Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
I guess I am pro syntax.
Since the taxpayers built the Jake/Progressive Field (and is owned by the county, if I recall), and this is occurring inside the grounds of a state-built entity, would/could this not be a potential First Amendment issue?
Well, look, regardless of whether it's legal, it's just wrong to take an employee who wasn't hired on the understanding that he'd be asked to publicly advocate political positions, and tell that person that that's what he has to do now to keep his job.
I guess I am pro syntax.
Dammit. The one English-teacher-oriented headline to land in some time, and you beat me to it...
If he's an at-will employee, he can be fired at will.
The flair scenes in Office Space are a treasure for the ages.
Look, we want you to express yourself, okay? Now if you feel that the bare minimum is enough, then okay. But some people choose to wear more and we encourage that, okay? You do want to express yourself, don't you?
The post you quoted was not talking about right/wrong in terms of being legal; that's why they wrote "regardless of whether it's legal."
I still have no idea what "Issue 7" is all about.
Every sporting event comes to an end, even if it requires extra innings or overtime. But the billionaire owners of pro sports teams now want the welfare they collect from taxpayers to go on forever.
A key test of this new page in their playbook comes in a May 6 vote in Cleveland, which the Census Bureau lists as the second-poorest large city in America. A ballot measure there and in surrounding Cuyahoga County would extend taxes first imposed in 1990 until 2035 to benefit the city’s three pro teams: the Browns (football), Cavaliers (basketball) and Indians (baseball). The taxes are small levies on alcoholic drinks and tobacco—everyone in the area who drinks beer, wine or hard liquor or uses tobacco pays, even if you never attend a game.
I was responding to this part of the sentence, which was about expectations: "who wasn't hired on the understanding that he'd be asked to publicly advocate political positions,"
In the context of at-will employment, he didn't have any reasonable expectation of keeping his job after refusing his marching orders.
Hey! Drinking alcohol isn't a sin! Jesus turned water to wine for Christ's sake!
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (3 members)
Page rendered in 2.9356 seconds, 73 querie(s) executed