Wakeforest22890
Snowpom
The VP denies that Duke told the company to fire the two employees but the company says Duke did tell them to. Why lie?
Yes, seriously.
My perspective is that the contract worker who had put in 18 months with no previous record of workplace misconduct is fired after apologizing for a single mistake; a mistake enabled by the apparent lack of policy surrounding music at the coffee shop ("play what's cool"). She played what she thought was cool - the music she enjoyed - and suffered for it.
I don't agree the song was appropriate, but I can see why the lapse in judgement might take place. Why do you think the "tremendous overreaction" took place?
The VP denies that Duke told the company to fire the two employees but the company says Duke did tell them to. Why lie?
You're engaging in a form of victim blaming that isn't very far removed from "well they shouldn't have been playing their music so loud" or "he shouldn't have flirted with that white girl" or any number of variations of what you call "single lapses in judgment."
I was illustrating a possible interpretation of the situation that I thought might be reasonable, short of racial discrimination. If it had been a white dude playing Slipknot I think you probably have the same result. People get fired for lapses of judgment all the time. It's not always fair. It's also not always racial discrimination.
Uh, yeah, that song isn't appropriate for a campus coffee shop.
Probably need to know who's lying first in order to answer that question, right?
Because they are mother fucking dukies. Every last one of them.The VP denies that Duke told the company to fire the two employees but the company says Duke did tell them to. Why lie?
it's probable the owner was so aggravated that he just said "fuck it, both are fired for even getting me into this conversation with my biggest contract."