If they make one for the beautiful it may save your job
A dentist acted legally when he fired an assistant that he found attractive simply because he and his wife viewed the woman as a threat to their marriage, the all-male Iowa Supreme Court ruled Friday.
The court ruled 7-0 that bosses can fire employees they see as an “irresistible attraction,” even if the employees have not engaged in flirtatious behavior or otherwise done anything wrong. Such firings may be unfair, but they are not unlawful discrimination under the Iowa Civil Rights Act because they are motivated by feelings and emotions, not gender, Justice Edward Mansfield wrote.
An attorney for Fort Dodge dentist James Knight said the decision, the first of its kind in Iowa, is a victory for family values because Knight fired Melissa Nelson in the interest of saving his marriage, not because she was a woman.
I’m so lucky at my job that isn’t a problem at all.
Rick, I’m happy to hear that at some places your being ugly won’t get you fired.
This is going to be a problem for a lot of Iowa farmers
yeah but i bet he is looking for a really good looking guy to replace her with…. 😛
I used to suffer from that when I was young. (I was a guy with a reputation.
Time has erased any possibility of that ever happening again. 🙁
Begs the question of why he hired her in the first place? Equally puzzling is his lawyer’s claim that winning in court over this was a “victory for family values.”
He didn’t know it would be a problem at the time. Also, that is not the proper use of ‘begs the question’.
Hey Mickey–only intelligent post you have ever made. Nice catch.
I did have an incredibly beautiful woman as my receptionist. Good, kind, hard working and drop dead gorgeous…married.
Office lost a lot of productivity, but it was worth it.
So the guy figured he couldn’t keep it zippered if she hung around? I think his marriage is already in trouble.
Just like the Taliban
Over there women have to wear a burka otherwise men can lose their control.
In US they get fired otherwise men are going to divorce their wives.
Strong enough to carry a gun everywhere, but not man enough to handle the presence of a beautiful woman, huh?
I guess, right now, the only safe heaven for pretty women is Europe, where they can freely go topless on the beach and nobody cares.
The solution is of course more beautiful women.
And arming them
Good for him, An “irresistible attraction” is just that — nice but naughty.
Here’s her pic. Looks like two diffrent people from top pic to lower pic. Long time at the job too. Its those emails.
http://dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2252135/Melissa-Nelson-Judges-married-dentist-fired-aide-said-irresistibly-attractive.html
Cute but not “irresistible”.
Last dentist I went to, the woman was very attractive. This guy is losing a lot of business.
What was her job, exactly? Hygienist? Was there a problem alleged with her tooth-scraping abilities? Or was she “just” a receptionist?
“Knight is a very religious and moral individual, and he sincerely believed that firing Nelson would be best for all parties.”
In his own mind he’s religious & moral. A genuine morality would suggest payment greater than one month’s severance. He trashed a woman’s career & got off cheap. What a douchenozzle.
“Such firings may be unfair, but they are not unlawful discrimination under the Iowa Civil Rights Act because they are motivated by feelings and emotions, and not gender, Justice Edward Mansfield wrote.”
Mr. Knight is entitled to his feelings & emotions but he needs to pay his former employee handsomely for his weak-kneed resolve & poor judgment in dealing with a subordinate. Will he do the right thing? Three guesses.
The legal system is a magnet for absurdities, & now that the fatuous boneheads in robes have weighed in, we’ve got a full-blown absurdityfest memorialized for our posterity. Case closed.
Trashed her career? Reason for leaving last job? “I was too pretty.”
What idiot judge decided this? I serious give the USA another 100-125 years of life before it dissolves.
Stupid rulings like this just hasten the day.
The Iowa Supreme Court in a 7-0 vote, am I the only one who reads the articles anymore?
The employers mistake was giving a reason for the firing. Only Montana currently has a law that says there has to be “just cause” for firing. He should have said her services were no longer needed and left it at. In this case the court made the correct (if popularly unpalatable) decision that as an employer he had the right to fire her at will for any reason or no reason.
As far as a triumph for family values the lawyer is a moron, but then he is a lawyer so that’s probably redundant.
I think the law says for any reason or no reason but not for an illegal reason. I think that standard was met here, but yes he should have simply noticed her termination date without ANY reason given. It is a free market place afterall and “bitch of a wife”/religious nut ball is all part of the market place.
Life. You eat shit, and then you die.
People get hired for the way the look and they get fired for the same reason.
One study I can recall asserted that beautiful women with big busts weren’t less intelligent than others but that the people around them were/acted less intelligent thus a good reason not to hire them.