Moderated Using wrong pronouns= violence??

[Hercules56]

Hard to even keep focus on the number of moves you make with goal posts.

Unfortunately necessary since some folks want to play word games.

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

OSHA

What is workplace violence?

Workplace violence is any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior that occurs at the work site. It ranges from threats and verbal abuse to physical assaults and even homicide.

 

[Hercules56]

OSHA

"I called my coworker a "jerk" and I was fired for engaging in workplace violence"

 

[sarge]

Unfortunately necessary since some folks want to play word games.

Unfortunately necessary since some folks want to play word games.

There is exactly one ‘folk’ playing word games. Your original contention was that intentionally using the wrong pronoun can never be violence. When shown that several authoritative sources disagreed, you resorted to a dictionary definition of violence. When shown conclusively that even your chosen dictionary provided definitions of ‘violence’ that includes words, you pivoted to some u related babble about the difference between assault and battery.

The CU memo is a student authored piece that attempts to ensure that students are protected from intentional, aggressive misuse of personal pronouns. You (seemingly) oppose this and have invented from whole cloth increasingly false or far-fetched reasons that such a policy is wrong.

 

[lionking]

There is exactly one ‘folk’ playing word games.

I think Darat is making a good fist of it too, but there you go….

 

[sarge]

I think Darat is making a good fist of it too, but there you go….

I think Darat was merely being very precise in his use of words. That is sometimes persnickety and sometimes necessary.

 

[Lothian]

Using the wrong pronoun is not an act of physical violence and therefore can never justify a criminal charge of assault. There are no laws on the books that would allow such a thing.

....for now.

Oooh, I love the slippery slope fallacy.

 

[Darat]

"I called my coworker a "jerk" and I was fired for engaging in workplace violence"

Sounds right to me.

Now obviously every situation is different but in general terms - who wants to work with an actually demonstrated jerk? Certainly in the UK calling your colleague a jerk once (outside of camaraderie/humour/so on) would generally not be grounds for being sacked for gross misconduct but probably subject to some disciplinary action. Keep doing it and you will - eventually - be sacked for "calling my coworker a jerk". Equally certainly in the UK misgendering your colleague once (outside of camaraderie/humour/so on) would generally not be grounds for being sacked for gross misconduct but probably subject to some disciplinary action. Keep doing it and you will - eventually - be sacked for "misgendering my coworker".

I would be very surprised if it was much different in most countries.

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

"I called my coworker a "jerk" and I was fired for engaging in workplace violence"

Words alone can constitute workplace violence according to the government authority on workplace violence.

Otherwise, what Darat said.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

"I called my coworker a "jerk" and I was fired for engaging in workplace violence"

OSHA wisely not following the toddler rules of "I'm not touching you" when deciding that keeping the workplace free from intimidation and violence. Seems rather straightforward, if you want to keep the workplace safe from violence you don't tolerate behaviors that will in many cases escalate to violence. Wild stuff

 

[Lothian]

"I called my coworker a "jerk" and I was fired for engaging in workplace violence"

I couldn't see the text you quoted in the link. Is it real or are you making up quotes so you can be offended by them?

 

[Upchurch]

Unfortunately necessary since some folks want to play word games.

Be fair. You’re the one redefining the word, thereby playing the word games. CU Boulder was clearly using the non-physical form of the word. Most people here understood it as the non-physical form of the word. You’re the one conflating it and swapping definitions.

There is no shame in not knowing something. The problem comes when it is shown to someone and they reject it despite the evidence.

 

[Hercules56]

I couldn't see the text you quoted in the link. Is it real or are you making up quotes so you can be offended by them?

"
:
What is workplace violence?

Workplace violence is any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior that occurs at the work site. It ranges from threats and verbal abuse to physical assaults and even homicide"

 

[Hercules56]

Be fair. You’re the one redefining the word, thereby playing the word games. CU Boulder was clearly using the non-physical form of the word. Most people here understood it as the non-physical form of the word. You’re the one conflating it and swapping definitions.

There is no shame in not knowing something. The problem comes when it is shown to someone and they reject it despite the evidence.

Not gonna play word games, sorry.

 

[Upchurch]

Not gonna play word games, sorry.

Good. Please don’t.

 

[sarge]

Sounds right to me.

Now obviously every situation is different but in general terms - who wants to work with an actually demonstrated jerk? Certainly in the UK calling your colleague a jerk once (outside of camaraderie/humour/so on) would generally not be grounds for being sacked for gross misconduct but probably subject to some disciplinary action. Keep doing it and you will - eventually - be sacked for "calling my coworker a jerk". Equally certainly in the UK misgendering your colleague once (outside of camaraderie/humour/so on) would generally not be grounds for being sacked for gross misconduct but probably subject to some disciplinary action. Keep doing it and you will - eventually - be sacked for "misgendering my coworker".

I would be very surprised if it was much different in most countries.

It might be much different in some workplaces here. I worked 40 years for the federal government. We had codes of conduct, a unionized work force, and fairly detailed conditions for termination. In that environment, such behavior would follow the path you describe.

In much of the US (perhaps most), there are no real employment contracts, or at least when they exist they describe hours work and amount paid and not much else. In those jobs, it is the sole judgment of the employer that decides if you continue to work. One can be fired for calling a co-worker a jerk. One can be fired for complaining about a co-worker calling them a jerk.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

It might be much different in some workplaces here. I worked 40 years for the federal government. We had codes of conduct, a unionized work force, and fairly detailed conditions for termination. In that environment, such behavior would follow the path you describe.

In much of the US (perhaps most), there are no real employment contracts, or at least when they exist they describe hours work and amount paid and not much else. In those jobs, it is the sole judgment of the employer that decides if you continue to work. One can be fired for calling a co-worker a jerk. One can be fired for complaining about a co-worker calling them a jerk.

That's true, but with the caveat that making the employer making the wrong choice carries a substantial risk of being sued. At-will employment makes illegally firing people pretty easy, and often workers do not know or are not willing to exercise their rights, but the employer siding with an employee creating a hostile work environment rather than the victim is a great way to lose a large amount of money.

 

[sarge]

"
:
What is workplace violence?

Workplace violence is any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior that occurs at the work site. It ranges from threats and verbal abuse to physical assaults and even homicide"

The Federal Government says that workplace violence is:

Any act of violence
A threat of physical violence
Harassment
Intimidation
Verbal abuse


Unless you contend that intentionally and repeatedly misgendering someone is not verbal abuse, it is irrefutably established that misgendering someone can be an act of violence, at least according to the US Government.

 

[sarge]

That's true, but with the caveat that making the employer making the wrong choice carries a substantial risk of being sued. At-will employment makes illegally firing people pretty easy, and often workers do not know or are not willing to exercise their rights, but the employer siding with an employee creating a hostile work environment rather than the victim is a great way to lose a large amount of money.

In an at-will state (use North Carolina), what liability for wrongful termination would an employer be at risk of if they fired an employee that had complained about another employee calling them names that that doesn’t constitute one of the specifically prohibited practices? Specifically, a ‘jerk’.

ETA: In NC, an employer can fire an employee for any reason or no reason at all except for their inclusion in a protected class. The most common protected categories are those that protect an employee's civil rights based on age, race, sex, religion, national origin, color, disability [including the Americans with Disabilities Act], or pregnancy

 

[dirtywick]

idk guys, the workplace is one of the last few places you can say whatever you want