Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Monday August 08 2016, @08:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the don't-kick-me-when-i'm-down dept.

[Update. It appears the original submission was skewing the facts. From the What You Should Know about EEOC and Shelton D. v. U.S. Postal Service (Gadsden Flag case) on the EEOC (US Equal Employment Opportunity Commision) web site:

What You Should Know about EEOC and Shelton D. v. U.S. Postal Service (Gadsden Flag case)

  • This decision addressed only the procedural issue of whether the Complainant's allegations of discrimination should be dismissed or investigated. This decision was not on the merits, did not determine that the Gadsden Flag was racist or discriminatory, and did not ban it.
  • Given the procedural nature of this appeal and the fact that no investigative record or evidence had been developed yet, it would have been premature and inappropriate for EEOC to determine, one way or the other, the merits of the U.S. Postal Service's argument that the Gadsden Flag and its slogan do not have any racial connotations whatsoever.
  • EEOC's decision simply ordered the agency - the U.S. Postal Service - to investigate the allegations. EEOC's decision made no factual or legal determination on whether discrimination actually occurred.

The original story follows. --martyb]

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has determined in a preliminary ruling that wearing clothing featuring the Gadsden Flag constitutes legally actionable racial harassment in the workplace. In short, wearing the Gadsden flag while at work can earn you the title of "racist", earn you harassment charges, and cost you your job. The ideological witch hunt started back in 2014 when a black employee at a privately owned company filed a complaint with the EEOC when he saw a co-worker wearing a hat featuring the Gadsden flag and the words "Don't tread on me." The EEOC has decided to side with the over-sensitive employee, despite already admitting that the flag originated in a non-racial context and has been adopted by multiple non-racial political groups, countless companies and more, since it was created.

The ruling is a preliminary ruling and has not yet been made "official" but the preliminary ruling says that you can be charged with "racial harassment." They have not indicated when an "official" ruling will be made and it is ongoing.

Source: American Military News

Better Source: Washington Post

Facts: EEOC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by kurenai.tsubasa on Monday August 08 2016, @09:02PM

    by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Monday August 08 2016, @09:02PM (#385455) Journal

    Ok. I give up. I'm a racist in addition to a sexist. How can you tell?

    - I didn't like the Ghostbusters reboot.
    - That flag on my bumper (next to the LGBT flag).

    Welcome to 2016. Racism and sexism no longer have anything to do with prejudice against a group of people because of the way they were born.

    Now, how can I become un-sexist and un-racist? Any solutions?

    - Gender transition? Haha, nope! Now I'm just a bathroom rapist in addition to a sexist!
    - Darken my skin? Haha, nope! I'd just get slammed on national TV by Jessica Williams in addition to still being a racist!

    Looks like there's no way for me not to be sexist and racist, so good enough. I'll just accept that's the way it is and start avoiding people who are black in addition to avoiding people who are women.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Redundant=1, Interesting=3, Informative=1, Overrated=1, Total=6
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @09:18PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @09:18PM (#385467)

    No need to give up. TFA is factually incorrect.

    • (Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Monday August 08 2016, @10:58PM

      by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Monday August 08 2016, @10:58PM (#385525) Journal

      Looks like you're correct after reading through the EEOC link.

      This decision addressed only the procedural issue of whether the Complainant's allegations of discrimination should be dismissed or investigated. This decision was not on the merits, did not determine that the Gadsden Flag was racist or discriminatory, and did not ban it….

      On January 8, 2014, a U.S. Postal Service maintenance mechanic in Denver, Colorado filed a complaint of discrimination based on race (African American) and reprisal for prior EEO activity…. According to the federal sector process, that complaint was filed with the employing agency - the U.S. Postal Service.

      On January 29, 2014, the U.S. Postal Service dismissed the complaint for failure to state a cognizable claim of discrimination. On June 20, 2014, the EEOC Office of Federal Operations reversed the agency's dismissal, determining that Complainant had raised a cognizable claim of harassment, and ordered the agency to investigate the claim….

      The agency requested the EEOC Office of Federal Operations to reconsider its previous decision…. The U.S. Postal Service argued that the previous decision clearly erred because the Gadsden Flag and its slogan do not have any racial connotations.

      Upon review, the EEOC Office of Federal Operations determined that the agency did not meet its legal burden of demonstrating clear error. The EEOC decision sent the matter back to the U.S. Postal Service to investigate the allegations. In doing so, EEOC emphasized in its decision, "we are not prejudging the merits of Complainant's complaint. Instead, we are precluding a procedural dismissal that would deprive us of evidence that would illuminate the meaning conveyed by . . . the display of the symbol."

      Both American Military News and the WaPo blagger seem to be getting ahead of themselves and arguing a chilling effect. All that's happened is that the EEOC determined that the Post Office couldn't dismiss the claim out of hand and must investigate. It sounds like that puts the ball back in the claimant's court to prove that there was a racist message being expressed. Claimant's argument that the flag itself is a racist symbol because Gadsden was a slaveholder has not yet been evaluated.

      I'll save my outrage for if the Post Office uncovers no further evidence of a racist message and the EEOC determines that the claimant has a valid argument that anything originated by a slaveholder is a symbol of racism. That doesn't appear to have happened yet.

      We'll also need to wait and see whether the supposed chilling effect comes to roost.

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @11:07PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @11:07PM (#385528)

        The fact that a government agency has opened an investigation is chilling enough in and of itself. If the display of a Gadsden Flag image alone is enough to trigger such an investigation, then it absolutely is a big deal regardless if nothing further comes from the bureaucratic investigation.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @11:28PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @11:28PM (#385534)

          No, the fact that a government agency has to investigate a valid complaint is just an effect of the legal standard "under Title VII".

        • (Score: 2, Interesting) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday August 09 2016, @01:06AM

          by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Tuesday August 09 2016, @01:06AM (#385573) Journal

          I believe the point is that the EEOC wants the Post Office to determine whether the employee was merely displaying the Gadsden Flag or whether it was part of a pattern exhibited by that employee intended to create a hostile environment.

          It's a sticky issue. Assholes trying to subvert the Gadsden Flag to have a racist import (primarily looking at the KKK and Christian Identity) have come up recently, hence why the EEOC is rejecting the Post Office's claim that the claimant's claim should be simply dismissed as having no possible merit due to the history and general usage of the Gadsden Flag. The EEOC noted that it's possible that claimant is, in fact, a triggered snowflake, but that there must be an investigation to rule out a legitimate claim.

          Personally I would wish anybody who might read something racist into my display of the Gadsden flag would talk to me so that I can explain how it dovetails nicely with the principles of Kwanzaa…. (Trust me on this one. It does. Which is why I must save my outrage for the result of the Post Office investigation and subsequent determination by the EEOC.)

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @09:20PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @09:20PM (#385469)

    You can atone for the sins of other peoples fore-fathers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a33-FCxZ6zA [youtube.com] Remember to bring the kids!

  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday August 08 2016, @09:24PM

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday August 08 2016, @09:24PM (#385473)

    Ok. I give up. I'm a racist in addition to a sexist. How can you tell?
    - I didn't like the Ghostbusters reboot.

    Did you actually watch it? Why?

    I don't like it either, but I can tell just from the trailer and everything I've read about it online. I'm not about to waste a bunch of money and time and subject myself to the misery that is the modern theater experience just to give it a fair chance. Maybe if it comes on Netflix, but I doubt it; I'd rather spend my Netflix time watching something I know I'll like, such as old Star Trek episodes (though I'll skip the one that's nothing but Riker having flashbacks; that episode was terrible. I'd rather watch the Ghostbusters reboot, or worse yet, one of the new JJTrek movies, than that one. Maybe.)

    • (Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Monday August 08 2016, @10:10PM

      by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Monday August 08 2016, @10:10PM (#385498) Journal

      I reviewed it here https://soylentnews.org/~kurenai.tsubasa/journal/1987 [soylentnews.org] .

      Short version: Paul Feig had some white knight agenda and wanted show how oppressed these new Ghostbusters are because they're women. That is, they're oppressed because they live in a world full of men who are walking stereotypes that were put their by Feig. The actresses themselves were not the problem, and Leslie Jones wasn't even really the cringeworthy stereotype I thought she was going to be. I could definitely tell it was a film that failed in spite of the female talent, not because of it. That and we never get to see Thor without a shirt on!

      It's basically the first third of a story that would have made a good film stretched out to feature length (so that the story can be a trilogy or even a tetralogy depending on how unlucky we are).

  • (Score: 2) by jdavidb on Monday August 08 2016, @10:07PM

    by jdavidb (5690) on Monday August 08 2016, @10:07PM (#385495) Homepage Journal

    That flag on my bumper (next to the LGBT flag).

    People like you make the world go round. :)

    --
    ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 09 2016, @02:41AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 09 2016, @02:41AM (#385600)

    tsubasa, just a clue: everything is not necessarily about you. Some things are, but this is not one of them.

    • (Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday August 09 2016, @02:54AM

      by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Tuesday August 09 2016, @02:54AM (#385601) Journal

      It doesn't right away. That's how the madness starts.

      If you're at a pool and the lifeguard shouts, “No running on the deck!” should you assume the lifeguard meant you, personally? If you weren't running, then normally no. I've been through rape culture training, and I realize that when the lifeguard shouts that, it does apply to me, regardless of whether I'm running or not.

      This leads us to the bowl of jelly beans. 10% are poisoned. Now, are you comfortable with taking a big handful?

      I've been personally accused of sexism, multiple times. My last charge was that of trying to control women's bodies, and I suffered consequences for that. The judge, jury, and executioner on that case attempted to control my body.

      I've also stood accused of racism. The evidence? I value the values of Kwanzaa. That is enough to be racist.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 09 2016, @04:18AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 09 2016, @04:18AM (#385616)

        It doesn't right away. That's how the madness starts.

        Maybe, my dear kurenai, it is because the madness has already started? We are talking about the Tea-party crazy working at the post-office. Nothing to do with you. So try and look at the situation from above, as if you were a judge, or a parent, or a god. Might help.

        • (Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Tuesday August 09 2016, @04:30AM

          by Scruffy Beard 2 (6030) on Tuesday August 09 2016, @04:30AM (#385624)

          I worry that kurenai.tsubasa is not crazy.

          That makes me reluctant to suggest she is just imagining things.

          That said, I did mod up the GP post. (I figured out not everything was about me when I was 5 or 6 -- that was mind-blowing.)

          • (Score: 2) by Webweasel on Tuesday August 09 2016, @01:21PM

            by Webweasel (567) on Tuesday August 09 2016, @01:21PM (#385747) Homepage Journal

            Hmmm, can you help me to explain that to my 13 year old son?

            Please!!!!

            --
            Priyom.org Number stations, Russian Military radio. "You are a bad, bad man. Do you have any other virtues?"-Runaway1956
            • (Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Tuesday August 09 2016, @03:16PM

              by Scruffy Beard 2 (6030) on Tuesday August 09 2016, @03:16PM (#385790)

              Well, for me: just realizing that the people I interacted with in the world had their own independent thoughts and feelings was enough. YMMV.

  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 09 2016, @12:21PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 09 2016, @12:21PM (#385730)

    You can't be un-racist or un-sexist if you are white and male. The only thing you can do is put off your punishment by attacking all other white males as racist and sexist and giving up everything others value in you.