Quantcast

Chili's server fired over Facebook rant: Fair or Foul?

★~DoctorWhoGuru~★ 2012/06/24 23:14:43
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Chili s server fired over Facebook rant


Read More: http://www.dailydot.com/society/chilis-server-fire...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • addie 2012/06/25 01:20:38
    Fair
    addie
    +4
    A server, publically threatening to spit in food, using the company's name?? Yes, fire that jerk!!
    As an aside...the tip is up to the tipper! and they are not owed.
    Sometimes a waiter is not too good.
    Some people are cheap or just do not have the money for a huge tip.

    ----if a person is given, very little, for a lot of work...and cannot take it, they should get another job and it should not be with the public!

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Silent Bob 2012/06/24 23:19:13
    Foul
    Silent Bob
    +1
    Freedom of speech.
  • Jo Silent Bob 2012/06/24 23:29:28
    Jo
    thats not "freedom of speech"---freedom of speech is meant for political speech, not for people to verbalize whatever they want.
  • Silent Bob Jo 2012/06/24 23:36:28
    Silent Bob
    Sure it is. She has the right to say what she wants when she wants however she wants. It's not just political.
    She had no mention of her work at all, so how is it their business?
  • Jo Silent Bob 2012/06/24 23:39:36
    Jo
    It IS just political---freedom of speech does NOT mean you can say whatever you want however you want; you canNOT, for example, walk into a crowded building and yell "fire!"; you also cant call an establishment and joke about there a bomb planted in their building, nor can you walk into a bank and yell "this is a stick-up!"----all of these are examples of people that said "whatever they wanted" however they wanted to say it; they're also felonies:))
  • Silent Bob Jo 2012/06/24 23:42:45
    Silent Bob
    Then what's the point of having that amendment? Sure it's not right to say those things, yet technically people should have the right to say whatever they want.
    In this ladies case, she didn't do any serious damage.
    If anything just write her up and carry on.
  • Jo Silent Bob 2012/06/25 04:15:00
    Jo
    the point of having that ammendment is to allow people to speak freely in speech settings concerning politics--thats why it was originally drawn up; in this case, what she did not only showed her employers that she possessed a particularly negaitve attitude that runs counter to her job, but she also posted it in a setting that could potentially permit customers---past, present, and future--to see it. They had every right to take issue with it.
  • Silent Bob Jo 2012/06/25 17:30:29
    Silent Bob
    +1
    I suppose you do have a point, thanks for this conversation Jo, :)
  • Jo Silent Bob 2012/06/25 18:51:10
  • Helmholtz Silent Bob 2012/06/24 23:41:51
    Helmholtz
    +1
    Freedom of Speech has been interpreted by the courts to mean that, except for in a handful of circumstances, governments can't limit your speech. Private institutions are a different deal. This is why you can refuse to allow a person into your home, for example, if they say things that you find offensive or why a church can kick a person out if they, say, are expressing opinions that run counter to the tenants of the church.
  • Marcus ... Silent Bob 2012/06/25 07:12:45
    Marcus Clark
    +2
    This has nothing to do with "freedom of speech."
    "Freedom of speech" is a term derived from the US Constitution, 1st Amendment, which states "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech..."
    Chili's is not Congress.
  • Jo Marcus ... 2012/06/25 18:51:31
    Jo
    +1
    very well put, thank you:))

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/07/31 05:36:11

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals