Iowa Supreme Court Rules That Ladies Can Be Fired For Being Too Damn Fine

**Ksandra** · 2012-12-22 18:53

I guess it depends on whether there was a dress code when she was hired? I can kinda see what they're saying if technically she was violating the code set by the business, though the boss went about it the wrong way fighting it (ie should have just said the dress policy not that he was getting mad boners).

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-12-22 19:00

He's not firing her for being a part of a protected class.

Therefore he can fire her if he wants to. Welcome to America, home of the free.

**D44kpunk** · 2012-12-22 19:03

i also live in iowa and lol'd when i read this

**Churchill** · 2012-12-22 19:20

yeah this is the same as any other personality based reason to fire someone, if you negatively impact a groups performance it isn't up to the group to deal with it as long as those reasons aren't simply "she's a woman" or "he's a nignog".

**Correction** · 2012-12-22 19:26

Originally Posted by Churchill

if you negatively impact a groups performance

In a subsequent conversation between Knight and Nelson's husband, Knight said Nelson had not done nothing wrong and that "she was the best dental assistant he ever had," the decision read.

That doesn't seem to be the case here. He fired her because his wife was pissed off at the flirting, which was mutual. He got the court to side with him because it's a mans world, and women should know better than to be attractive around married men or something.

**Churchill** · 2012-12-22 19:32

Creating family problems is negatively impacting performance. I'm also not keen on hearing arguments that the US Court system is biased in favor of males, there's a get the fuck out for that.

**hey** · 2012-12-22 19:32

Originally Posted by Correction

and women should know better than to be attractive around married men or something.

I think that's the problem.

**Eurell** · 2012-12-22 19:36

It wasn't just being good looking. She was flirting with her boss.

Don't wanna get fired? Don't talk about your boss's boner.

Edit: Im sure oout of all the women he hires, she isnt the only good one he has ever worked with.

**Correction** · 2012-12-22 20:20

Originally Posted by Churchill

Creating family problems is negatively impacting performance. I'm also not keen on hearing arguments that the US Court system is biased in favor of males, there's a get the fuck out for that.

The family problems were mutually created and she's shouldering an unjust share of the burden here.

Originally Posted by Eurell

Don't wanna get fired? Don't talk about your boss's boner.

Reading is fundamental. The employer was the one talking about his boner.

**Eurell** · 2012-12-22 20:27

Originally Posted by Correction

Reading is fundamental. The employer was the one talking about his boner.

Yeah I completely misread that. The way the sentence was worded, I just assumed it was her saying that. My mistake.

In that case, If she didn't actually do anything inappropriate, then Idk wtf. It seemed to me at first that they were both out of line, but now I'm not so sure lol.

**Churchill** · 2012-12-22 20:32

So should he fire himself

**Qalbert** · 2012-12-22 20:52

probably fired himself a few times what with the mad boners he was poppin

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-12-22 21:08

Guys, I repeat, you can get fired for anything other than being a protected status. Being boner worthy isn't a protected status. The end.

**Chamaan** · 2012-12-22 22:02

What about sexy white rhinos?

**guartz** · 2012-12-22 22:09

I don't see how this is gender bias. A female boss could fire a male employee for being too hot, if it starts to affect her adversely.

**ronin sparthos** · 2012-12-22 22:17

Originally Posted by guartz

I don't see how this is gender bias. A female boss could fire a male employee for being too hot, if it starts to affect her adversely.

Sam, stop wearing those assless chaps with the dickflap its soooo distracting.

**Khajit** · 2012-12-22 22:26

I dont see it as it being ruled that a person can be fired for looking too good as it being ruled that the dude was whipped so bad you'd think his name was Kuta Kintae.

**ronin sparthos** · 2012-12-22 22:34

Originally Posted by Khajit

I dont see it as it being ruled that a person can be fired for looking too good as it being ruled that the dude was whipped so bad you'd think his name was Kuta Kintae.

A good wife would have agreed to the threesome to nip the sexual tension the bud, naturally.

**dejet** · 2012-12-23 07:26

I have to say though

Toward the end of her employment, Knight complained to Nelson her clothing was tight and "distracting," the decision read. She denied her clothes were inappropriate.

that alone should of told her if she wants to keep her job just dont dress nicely. Its work, if I could dress down fuck I would lol.

The next line is epic tho.

At one point, Knight told Nelson that "if she saw his pants bulging, she would know her clothing was too revealing," the decision read.

**kuronosan** · 2012-12-23 08:10

The guy was obviously attracted to her from the get-go and, when his wife found out he probably was wanting to fuck his assistant, suddenly decided not losing his practice was more valuable than keeping an employee that probably made him happier than his wife was making him.

The Supreme Court backing him is just an example of male dominance, because if a woman had done this there would have been no set precedent. They would have sent her home packing with a ticket saying "lol u cant fire sum1 4 being 2 hot".

Thread: Iowa Supreme Court Rules That Ladies Can Be Fired For Being Too Damn Fine

Thread Tools

Re: Iowa Supreme Court Rules That Ladies Can Be Fired For Being Too Damn Fine

Latest Threads

Up & Coming Threads

Hottest Threads