Philly hospital employee fired over racist social media comments

[bluestateguy]

Enjoy the unemployment line, Diane! But don't worry, Obama the Food Stamp President (isn't that what you guys call him?) will take care of you. And Trump is all for welfare for white people.


http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/philly-hospital-employee-fired-over-racist-social-media-comments/article_ac81af30-4911-11e6-9806-c7774cb12b98.html

Posted: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 6:00 pm

NICOLE LEONARD, Staff Writer

PHILADELPHIA—The police shootings of black men in Louisiana and Minnesota and the killing of five police officers in Dallas last week have caused a ripple of reactions from people all over the country. Recent comments on social media by a Philadelphia hospital employee about those events have resulted in that person's firing.

An employee at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital chimed in on the national events, ranting on Facebook earlier this week about the Black Lives Matter movement and the black community in Philadelphia.

The hospital acknowledged the social media posts by its employee, but would not identify the employee by name. An updated message from the hospital Wednesday said the employee has since been fired.

People in the Philadelphia and Pennsylvania areas have been sharing a Facebook post by Diane Amoratis since Monday. In the post, she wrote how a recent Black Lives Matter protest in Philadelphia should have been "bulldozed."

more

?resize=411%2C499

[brush]

1. Hah! She got deleted from her job.

[Warpy]

2. While it's nice to get open and raving bigots out of jobs around vulnerable people

I have to wonder just how they found this rant and why they thought private, off duty stuff was particularly their business. Had she been saying this stuff at work and/or treating POC badly, they'd have had more cause for firing her.

Just how much control over an employee's private life and correspondence should an employer have?

At some point this stuff is going to have to be decided.

[Tree-Hugger]

5. My understanding....

....is that someone who either knows her or works with her saw the post and sent a screenshot to a friend. Said friend passed it along and someone called TJU human resources.

[Warpy]

7. Unless she brought it into her job

she shouldn't have been fired.

I've worked in health care. The idea is to check all your unattractive baggage at the door so you can do the job of helping people get well. If she wasn't able to do that, they wouldn't need a Facebook post, she'd have been gone a long time ago.

[Person 2713]

3. Doesn't think a black protestor can have an honest job or raise children to be productive

citizens........

[Catherine Vincent]

4. ...

She probably did a lot of holding back from calling the braided woman the n word. Such a hateful post.

[ProfessorGAC]

6. What An Idiot!

So, either she actually believes she's anonymous, after using her real name on an international digital network, or the Trump phenomenon has emboldened these buffoons to such an extent that are proud to be racist.

[tblue37]

11. They live in a bubble, interacting with like minded friends, so they

assume their bigoted expressions will earn them social capital/approval.

[Joe the Revelator]

8. I don't think I like the idea of people being fired for off duty opinions.

That is a real slippery slope.

[tblue37]

10. When their big mouths harm their employers' reputation or business, the employers

have a right to protect themselves.

[Joe the Revelator]

12. Unless the person was posting in their capacity as an employee...

it's a scary proposition.

[tblue37]

15. True, but nowadays people need to understand that social

media posts are public, no matter how they set their preferences.

Anyone on your friends or followers list could pass along what you say, so you need to be careful.

If she had said that in a private letter or email, then she could assume it was private; but posting it on Facebook is like putting up a billboard or taking out a half-page newspaper ad.

When such bigoted language becomes "domesticated" by pervasive public expression, its normalization increases bigotry, and not just words but actions, too. We've seen that with the consequences of Trump's rhetoric.

People should feel embarrassed to reveal bigoted attitudes; they should feel that they are out of step with polite society for harboring such attitudes, so they won't feel comfortable acting on them or spreading them around. There have been studies about how free expression of bigotry normalizes and spreads it. People have a right to be bigoted, but it is better if they recognize that other people won't approve. Social pressure (shunning, also called ostracizing, because of the Athenian method with broken pottery) is one of the oldest ways of managing public behavior.

Yes, such social pressure often becomes vicious cyber bullying, and actually, the online swarming of people like this is a form of cyber bullying. But by now most adults should be aware that their social media activities are not private. It's like minors sexting each other. They don't understand that they could be affected by such public behavior pretty much forever.

Someone wrote a book about such online swarming and its consequences (ruined lives), often over relatively minor transgressions.

So I actually agree that one should be free to express opinions off duty--up to a point. But aren't we appalled when cops' emails and online postings reveal them to be racists or bullies who love to swagger around and abuse "civilians"? We are relieved when such self-revelation leads to sanctions, and we would love to see them fired if their unions didn't make that almost impossible.

Similarly, the second grade teacher who posted almost the same anti-BLM rant should not be teaching minority kids who might be harmed by her bigotry, nor should she be passing her prejudices along to white kids.

There is a fine line between reasonable and unreasonable consequences for such public expressions. However, since online swarming does happen and does damage the reputations and businesses of employers, they do have to protect themselves. They should make clear with every new hire the risks and potential consequences of intemperate online behavior.

And adults do need to learn that the internet is very public--and more "forever" than diamonds!

[tblue37]

16. BTW, the book I mentioned was written in response to

the way a dumb (borderline racist) joke tweet cost PR professional Justine Sacco her job and ruined her career. I can't remember the book title. Here is a good article on the subject:

"Social Media, Bullying, and the Growing Lynch Mob Mentality"
http://dannybrown.me/2014/01/07/social-media-bullying-and-the-growing-lynch-mob-mentality/

[Matrosov]

14. You represent your employer

Imagine having to hire and fire people at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital and then being asked, 'Why do you allow white supremacist to work for you?' Of course you could say that what they do away from work is none of your business, but the reality is that their private opinions have an influence on your productivity, whether it is encouraging other white supremacists at the work place or alienating employees of colors. So even from a pure business point of view, you don't want a white supremacist working for you, maybe unless your core audience consists of white supremacists.

[tblue37]

9. sounds like this Arkansas second grade teacher:

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/run-their-ass-over-arkansas-teacher-refuses-to-apologize-for-threats-against-black-lives-matter/


https://m.facebook.com/MichaelQuanderWREG/photos/pcb.922662927842826/922662817842837/?type=3

[Blue_Adept]

13. A lot of contracts are including social media clauses these days

So no surprise there.