[WTF?!] School Guard fired for telling disruptive student to stop calling me the n-word

Kasey Chang · Post by **Kasey Chang** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:26 am

Apparently, this zero-tolerance policy on "racial slurs" is absolutely idiotic.

A black security guard at Madison West High School in Madison, Wisconsin, asked a student—also black—to stop calling him the n-word. The school fired the security guard, citing its zero-tolerance policy on racial slurs.

Lorini · Post by **Lorini** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:27 am

They are re-visiting it.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 12:29 pm

Most zero tolerance policies are.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 12:49 pm

They should have zero tolerance on bad administrative decisions.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 1:08 pm

Too bad you cant teach common sense.

Drazzil · Post by **Drazzil** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:12 pm

The security guard should by no means be upset. For one Cher agreed to foot his legal bill if he sues (which he totally should) This is a total payday for him. I wish one of my employers shitcanned me in such an offensive and possibly illegal manner. The school district will be BEGGING to make this disappear.

This guy will get a new house out of this at minimum. I'd be cheering in the streets.

Ænima · Post by **Ænima** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 5:14 pm

Most people just want to work hard and be compensated for their work and treated with respect. People who are hoping that they get wronged so they can sue and not have to work are leeches on society.

Drazzil · Post by **Drazzil** » Sat Oct 19, 2019 11:51 pm

Ænima wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 5:14 pm Most people just want to work hard and be compensated for their work and treated with respect. People who are hoping that they get wronged so they can sue and not have to work are leeches on society.

Yes. But after the fact. After he was discharged in the manner he was, he should have no problem nailing the SD to the wall for a large payday.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:23 am

Drazzil wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 11:51 pm
Ænima wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 5:14 pm Most people just want to work hard and be compensated for their work and treated with respect. People who are hoping that they get wronged so they can sue and not have to work are leeches on society.
Yes. But after the fact. After he was discharged in the manner he was, he should have no problem nailing the SD to the wall for a large payday.

Maybe he isn't the type to give himself a 'large payday' by taking money from a school.

Drazzil · Post by **Drazzil** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:29 am

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:23 am
Drazzil wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 11:51 pm
Ænima wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 5:14 pm Most people just want to work hard and be compensated for their work and treated with respect. People who are hoping that they get wronged so they can sue and not have to work are leeches on society.
Yes. But after the fact. After he was discharged in the manner he was, he should have no problem nailing the SD to the wall for a large payday.
Maybe he isn't the type to give himself a 'large payday' by taking money from a school.

Based on the curcumstances I gleaned, if he doesen't; more fool him.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:32 am

Yes, because taking education away from kids to prove a point is always classy.

Drazzil · Post by **Drazzil** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:46 am

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:32 am Yes, because taking education away from kids to prove a point is always classy.

Classy left the equasion when the administration, who btw according to the pay scale make just in wage 4-5x his compensation daily decided to fire the officer in a manner that was ethically, if not legally bullshit.

Now if you're arguing that the lawsuit would likely come out of the kids somewhere; I'd be inclined to agree. The administration always protects itself. That said; I'm sure the administration would have the political cover to make a few positions immediately "redundant". Starting with the administratrators who were involved in the decision to fire this guy.

PS: It appears that this guy was fired in part for a zero tolerance policy towards racism that was in fact implimented after instances of racism towards students and may in itself be racially motivated.

Nothing at all in the world motivates change then hitting an organization in the wallet. I would argue that if this man lets this go; he will in fact be complicit in its future occurance.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:00 am

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:05 am

Drazzil · Post by **Drazzil** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:28 am

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 1:00 am

I *totally* get what you're trying to say... I just... yaknow... disagree. I'm gonna point out a few more things before I shut up.

First, now that I think about it, the school and district has to have insurance against these suits. Their premiums may go up if the lawsuit is sucessfully settled. My guess is that it won't be as much if these issues are addressed in a meaningful manner *cough* firetheadministrators *cough*

Second: This guy is going to be quite unhirable in the days, weeks, months and even YEARS after making national news for this incident. One google of his name and his resume goes off into the circular filing cabinet. His earning potential is effing toast.

Third: The district may indeed offer this guy his job back. Or they will not. They WILL urge him to sign a comprensive release waiving any and all right to sue in the future "for the children" If he has accepted his job back heres the important thing: He made them look bad, they WILL find a reason to fire him again.

The only way this guy contunues with his life is if he sues.

morlac · Post by **morlac** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:29 am

Ænima wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 5:14 pm Most people just want to work hard and be compensated for their work and treated with respect. People who are hoping that they get wronged so they can sue and not have to work are leeches on society.

One would need to contributing to society to understand this.

Drazzil · Post by **Drazzil** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:02 pm

morlac wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:29 am
Ænima wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 5:14 pm Most people just want to work hard and be compensated for their work and treated with respect. People who are hoping that they get wronged so they can sue and not have to work are leeches on society.
One would need to contributing to society to understand this.

Yeah, bypass all the points I made to be condecending.

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:24 pm

You can disagree with his stance, but don't make personal attacks.
Not cool.

gameoverman · Post by **gameoverman** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 2:25 pm

If the guard sues the school district and wins, or gets a settlement, he's not taking anything away from the kids. The taxpayers foot the bill, same as they do when cops abuse their authority and their victims win a lawsuit or get a settlement. If the LAPD has to pay someone a million dollars in a settlement does that mean the LAPD has one million dollars less in their budget this year? Haha, no.

If you don't like that, your quarrel is with the dumbass who did the stupid thing, not the person who was wronged by that person being stupid.

Kasey Chang · Post by **Kasey Chang** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 4:40 pm

Taxpayer always foot the bill, because taxpayers voted in the school board that hired the idiot administrators.

em2nought · Post by **em2nought** » Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:49 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 1:08 pm Too bad you cant teach common sense.

Nobody would sign up for the class.

Scuzz · Post by **Scuzz** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:37 am

Kasey Chang wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 4:40 pm Taxpayer always foot the bill, because taxpayers voted in the school board that hired the idiot administrators.

Agreed. But schools are still like any other business where sometimes the only way to make them appreciate their own idiotic policies is to sue their ass, even if the money is from the taxpayers. Like suing cops for their actions. Insurance usually pays the largest amount.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:46 am

And the taxpayers pay for the insurance.

Lorini · Post by **Lorini** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:30 am

Maybe we should start a new thread on this issue, but the core issue here is that the people who made the mistake are totally divorced from the fine. So why should they care? To me this a a serious problem with misconduct by public employees.

Lorini · Post by **Lorini** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:25 pm

NBA creating zero tolerance rule for fans. Although I think this one won't have the repercussions of the school guard firing, fans are at the mercy of the league and are told that when buying tickets.

Drazzil · Post by **Drazzil** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:45 pm

Lorini wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:25 pm NBA creating zero tolerance rule for fans. Although I think this one won't have the repercussions of the school guard firing, fans are at the mercy of the league and are told that when buying tickets.

I think it's great that the NBA is doing this. Some of the most creative, funny (and insulting) fan jeers can be used WITHOUT being abusive, racist or vulgar.

Example: Years ago, Shaq bought a yacht and asked what it should be named. One creative facebooker said "Three points" It'll never sink with you on it!"

Drazzil · Post by **Drazzil** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:47 pm

Lorini wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:30 am Maybe we should start a new thread on this issue, but the core issue here is that the people who made the mistake are totally divorced from the fine. So why should they care? To me this a a serious problem with misconduct by public employees.

Think they won't be fired if a lawsuit gets settled? Think the union go out of it's way to defend the admins?

Drazzil · Post by **Drazzil** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:47 pm

Lorini wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:30 am Maybe we should start a new thread on this issue, but the core issue here is that the people who made the mistake are totally divorced from the fine. So why should they care? To me this a a serious problem with misconduct by public employees.

That is an *excellent* thread idea.

em2nought · Post by **em2nought** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:46 pm

Lorini wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:25 pm NBA creating zero tolerance rule for fans. Although I think this one won't have the repercussions of the school guard firing, fans are at the mercy of the league and are told that when buying tickets.

No bad mouthing China?

Scuzz · Post by **Scuzz** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:46 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:46 am And the taxpayers pay for the insurance.

So your arguement would be if a taxpayer funded institution somehow violates your rights or wrongs you in a legal sense you should just bend over and take it?

There is a difference between what is frivilous and what is deserved. If your action can prevent future illegal actions by said institution then you should sue. Maybe they change policies or get rid of the people who are causing the problems.

Lorini · Post by **Lorini** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:47 pm

em2nought wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:46 pm
Lorini wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:25 pm NBA creating zero tolerance rule for fans. Although I think this one won't have the repercussions of the school guard firing, fans are at the mercy of the league and are told that when buying tickets.
No bad mouthing China?

??? Adam Silver the commissioner already said more than once that bad mouthing China is just fine. Or is this another hepcat style quote?

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:54 pm

Scuzz wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:46 pm
Jaymann wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:46 am And the taxpayers pay for the insurance.
So your arguement would be if a taxpayer funded institution somehow violates your rights or wrongs you in a legal sense you should just bend over and take it?

There is a difference between what is frivilous and what is deserved. If your action can prevent future illegal actions by said institution then you should sue. Maybe they change policies or get rid of the people who are causing the problems.

Dude, relax. I'm just saying no matter how you slice it the taxpayer takes it in the shorts.

gameoverman · Post by **gameoverman** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 4:34 pm

The only reason I brought up the taxpayers being the ones who pay is because of the implication that the guard, if he sues, would be taking something from the kids. In my opinion, worrying about who will pay is not a reason to tell someone to not sue. If you have a case then you should sue. The ones paying can sort out who loses what amongst themselves, that's not your problem.

If some organization has a 50 million dollar budget and has to pay out 1 million in a settlement, it's up to them to either raise more funds or eliminate 1 million dollars in expenses. If it's a school, and the things they decide to eliminate are things the kids need, that's the fault of the people deciding to take it from the kids, not the fault of the person suing.

em2nought · Post by **em2nought** » Mon Oct 21, 2019 7:16 pm

Lorini wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:47 pm Or is this another hepcat style quote?

It's an apparently failed attempt at levity.

Lorini · Post by **Lorini** » Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:22 am

em2nought wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 7:16 pm
Lorini wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:47 pm Or is this another hepcat style quote?
It's an apparently failed attempt at levity.

Yeah. Everyone is different and is entitled to say what they say

And I tend to take these things more seriously than some because as a person who cares about these things I find them disturbing on a personal basis.

Please carry on

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:01 am

Lorini wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:22 am
Yeah. Everyone is different and is entitled to say what they say And I tend to take these things more seriously than some because as a person who cares about these things I find them disturbing on a personal basis.

Please carry on

Pretty much everybody here - save for a couple of obvious individuals - cares about these things, some of us a lot. We aren't all directly affected by them in our everyday lives, or not all to the same degree as others, but we care. That said, some people just handle serious matters with levity. It doesn't mean that they don't take them seriously.

morlac · Post by **morlac** » Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:17 am

gameoverman wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 4:34 pm The only reason I brought up the taxpayers being the ones who pay is because of the implication that the guard, if he sues, would be taking something from the kids. In my opinion, worrying about who will pay is not a reason to tell someone to not sue. If you have a case then you should sue. The ones paying can sort out who loses what amongst themselves, that's not your problem.

If some organization has a 50 million dollar budget and has to pay out 1 million in a settlement, it's up to them to either raise more funds or eliminate 1 million dollars in expenses. If it's a school, and the things they decide to eliminate are things the kids need, that's the fault of the people deciding to take it from the kids, not the fault of the person suing.

I believe BH's main point was calling out the gleeful exuberance/jealousy of a poster who seemed excited for the guards potential coming windfall and how he would be a fool not to sue them into oblivion. The whole don't feel sorry for him because he is lucky he is black and was discriminated against vibe. Which is a sad if an unsurprising viewpoint.

That being said I mostly agree that the taxpayers take the hit but not the kids. However, public schools now a days are starved for funding. This could have a negative impact on said funding, public or private. That would in turn have a negative effect on the children. It could also lead to more funding from folks due to media exposure...who knows. The hope is that it inspires positive change for all involved parties but the reality is it will do nothing while it fades away from public view.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:34 am

Nothing in the past has moved the needle on zero tolerance policies. Since most of them are district-wide, it takes the pressure off of the individual administrators to make decisions about socially tempestuous issues. No choices = no blame for wrong choices, at least from their perspective. It's a cheap way to sidestep real issues without ever addressing them.

gameoverman · Post by **gameoverman** » Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:32 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:34 am Nothing in the past has moved the needle on zero tolerance policies. Since most of them are district-wide, it takes the pressure off of the individual administrators to make decisions about socially tempestuous issues. No choices = no blame for wrong choices, at least from their perspective. It's a cheap way to sidestep real issues without ever addressing them.

Yes, and I don't blame them for it. I'm not in favor of zero tolerance, it's basically a form of extremism to me. But I see the need for it. For one thing, if you give people in power discretion to wield that power as they see fit, the countdown to abuse has begun. Certain people will receive different consideration than other people. Zero tolerance is a brute force way to even the playing field. But it leads to stupid actions, since there's no way to account for every possible situation with an extreme 'you can never...' kind of rule.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:40 pm

I'd actually be more OK with zero tolerance as an immediate response with an automatic review/appeal afterward very soon afterward.