AIBU to think public racist / anti immigrant / anti trans posts can justify dismissal?

[Slightyamusedandsilly]

Read a couple of accounts this week of racist, public supporters of the far-right being sacked for spouting race / immigrant / trans hate on their personal social media accounts.

One was a doctors receptionist.
The other a school learning support assistant.

Both roles where they are likely to work with people in the groups they're publicly trashing online. One was recorded at a far-right rally, speaking about the amount of immigrants she was forced to support in her line of work.

What is your opinion on this?

YABU - People should be able to express their opinion without fear of losing their job. Freedom of speech.

YANBU - Anyone with any kind of public facing role/a role where their employer is likely disapprove of this should not publicly post this way and needs to understand that being sacked is their own fault.

Aren't both sackable?

This is a meaningless question without any context. Who gets to decide what is racist or anti trans or whatever? Because I have seen people label others as racist on here when it wasn’t merited. Ditto with ‘transphobe’

There is a world of difference between saying, for example “death to all <insert minority>” and expressing concern for unchecked immigration.

And what about other groups? What about people who express ageism? Or ableism? Or misogyny? Or are the old, disabled or female fair game? Should we only ban people who say bad things about ‘trendy’ disadvantaged people?

Yes - I believe HH is under investigation by both the university and police.

There are so many really divisive issues in our time - things like views on support for Israel/Palestine etc.

Should an employer be allowed to openly support one view and ban their employees from expressing the other view in their personal lives?

Do you think all of the people whose posts are on this site should be sacked?
https://terfisaslur.com/

You mentioned anti-trans in your title but what about violent threats to people holding protected gender critical beliefs?

This is why digital ID and the way we are being forced to verify our identity for social media is going to have a devastating impact on free speech.

If they pay you to support immigrant children and you post publicly on SM that you hate immigrants, you're not suited to the job though?

Same with the GP receptionist. She's there to support all patients. Not just the white British ones.

Maybe not you, but I think there are quite a few people who would only agree that the statement about immigrants was sackable, including here on MN.

Start a new thread. Off topic.

Gosh so many inflammatory topics lumped in together.

Anti immigration is not necessarily racist.

Anti trans is critical thinking common sense as opposed to woke nonsense.

people are entitled to their opinions some opinions make sense, some are delusional and some are somewhere in the middle.

It’s not though, is it? It’s “people expressing hate on social media”.

The fact that Lucy Connolly had to serve a full year for her tweet which she then deleted is actual insanity. They were totally trying to make an example of her

There's nothing to say that they don't perform their duties well despite holding those views.

If there was an issue in their workplace over how they do their job, that would be different.

I think this is very dangerous - it allows people with the 'wrong' views to be hounded out of their jobs by those who believe they have the 'right' views.

Uh huh. Well you’ve answered my question anyway. Posting hateful things about some groups is fine but not others. Got you.

Any violent threats should be sackable imo.

So, just to clarify - hatred against certain groups is ok, or not?

I agree.

Yep. Especially when actual rapists have been released after serving far less than that because of over crowding in prisons.

Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion. 100%.

But the point is a different one. If you hold an opinion that makes it hard for you to do your job (right-wing LSA who is hostile to immigrants, supporting immigrant children), your opinion is disqualifying you for the job.

I'm not suggesting she should be arrested or cancelled or face violence. But she can't do the job. Because she's made her point very clear that she hates one of the groups she's supposed to support.

The other choice she could have made was to hold this opinion privately. But by giving a speech in public which was recorded and published, she's outed herself.

Me too

New thread. Discuss it there.

This shouldn’t even need to be a question.

He should have been sacked and arrested immediately.

It’s one thing to secretly have an opinion, but to openly type it out and share it on your social media is another level and these people should absolutely suffer the consequences of it.

Unfortunately, many people will imply that they were hacked.

Apart from MN, I have no social media but my work place has a very strict policy on it.
Before we’re even offered the job, our social media history is throughly checked and as part of our contract if we write any extreme or prejudice views then we can be sacked.
I assumed most places would be similar.

I do not have any sympathy for anyone who actively chooses to make their opinion public to the world.

They make a conscious decision to post and so therefore they should suffer the consequences.

I would not want my DC attending a university where members of staff find amusement and joy in a woman being beaten to death.

Can’t really comment on that specific case as I don’t know exactly what was said. So my points are general mostly. Do you have a link?

This, so @Slightyamusedandsilly drawing attention to the posts of those who call for the killing of gender critical is something different?

Do you think anyone in this photo should have been sacked?
https://news.sky.com/story/scottish-politicians-and-jk-rowling-voice-anger-over-decapitate-terfs-sign-at-pro-trans-rally-in-glasgow-12793544

If you sack someone for being racist but don’t sack someone for being ableist is that a discriminatory process?

Organisations have to tread carefully so avoid excusing some behaviour and penalising others when objectively there is no material difference in the potential for offence to their user group.