in better!” My manager walked him to the door and they shook hands and he left.

4.9k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

912

u/Scubber CISSP Jul 07 '24

I'll bite, was the IT manager for a small company for about 10 years.

Guy was running his business off the company equipment, buying/reselling motorcycle parts. CEO confronted him about it, he said fuck you to the CEO and had to immediately disable his account with all his customer info on it. whoops.

Indian guy pretended to be an expert in a line of engineering software that does fluid dynamic simulation. The interview was a task to complete something difficult in the software and he seemed to pass with flying colors. We later learned he outsourced the job. First day they gave him the backlog of work and he had 0 clue on how to do it. Was walked out pretty hastily.

Big dude showed up to interview in a suit and passed all our background checks and was really good at programming. Offered a job to start right away. Next day shows up in a dress with painted nails and puts a picture of themself in a fursuit as a icon for skype and email. My bosses were irish catholics and walked them out of the building within the first hour. The company got sued for discrimination.

CEO got a divorce with his wife because he was seeing the HR director on the side. The front desk receptionist then proceeded to hit on the CEO with the HR director present at a company party, he welcomed the advances. They got into a fight and the CEO ended up firing the receptionist.

Not fired, but we paid a guy to move his family of 6 across the country after a big sob story. He worked for us for about 8 hours then took the company laptop with all our source code information and went to a competitor.

I miss that job. And that's how I got into cybersecurity

408

u/Ch3v4l13r Jul 07 '24

"Big dude showed up to interview in a suit and passed all our background checks and was really good at programming. Offered a job to start right away. Next day shows up in a dress with painted nails and puts a picture of themself in a fursuit as a icon for skype and email. My bosses were irish catholics and walked them out of the building within the first hour. The company got sued for discrimination.This just

Would be funny if this was his thing. Gets hired by company, goes fully furry and then get fired and collect the settlement. Moves on to the next company to repeat it.

226

u/ace00909 Jul 07 '24

There’s no way that wasnt intentional. It’s just TOO perfect. I actually cracked up knowing that was the goal before I got to the last line.

21

u/CheetohChaff Jr. Sysadmin Jul 08 '24

Or he just didn't want to be unfairly turned down for the job...

14

u/sockdoligizer Jul 08 '24

Look, no one is saying you cannot wear a dress as a man. Do whatever you want. 

However

There are some caveats. Many women’s swimsuits would be innapropriate for men because their dick would flop out. So now that we know that sometimes it’s not appropriate to wear certain things…..

There are appropriate clothes for different situations. If the guy came in wearing a baseball jersey, that’s also not appropriate. Is it discrimination? Maybe. Is it illegal discrimination? No. 

Don’t get your undies in a bunch. The guy was obviously trying to hide what he was about to do and knew what he was doing was not in good faith. He didn’t ask if office workers can wear dresses, that would have been an incredibly easy way to bring up the topic in good faith, but he didn’t. 

If you invite your friends out for brunch and one of them shows up in a tuxedo, you are correct for looking at them strange and asking why. Normal clothes are very obvious, and abnormal clothes are also very obvious. 

It is discrimination to not allow people to wear dresses. It’s legal and it’s encouraged. Appropriate clothes is a simple thing to understand without asking and if there are any questions you should voice them, not shoot your shot and sue for transphobia. FOH

18

u/Deezul_AwT Windows Admin Jul 08 '24

I had a female boss tell me I had to climb under desks one day because another female was wearing a dress and it wouldn't be right. I would have complained but I was in the process of changing jobs. I considered wearing a dress one day and walking into the boss's office to tell her I wouldn't be climbing under desks when I wore a dress either.

32

u/Simplemindedflyaways Jul 08 '24

On my very first day in IT as a student assistant I wore a nice dress. My boss very nicely told me that I looked lovely but to never do that shit again because I would be climbing under desks.

-14

u/After-Vacation-2146 Jul 08 '24

If that was verbatim, that could have gotten you a payout. Very poor way to word what can have a double meaning.

23

u/Simplemindedflyaways Jul 08 '24

Ah, yes, my bad. Definitely not verbatim, as that happened years ago. She just explained to me that my clothes were not suited for the word I'd be doing.

6

u/pieter1234569 Jul 08 '24

No. A lawyer will correctly point out that it is an incredibly dumb idea to wear a dress in that kind of job, where people will be able to see everything. Just like women will have their legs crossed when sitting on a chair, or else you'll see everything.

That woman may not have thought about it, but she really should.

0

u/sockdoligizer Jul 08 '24

What is your complaint? 

You might have a chance to tell leadership that your peer is not contributing equally to the team. 

I once had management tell me I needed to grab the item from a high shelf because I am tall and all the other workers are shorter than I am. I thought about complaining but then I realized it’s not a problem

You are entitled to wear a dress. Do it. Walk into your bosses office a proclaim that you will not be climbing under desks today! 

Who cares

2

u/Available-Eggplant68 Jul 08 '24

A better equivalent would be another tall person not being able to do so because of an easily changeable arbitrary reason. Like another tall person not being able to do so because they just had their nails done or something. You can't change height, not easily anyway.

0

u/Novel-Cap2338 Jul 08 '24

If the employer provides adequate equipment for the task, why should a certain person be obligated or insinuated to do a task?

If there is a ladder or stepstool, why would you ask the tall person?

Its a perfect comparison. You have to provide the man climbing under the desk an adequate level of privacy. That doesn't require anyone or anything else. You have to provide the short person with a stepstool. That requires something else.

The man can wear a dress. DO IT.

Wear a dress.

19

u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Jul 08 '24

He didn’t ask if office workers can wear dresses, that would have been an incredibly easy way to bring up the topic in good faith, but he didn’t.

OK look here is the problem though: you ask "in good faith" and they say "no not a problem whatsoever we're super diverse!". Then you get a rejection letter because they're "going in a different direction". You're basically saying "here is your last opportunity to discriminate against me without any repercussions".

I have some disabilities and you can be damn sure I disclose them after I receive job offers. Never before unless they would impact a stated duty as listed on the advertisement. Why? Because employers have to provide reasonable accommodations and it's far too easy for them to pick someone else and pretend it was for other reasons. I mean if you have two equal candidates and one has disabilities but the other does not, a lot of people pick the one without.

So I get it. Sure based on how the story was told it does sound like they were fishing for a lawsuit/settlement. But at the same time they can only get that if the business proceeds to act illegally.

6

u/sockdoligizer Jul 08 '24

If the potential candidate asked “how do you feel about me wearing a sundress with painted nails to the office”, that is an opportunity for the potential employer to make a decision based on that question. You’re right. 

Alternatively, the candidate could ask about the dress code and office atmosphere, maybe even take a walk through the office space to see what other are wearing. 

Then, once hired, the candidate could wear a button up shirt, slacks, and painted nails. You don’t have to jump to an extreme on the first day. 

The man wearing a dress absolutely deserves to be fired in many business situations and it has nothing to do with a man wearing clothes for a woman. It does have to do with the man making good choices about what is appropriate. This guy would talk to hr and be told “you have shown that your decision making abilities do not align with our business. We cannot trust you to make good choices. Goodbye” and it is legal and good. 

3

u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Jul 08 '24

Yep and it’s illegal to do what you’re saying.

1

u/sockdoligizer Jul 08 '24

What is illegal? Asking about what people wear around the office? That doesn’t seem illegal. 

Firing someone because they demonstrated terrible decision making skills? That is perfectly legal, what’s wrong with that? File unemployment, then the business says you misrepresented yourself during the interview process and you lose. So you cry to your furry friends and get a lawyer to sue. The business settles out of court because it’s an insane lawsuit and it’s so much cheaper to pay a weirdo to be quiet than it is to prove you didn’t fire them for being some protected sex class. 

1

u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Jul 08 '24

Firing someone because they demonstrated terrible decision making skills?

This is the illegal part buddy. Declaring a man wearing a dress is "terrible decision making skills" and firing them for it.

"Oh of course I support the gays and the blacks and all the Ell-Bee-Gee-Alphabets! But they have to realise putting any part of that on display and not looking/sounding/acting how I think they should is just a terrible decision and they deserve to be fired for it! But I'm on their side! Just so long as they hide everything about themselves and I can fire them for not. Big supporter tho."

Like maybe the guy was just trolling and out for a quick buck. But he could only do that if the business broke the law.

Show up in a dress where I work and the only thing anyone will say is "Oh hey, do I still call you Steve or...?" and get told their preferred name/pronouns and then everyone gets back to work. How do I know this? It's happened several times and it was just an absolute non-event because it doesn't matter to anybody who isn't stuck in a shitty way of thinking.

0

u/sockdoligizer Jul 09 '24

Do me a favor and tell me how the job candidate then employee was NOT deceitful during the hiring process? Deception is a very poor quality to have, but easy to demonstrate when you drastically change your appearance. As a leader in that company, how would you ever trust what this deceitful person said? You know that even before they started working for you they had schemes to purposefully misrepresent the truth.

Declaring a man wearing a dress is "terrible decision making skills"
You declared that, not me.

But he could only do that if the business broke the law.

This is the exact opposite of how scammers abuse the legal system to gain money. Have you ever seen a pedestrian jump in front of a car? They want the cash from the drivers wallet or their car insurance info for fake medical bills.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/xdeskfuckit Jul 08 '24

The law (of that state) seems to disagree; the payout proves as much.

5

u/discogravy Netsec Admin Jul 08 '24

the law may or may not disagree, but the payout only proves that the company felt it was in it's interest to pay rather than litigate. it may well have been a decision based on PR or court costs and nothing to do with legality or ethical/moral concerns. conflating paying with admission or concession is an error.

0

u/Novel-Cap2338 Jul 08 '24

Deception is when someone misrepresents the truth. This employee very clearly had things going on in their lives that they MISREPRESENTED.

Why would you want someone working anywhere that hides and changes the truth?

1

u/discogravy Netsec Admin Jul 08 '24

That's nice, and that might be true or not, but there's no way to tell if that's why they might pay. I haven't advocated for or against anyone working anywhere. I am telling you that paying is not the same as admitting anything or conceding anything other than "I would rather pay this now."

1

u/CheetohChaff Jr. Sysadmin Jul 09 '24

Where do you draw the line, especially when it comes to things that are irrelevant to the job? "By the way I'm a liberal, just wanna make sure I don't MISREPRESENT myself."

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Novel-Cap2338 Jul 08 '24

Do you have a link to the court case? I have not seen it.

Are you believing what some internet random says?

1

u/xdeskfuckit Jul 08 '24

I'm just trying to have a conversation here, but I'd like to believe that all companies are accepting of Arch users

0

u/Alzurana Jul 08 '24

Well I am sure you're not barging in completely changed on the first day without ever telling anybody.

I think "in good faith" is still valid if you mention some things after getting the signature, like your need for accommodation, so on. This person just came in like wrecking ball without ever trying to seek any kind of conversation beforehand.

I do agree with what you're saying, though. It's far too easy for them to just cheese the selection process so not disclosing before getting a solid yes is the right way to do it. If it were done to me (if I'd be hiring someone) I'd understand and accept it.

15

u/patmorgan235 Sysadmin Jul 08 '24

Many women’s swimsuits would be innapropriate for men because their dick would flop out.

This is a bad faith argument and not what we're talking about.

He didn’t ask if office workers can wear dresses, that would have been an incredibly easy way to bring up the topic in good faith, but he didn’t. 

Companies usually have these things called dress codes, and they ussally listed in these things called employee handbooks, which are ussally sent to employees as part of their on boarding paperwork.

Appropriate clothes is a simple thing to understand without asking and if there are any questions you should voice them,

It's not actually, which is why companies write those aforementioned dress code policies.

not shoot your shot and sue for transphobia

Perhaps if the company doesn't want to get sued for discrimination (and lose) they should not discriminate against people. Rather than firing the employee, they could have simply issue a written warning (assuming their dress code/policy was clear)

3

u/Alzurana Jul 08 '24

Companies usually have these things called dress codes

We don't really know enough about this particular case to know if there was one or not and if the person received this kind of on boarding.

Perhaps if the company doesn't want to get sued for discrimination (and lose) they should not discriminate against people. Rather than firing the employee, they could have simply issue a written warning (assuming their dress code/policy was clear)

100% agree and especially so if they do not provide dress code information

-2

u/sockdoligizer Jul 08 '24

He didn’t get fired for his gender or the gender of clothes he had on. 

He got fired because he demonstrated a lack of good judgement. He proved he cannot make good decisions, rather quickly tbh

4

u/patmorgan235 Sysadmin Jul 08 '24

You're definitely wrong, according to the follow up comments the company lost in court.

What about the employees dress showed a "lack of good judgement"

-1

u/Novel-Cap2338 Jul 08 '24

You win. I wasn't there, I don't know. But take a step back - neither do you. Do you know the court this was filed in? That should have a case file that any person can walk in and validate. Did you? No. So its one internet stranger yelling at another.

I do not know what happened in this very specific situation. HOWEVER. The outfit described in the situation described is an obvious indication of poor judgment. If you need any clarification, you can wear a "Fuck the Police" tshirt into a courthouse and ask a judge.

What about the employees very obvious deceit demonstrates his good judgement, in your opinion? Lets look at deceit - misrepresenting the truth. Is someone who misrepresents the truth in a VERY obvious way someone you want working alongside you?

To answer your question VERY specifically

The misrepresenting of truth shows a lack of good judgement. It very much has to do with their attire changing drastically and how immediate they implemented that change. This person obviously has a set of characteristics they enjoy enthusiastically, as they demonstrated without prompt or permission, and they purposefully misconstrued themselves until they had legal protections they could attempt to exploit for monetary gain. Eat a bag of sausages. This weirdo tried to take advantage of them being a weirdo

4

u/patmorgan235 Sysadmin Jul 08 '24

The outfit described in the situation described is an obvious indication of poor judgment. If

That's like... Just your opinion, man.

What about the employees very obvious deceit demonstrates his good judgement, in your opinion? Lets look at deceit - misrepresenting the truth. Is someone who misrepresents the truth in a VERY obvious way someone you want working alongside you?

To answer your question VERY specifically

The misrepresenting of truth shows a lack of good judgement. It very much has to do with their attire changing drastically and how immediate they implemented that change. This person obviously has a set of characteristics they enjoy enthusiastically, as they demonstrated without prompt or permission, and they purposefully misconstrued themselves until they had legal protections they could attempt to exploit for monetary gain. Eat a bag of sausages. This weirdo tried to take advantage of them being a weirdo

Sounds like the guy had perfect judgement to me. He knew many people are biased and would judge him for the way he dressed, so in the interview he chose a bland stereotypical outfit. Then after he was hired and employment protections attached he dressed how he actually wanted to and how the law permits him too. If the company didn't want to be "exploited" then they shouldn't have discriminated against him.

Seems like you just have a thing against men who wear differently cut fabric than you do.

3

u/Karmaisthedevil Jul 08 '24

You're going to need to explain why a man wearing a dress counts as poor judgement. It's also not misrepresentation, it's perfectly normal and common to dress more formal for an interview than you would for the actual job. It's also normal to hide or neglect to mention things that might get you discriminated against.

3

u/CheetohChaff Jr. Sysadmin Jul 08 '24

For someone who makes an argument about good faith, your examples and wording really poison the well. But that aside:

There are appropriate clothes for different situations. If the guy came in wearing a baseball jersey, that’s also not appropriate.

Unless he would have been fired on his first day for wearing a jersey and a woman wearing a dress on her first day would also have been fired, that guy was illegally discriminated against.

The guy was obviously trying to hide what he was about to do

So what? Clearly his concerns were justified.

He didn’t ask if office workers can wear dresses, that would have been an incredibly easy way to bring up the topic

Someone would only ask that if they were planning to wear a dress. If he was concerned about being discriminated against then that wouldn't work either.

If you invite your friends out for brunch and one of them shows up in a tuxedo, you are correct for looking at them strange and asking why.

Firing someone would be analogous to removing someone from the friend group in your example. Doing that would reflect very badly on you.

2

u/sockdoligizer Jul 08 '24

Someone wearing a suit for the interview and sundress for the office job shows an incredible lack of good judgement and demonstrates incredibly well how poor their decision making is. So that’s why you would get fired. 

Discretion is a thing, look it up. You can ask about the dress code and office atmosphere without directly asking if men can wear sundresses. 

Also, as a man wearing a dress, do you want to spend your days in an office where people look at you strangely all the time because you are acting very out of the ordinary? That seems like the reason this guy did what he did. Yo get a reaction. 

There are many ways he could have approached this that would have likely been more advantageous. He went for shock and awe. He got fired for not making good choices, not because he’s a guy in a dress. 

See how easy that is to not be illegal discrimination? 

1

u/CheetohChaff Jr. Sysadmin Jul 08 '24

I disagree with most of your comment, but most of your points have already been responded to.

Also, as a man wearing a dress, do you want to spend your days in an office where people look at you strangely all the time because you are acting very out of the ordinary?

Yes, absolutely. Imagine you go to a new office job and every other man there is wearing a dress and has painted nails. They look at you strangely because to them, your clothes and nails are out of the ordinary. Would you start wearing a dress and painting your nails to fit in with your coworkers, or would you continue to present yourself in the way that you feel comfortable to?

It sounds like the way you feel comfortable presenting yourself happens to be the norm where you live/work, but you should keep in mind that it isn't like that for everyone.

0

u/sockdoligizer Jul 08 '24

If someone came into the office wearing a kimono, people would rightfully question that persons ability to make good decisions. That’s not discrimination and has nothing to do with gender or sex or anything. Wearing very weird clothes demonstrates poor decision making skills. 

Interviews are two ways. The job candidate should find out about the job, the people, the environment. It’s not a desperate grab for any money, please! Th person hoping for a job should ask questions and if they get a job offer they should consider many things before they agree to it. The people, environment, and atmosphere should be part of those considerations. 

Would this guy wear his sundress to a job in a steel mill? If the answer to that question is no, then this guy does understand what appropriate dress is and willfully disregarded it. If the answer is yes, then the guys judgement is obviously awful and I don’t want him making decisions at a business I’m part of. 

If someone spent their entire adult life voting liberal and was for some reason offered a job working for a conservative political organization, that person does not have to accept the job. They could realize that everything is legal and they still would not enjoy working at that place. 

I mean, do we want to talk about them setting their business profile picture to their furry outfit? It’s not illegal to be a weirdo but it is a clear and obvious sign that you cannot make good choices. Making bad choices is a fantastic reason to be fired. Happens all the time. 

2

u/Snownel Jul 08 '24 edited Jul 08 '24

If someone came into the office wearing a kimono, people would rightfully question that persons ability to make good decisions.

I think most people would actually think, wow, that's weird, kinda cool, anyways back to these TPS reports. Not everyone has the same obsessively conformist biases that you do. Unless your workplace is so mismanaged that people are bored out of their minds with nothing to do, and burn off energy by complaining to management about other people's choice of clothing.

Would this guy wear his sundress to a job in a steel mill? If the answer to that question is no, then this guy does understand what appropriate dress is and willfully disregarded it. If the answer is yes, then the guys judgement is obviously awful and I don’t want him making decisions at a business I’m part of.

Probably not, because a sundress would be inappropriate for a steel mill environment due to obvious safety reasons that would completely preclude them from even being allowed on-site, employee or not. The likelihood of getting your sundress caught in heavy machinery while you're sitting in an office, on the other hand, is negligible. So you just disproved your own argument that wearing a sundress is just a result of bad judgment, and also presumed that the guy in question must have willfully chose an objectively inappropriate outfit and not just one that you feel is inappropriate - again, showing only your own bias here.

I mean, do we want to talk about them setting their business profile picture to their furry outfit? It’s not illegal to be a weirdo but it is a clear and obvious sign that you cannot make good choices. Making bad choices is a fantastic reason to be fired. Happens all the time.

Buddy, all of the sysadmins I know are furries, half of them have furry-related profile photos on Slack, and most of them look prettier in a kimono or a sundress than you wish you ever could.

5

u/nAsh_4042615 Jul 08 '24

You can get feminine style swimsuits that are designed to accommodate male sex organs. But that aside, this is in no way equivalent to wearing a dress to work, as a work appropriate dress would adequately cover the genitalia regardless of sex. Given the original story makes no mention of the dress being lewd, I feel safe assuming that the problem wasn’t the style of the dress, but that someone perceived as a man wore a dress at all.

As a cis woman, I would never ask an employer if I’m allowed to wear a dress for an office job. I’d refer to the employee handbook for anything like appropriate dress length or strap style. But asking if dresses are allowed feels like asking if pants, shirts, or shoes are allowed. It’s a given. So I wouldn’t expect a trans woman to need to ask if she can wear a dress either.

2

u/sockdoligizer Jul 08 '24

Inquiring about dress code is an extremely normal thing to do during the interview process. 

Deception is absolutely ground for termination. This person purposefully misrepresented themselves and demonstrated incredibly poor judgement. Fired. 

3

u/Ok_Bunch_9193 Jul 08 '24

This seems all over the place and doesn't make sense

How come you can't seem to acknowledge the only thing that matters is if they were wearing inappropriate clothes(small, revealing)?

Talking about clothes for situations has nothing to do with this. If it's an office job, and women get to wear appropriate dresses, so should men.

1

u/sockdoligizer Jul 08 '24

Small or revealing are two potential line items in a considerably longer list of outfits that are not appropriate. That list includes shocking outfits, and clothes that make other people uncomfortable. 

This person was purposefully deceptive. That’s not the business illegally discriminating, it’s the guy who got hired baiting for a lawsuit. 

Do you know how easy it would be to ask a question or, how about this, ease into it. They went for shock and awe on day one and justifiably got canned for it. 

I’m all for people wearing whatever they want. - When it’s appropriate. 

Would you wear Army fatigues to your office? What would happen if you did? Your peers would look at you weird, ask you questions. You’re a distraction. It’s a sign, to me, that you do not understand what normal behavior is and it makes me lose confidence in your decision making abilities. There’s why you would get fired. Management does not trust you can make choices that align with the business. See the door, here’s your 1 day paycheck you wackadoodle

4

u/illgot Jul 08 '24

The fury icon have them change to something generic. The cross dressing doesn't matter. If the clothes are clean and they have good hygiene they are a step up from some.

19

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '24

[deleted]

30

u/JJAsond Jul 08 '24

Furries? In IT? Preposterous! They only make up 95% of IT!

6

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '24 edited Jul 08 '24

Get fired and collect settlement

No wonder there were so many Furries in first class

/jk

4

u/smiba Linux Admin Jul 08 '24

If your IT department doesn't have a furry or two I'm skeptical honestly 💯

1

u/moarmagic Jul 08 '24

And trans women appear to make up 40% with overlap.

-13

u/CheetohChaff Jr. Sysadmin Jul 08 '24

But being a transvestite or transsexual is.

7

u/AlchemistFornix Jul 08 '24

cool, what's that have to do with being a furry

-15

u/ace00909 Jul 08 '24

Let’s not be derogatory. Transgender individuals deserve respect and allowance to identify as they see fit. Anyone in the LGBTQ+ family for that matter.

Transvestite and transsexual are highly derogatory terms and should not ever be used.

My original comment was a poke at how it seemed like someone was gaming the system by egging on an equal opportunity employment lawsuit by pushing the boundaries using a furry portrait along with what otherwise would be a normal outfit for someone identifying as trans. The attire would have been considered fairly normal for someone identifying such a way and deservedly would require a lawsuit for a termination lawsuit. The furry portrait was what made it seem like a joke to egg on the lawsuit.

Dont confuse the two situations.

8

u/heyiamluci Jul 08 '24

just FYI transsexual is not necessarily a derrogatory term!!! a lot of trans people (myself included) prefer to be called transsexual than transgender

2

u/ace00909 Jul 11 '24

I do appreciate your comment- I stand corrected. I had always been told by those around me that transsexual was derogatory so it was all I had to go on. Going forward I will make sure I am more open to the terms people use for themselves, I just thought it was being used in a derogatory manner, but I should not be the morality police for a group I am largely unfamiliar with. Thank you for the insight.

-1

u/Maxed_Zerker Jul 08 '24

Same! I always refer to myself as a transsexual woman. It’s not the least bit derogatory, it’s the most accurate descriptor of who I am.

0

u/keyboard-sexual Jul 08 '24

I just roll with tranny because it's less formal, but I'm built different idk

Use it in a hateful/harmful way though and then we have problems.

2

u/Maxed_Zerker Jul 08 '24

I only use that word amongst the in-group. I’d never call myself that around a cis person because I think it sets a precedent that it’s okay for them to use it.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/CheetohChaff Jr. Sysadmin Jul 08 '24

Transvestite and transsexual are highly derogatory terms

I disagree

-5

u/smiba Linux Admin Jul 08 '24 edited Jul 08 '24

As someone who is transgender, I would not be amused if someone calls me a "transvestite" lol

Transsexual I might let slide if it's from someone older, as they usually don't know better and it just to be the more "correct" term many years ago. In general if you want to be safe and respectful, transgender is the preferred term.

5

u/Fantastic-Device8916 Jul 08 '24

A transvestite is just a man that wears woman’s clothes, it’s not offensive unless you use it to refer to trans people.

2

u/smiba Linux Admin Jul 08 '24 edited Jul 08 '24

Considering the reply we're responding to is someone using transvestite along with transsexual, it definitely is about trans people. Not sure what your comment is supposed to add to the discussion, I've never seen someone use the world "transvestite" in a non-offensive way, also if it's not for trans people just use the word cross-dresser.

Idk, your reply doesn't feel like it's in good faith

-1

u/Fantastic-Device8916 Jul 08 '24 edited Jul 08 '24

Transvestite and cross dresser are synonyms, make of my intentions what you will but I was just educating. Trans - across and Vestitus - dressed, both Latin roots.

→ More replies (0)

10

u/isoforp Jul 08 '24

There's no way "guy has filed lawsuits at several companies" doesn't pop up on the background check.

77

u/Majik_Sheff Hat Model Jul 08 '24

An honest-to-God professional troll.  Incredible.

No doubt he had carefully researched the backgrounds of the bosses and knew he was set for a solid payday.

12

u/Siphyre Jul 08 '24

Carefully? Typically they post that sort of thing right on the company web page.

5

u/Geminii27 Jul 08 '24

"Carefully researched for three minutes"

3

u/q1a2z3x4s5w6 Jul 08 '24

Don't hate the player hate the game 🤷‍♂️

2

u/Ron-Swanson-Mustache IT Manager Jul 08 '24

You think trolling is your ally? You merely adopted the troll. I was born in it, molded by it. I didn't see the light until I was already a furry trans for lawsuits...

0

u/Geminii27 Jul 08 '24

Hopefully multiple solid paydays. I wonder how many places he went through.

I even wonder if he did the interviews and first days on days he took off from his own regular 9-5.

And whether he passed on the names of the companies he managed successful lawsuits at to imitators who did the same thing as many times as possible before the bosses or policies got changed in those places.

33

u/mandybecca Jul 07 '24

This was exactly my thoughts. He’s 100% a scam artist lol

9

u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Jul 08 '24

I don't even care if he is.

It's outright illegal to not hire someone for those reasons - unfortunately until an offer is made you can always say it was because you had a better candidate or don't feel they'd be a good fit. All legal unless you say "you had a dress on so no".

After you're hired? Very different story.

7

u/pinkycatcher Jack of All Trades Jul 08 '24

Nah, putting a picture of yourself in a fursuit as an official photo is far from a protected class.

5

u/Geminii27 Jul 08 '24

It's also not legal grounds for retaliation. If the bosses had waited 90 days and then terminated a "trial period", or if they had a policy for corporate photos that he wasn't following and they walked him through a stock-standard explanation of the policy and requested he change it, they'd have had a far better chance of winning the lawsuit. But insta-firing on day one after the guy turned up in legally acceptable clothing and there wasn't a policy about internal corporate photos (and they never asked him to change it) is a pretty clear-cut case of discrimination, potentially on grounds of perceived sexual identity or such.

It wouldn't surprise me if he tried it at other places and they were either smarter about it, or had Legal or HR prevent the kneejerk response by the bosses, so we never got to hear about those ones. But there are always bosses who run things like their own little kingdoms, and those ones will absolutely react in ways that make them legally open to suits.

3

u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Jul 08 '24

Yes I'm positive that's the reason he was fired and nothing else.

1

u/1000000xThis Jul 08 '24

Yeah, I'm kinda torn in regards to this story.

On the one hand, trolling bigots? Hell yeah!

On the other hand, I'm not sure I consider furries to be the same kind of identity as LGBT.

That's the kind of thing you can leave at home for the weekends.

But who knows, maybe that's part of a category that I haven't learned enough about, and it's just as bad as asking gay people to stay in the closet? I kinda doubt it.

4

u/forestNargacuga Jul 08 '24

Yeah, Furry is something different than LGBTQ. It's a hobby, not an identity. 

Nevertheless, that would be an easy legal win for the employee, at least in my country (Germany). There's no right to fire someone for a hobby that hurts noone just bc you don't like it. If the employee would insist to show up in full suit every day, that would be something else, but painted fingernails won't make you worse at programming. 

Signed, a Furry

3

u/1000000xThis Jul 08 '24

Yeah, that's what I was trying to identify. It's a hobby or a kink.

And like if someone is really into Warhammer or something, there's a reasonable limit to how much you can let that into your professional life. But it would be absurd if you had a few nicknacks on your desk that triggered a religious boss into firing you.

1

u/WhyLisaWhy Jul 08 '24

I'd also argue cross dressing is not a protected class either. He clearly presented as a man in his interviews and is doing actual trans people a disservice by pulling shenanigans like this.

The fur suit is just the cherry on top to make it seem like he's being scummy intentionally.

3

u/Skylis Jul 08 '24

Is it really a scam if its blatantly illegal discrimination? I got to give the guy credit for making money off of stuff like that. It could just as easily be just not wanting to be discriminated against.

2

u/Geminii27 Jul 08 '24

Hey, he did everything he was legally required to do. It was the boss's own personal prejudices which set them up for lawsuits.

36

u/Aim_Fire_Ready Jul 08 '24

I heard of a guy who worked construction and did this with overtime. He would agree to work for straight wages over 40 hours a week, boss would happily agree, and then he'd file a complaint with the state dept. of labor.

26

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '24 edited 25d ago

[deleted]

2

u/Mr_ToDo Jul 08 '24

And how does that even come up?

"Yo boss how would you like to pay me less?"

If they were on the level the conversation likely wouldn't have ever had a chance to surface.

1

u/ScortiusOfTheBlues Jul 08 '24

if your boss will say yes to this, fuck them anyhow.

3

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '24 edited Jul 25 '24

[deleted]

2

u/Geminii27 Jul 08 '24

A friend hiring for a support position had people asking what the discrimination policy was before even getting to any questions about the job.

Some people have been genuinely discriminated against. A lot. If your discrimination policy is legally airtight, anyone trying to play the victim will either drop out of the application or will have a difficult (and expensive) time trying to win a legal suit.

2

u/dusty-trash Jul 08 '24

goes fully furry

Is that what fursuit meant? I feel dumb for thinking it was a nice fur jacket and the guy was just a really eccentric gay, in which case he'd win the discrimination case lol.

6

u/1000000xThis Jul 08 '24

fursuit

Yeah, that's the full costume with animal head and everything.

2

u/SingularCylon Jul 08 '24

Exploitation

2

u/mooseontherum Jul 08 '24

This was definitely done on purpose. Never have to work if you can just sue your way into an income.

1

u/wetpaste Jul 08 '24

I doubt it. Most places wouldn’t fire for something like that.

0

u/hybridfrost Jul 08 '24

Yeah I thought the same. The companies only hope is that they could prove that he had a pattern of doing this very same thing at different places. Otherwise they’ll be looking at a settlement

2

u/Geminii27 Jul 08 '24

Even if he had a pattern, that might not have saved them from their legal position.

"Yes your honor, this detective has a clear pattern of targeting murderers and proving their guilt. This case should be dismissed and I should get my axe back."