E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
KPRC
Sarah Tressler appears at a news conference in Los Angeles May 10, 2012. Sarah Tressler is suing her former employer, the Houston Chronicle, after she was fired. Tressler's lawyer, Gloria Allred, says her client's firing was sexually discriminatory.
The former Houston Chronicle reporter who was fired after another publication exposed her second job as a night club stripper announced Thursday she had filed a federal gender discrimination complaint against the paper that let her go.
In her complaint, Sarah Tressler, 30, is asking the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to look into the Chronicle's decision to fire her. Tressler says an editor told her she was let go because she hadn't disclosed her side gig in her job application.
"I was very upset that I was fired because I had been told by many editors that I was doing a good job," Tessler said in a statement. "There was no question on the form that covered my dancing. I answered the questions on the form honestly."
Tressler announced she filed the complaint at a news conference with her lawyer, Beverly Hills celebrity attorney Gloria Allred. Later, Tressler tweeted: "Couldn't ask for anyone better by my side ... So grateful."
The Houston Press, an alternative weekly, first exposed the "double life" of Tressler in a feature story with the headline "Writer by day, stripper by night." It also drew attention to Tressler’s blog — Diary of an Angry Stripper — which included pictures of her scantily-clad self, as well as rich detail from the inside of the gentlemen's club.
Society reporter moonlighting as stripper fired by Chronicle
During her two-month reporting gig, Tressler covered high society, human interest stories, and fashion. She had previously worked as a freelancer for the Chronicle. Tressler "very rarely" worked as an exotic dancer, a skill that helped her pay for college, she said at the news conference, according to local TV station KPRC.
Tressler said she occasionally went to the club for exercise.
"And I didn't have a gym membership. So, on days off I might just go in there in the afternoon and do a couple stage rotations and knock it out," she said.
KPRC reports that Tressler, who has a master's degree in journalism from New York University, also teaches part time at the University of Houston.
"Most exotic dancers are female, and therefore to terminate an employee because they had previously been an exotic dancer would have an adverse impact on women, since it is a female dominated occupation," Allred, who is a self-described feminist lawyer, said in a statement.
"Sarah’s work as a dancer is lawful and is not a crime. It does not, has not and will not affect her ability to perform her job as a journalist," the statement read.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
Those darn freedom loving Texans.
I would like to see her strip!
:D
Gosh really....I think the answer is rather simple...If the application afforded her the opportunity to disclose that she taught for the University of Houston then it also afforded her the opportunity to disclose that she also stripped at a Gentleman's club. It isn't rocket science. If you lie on a job application you risk getting fired. Pretty simple concept. The fact that she was both stripper and reporter is much more a conflict of interest, given her areas of coverage, than being a teacher at Uof H and a Reporter. Being a Stripper and University instructor could actually lead to a conflict of interest as well.
NOW NOW GLORIA, what a SEXIST statement, as many women will tell you there are PLENTY of male strippers, too. To declare it hurts women and not everyone, is to show your bias (or that you'll say anything if you think it gets a headline).
Allred is to faux-sexism what Al Sharpton is to race-baiting. 2 peas in a pod looking for the next big press conference (or someone's funeral to attend) to stay relevant.
Just my opinion...
What she does on her own time is her own business. She is beautiful and has the right to work where she wants after the day job. The what IF she does this and what IF she does that is BS, guess what? It's nobodys business but hers..........3 for $50 dance please :)
Seven- Most employers that I've worked for ask for you to declare your moonlighting or out-right prohibit it, especially if it may impact your work.
Depending on her schedule at "the office" and the trashy strip bar, and that at this time being a stripper isn't really seen as a credible profession, I can see where it would absolutely cause issues.
Right or wrong, they have standing to say, "We don't like you working elsewhere, and the image you portray online isn't what we want."
Personally, I think this is all a ploy to draw attention to her "book" which is probably material covered by thousands of other books, and from what I can see of her site, not really worth anyone's time. But hey, spend your money where you want. I think in the end she'll make more at the T***y-bar. Might be interesting to see in a year what the outcome of all this is.
How many of those reporters and editors go to these clubs?
It's ridiculous the double standards of society and such b@s. She wasn't a political reporter, she handled fashion reporting.
Maybe an expose of the editors and reporters of the paper attending these club is needed.
How low do you have to go, to embarras a company that hires reporters...thats kinda like a lawyer up on ethics charges...or a baseball player being charged with lying to a politician...
This from the "About Sarah" section from Angry Stripper.
txmom32: There is no requirement to list your current or previous employer(s) under the Fair Labor Act. Legal grounds for termination would be if she listed an employer, or employment record, that was false, but there is no grounds for termination for failure to list a current or previous employer. Also, the majority of 'gentleman's clubs' do not actually employ the dancers. Dancer's are considered 'Independent Contractors' and do not receive any compensation from the club. Technically if she listed 'self employed' on her application she would be making an honest statement.
DAMN......... Now why did they fire this guy again? ROUGH RUFF
A Stripper isn't a degrading position, it's part of our culture and a means of making income. Apparently, she is taking care of her body and looks. How many professionals visits Gentlemen Clubs to unwind and relax.
Don't hate the game.
Did she lie? Because it sounded like she told her employer what she did.
This is going to be tough for her. I don't think because there's anything wrong with having any sidejob. But employers in many industries (financial, for example, where I work, as well as healthcare, education, etc.) can dismiss or not hire you due to having a second career. If it doesn't interfere with your work, there may not be an inherent problem with it, but a lot of bosses look at second careers as inherently interfering and have used it legitimately to dismiss people.
We shall see in the future where this leads, but she's going to have to prove discrimination, which is not going to be easy.
@Cheryl - it is a degrading activity! From her picture - she looks like a stripper! Far from a professional new person. There are so many clues - the hard mark-up, the different color nail polish on each nail, and that overall look of worn out! I bet she is no older than 27 and looks like she is 40+! Look at the wrinkles on her neckline! Just sad! I hope she did lie on her application - can her a$$!!! Let her go back to working as a "stripper" - of course we know she never stopped! LMAO!
Why did she file for gender discrimination? Aren't there male strippers in Texas?
DaveWH...what does FLSA have to do with this discussion? The dispute is not over unpaid wages or any other standard covered by FLSA rather the fact that she did not disclose her stripper jobs. Sort of seems like you are unfamiliar with the limited purpose of FLSA.
It could have been very reasonable for her to state that she were self-employed (even if that vocation is as a stripper) in addition to being Lecturer at the University of Houston, which was probably a part time gig as she refers to herself as an adjunct professor. Basically truthful disclosure would have afforded her employer a full view of her qualifications during the interview process. It would have afforded her employer the opportunity to compare her against other applicants on a level playing field. There were most certainly other applicants for the position who were equally as qualified and possibly more so by virtue of making their position at the paper their main focus in vocation.
Your argument seems to be misplaced...anyway...
Being a stripper does not make a person a bad employee if their other qualifications are valued.
Being a liar, on the other hand, makes you pretty useless employee to a Newspaper.
Two words that extinguishes her credibility: Gloria Allred.
How??? Because she is wearing makeup??? I will not judge, I think degredation is subjective. You think its a terrible thing to do, so you are the one being judgemental.
right or wrong Texas is an at will state - you may be fired for no reason at all.
Gloria Allred has taken the woman's side for decades now. There is no shame in hiring the best. Men do it all the time.
This woman is doing what she wants; dancing, whether with the ABT or Exotic or Belly is just the most fun a woman can have outside of the sexual arena.
This is one of the few cases where I believe it's a good idea to sue. She was a good journalist and there weren't any real conflicts of interest. Whoever fired her needs to be punished for infringing on her freedom to have a side job.
I find it funny that you can have a sex tape and become famous in this country making boatloads of money in the process. Kardashian anyone? This woman is a writer which doesn't really have hours but deadlines and she gets fired for showing the goods from time to time. On the flip side if she worked for a Christian organization they would have the right to let her go, at least it seems that way.
As for Allred, the woman wasn't fired because of her sex she was fired because of her other profession. You might not agree with the firing but to bring a lawsuit is another waste of the courts and taxpayers money. The last several people she has represented are either mothers with too many kids, strippers or Tiger Woods mistresses. There's a true champion of a cause.
If she lied on her application, it is grounds for dismissal. Most job apps I have seen ask for info on any moonlighting jobs.
The gender-discrimination suit should be tossed. They didn't fire her because she was hired on the assumption that she was male and they suddenly found out she was female. She's not going to be able to make a case that a male reporter who stripped on the side would not be fired. The lawsuit is frivolous.
This firing is about one thing...her lack of giving a crap about others views of morality. She did what a lot of people have to do to make ends meet, work 2 or 3 jobs. Just because some people are prudes does not mean that this lady was in the wrong. People saying she should be fired for not showing the proper respect to morality is total BS.
Something that I haven't seen mentioned: Does the Houston Chronicle have a policy against outside empoyment of any kind? My employer is clear in their position that any "moonlighting" must be approved by the company, or it will be grounds for termination. (You'll notice that I made no mention of the TYPE of outside employment involved...that could throw out the whole discrimination thing).
What a shame as a reporter she would bare all in a story and as a stripper she would..........bare all.
I think it has to do with the respect a reporter should command in their job, think about it, what if Barbara Walters stripped?...oh God..mental image ...think i just i just barfed a little in my own mouth..OH GOD..make it stop!!!!.(*DIES*)
i don't object morally to exotic dancing as much as, say- tapping someone's phone line to get a news story...
cruzin,
I don't think most professional jobs use applications. She probably submitted a resume and only listed her relevant experience. I didn't put my job at Taco Bell on my resume because it's not relevant to the position for which I am applying. Read any professional resume website and they will tell you to do just that.
Only if her contract explicitly forbade outside employment should she have been sacked.
Noone wants to admit it? It's obvious why she was fired, she wouldn't give the editor in chief a free lap dance! It's obviously sexual harrassment!
I'm continually amazed at common misconceptions of reality. The news business and the dancing business are much more alike than they are different.
I'm not sure what is so degrading about being a stripper. Strippers can make pretty good money. If anyone would have a soiled reputation it should be the poor schmucks who throw away good money just to see a female body. If I were the newspaper, I'd be much more concerned if any of the reporters frequented these establishments.
These "professions" are pretty similar in that one could argue that both deal with an element of sleaze. The difference is that the dancers are just dancing and it is the watchers could be said to be seeking the sleaze. In the reporting business it is the reporters who are seeking the sleaze so that they can get ahead with sensational stories.
Not a perfect analogy, but it does point out that the firing is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black. But, in an employment-at-will state, one can fire for any reason. Not sure that this is necessarily sex discrimination. It would be if any of the male employees were known to frequent such clubs and they weren't terminated too.
Maybe if employers paid a decent wage and school debt wasn't so high people wouldn't need a second third or fourth job in the first place.
"Why did she file for gender discrimination? Aren't there male strippers in Texas?"
Actually Denver Bill 2, no, there are not.
Guys that wish to see male strippers have to travel to Louisiana.
The perfect woman! A stripper with a job.
In this economy if she can make money that way more power to her. People really need to stop being so uptight about the female body.
i like to see her do the news...today the top blew off the house'n market...and the bottom fell off on wall street...
LOL plain
Todd..
.it is nit quite that easy...we are still accountable, as is every other state, to Federal law. We just aren't strangled by outside interests like unions.
Now, let's see ... if she doesn't list her "stripping" job, she can get fired, and if she does, she won't get hired. Sounds like a Catch-22 to me. I faced the same thing 40 years ago as a Viet Nam combat veteran. If I listed my service (5 years) on my application, I wouldn't get hired (I actually had a couple of employers literally tear my application in half in front of me.), but if I didn't list it and got hired, I'd be fired for lying (not telling everything) on my application. Damned if you do and damaned if you don't. She is a stunningly pretty woman. If she isn't "hooking" or doing anything else illegal, why should the newspaper care. (Oh, I forgot. They might want her to flagrantly violate whatever laws they want to get her story. But this doesn't count.)
A lot of people are saying that she lied on her job application. Nowhere in the article does it mention that. In fact, it says that she answered the questions honestly. So, they can't fire her for lying on her job application if she did not in fact lie. If somewhere on the application it says you MUST list all jobs for which you are currently working, then she lied. Most applications that ask you to list your job history don't say MUST. You can chose to leave jobs off of there. You are selling yourself to get the job. If you are applying for a teaching position, it would be helpful to show that you taught in several different places and show references. It would not be helpful to show that you worked at Burger King to put yourself through college.
for those like ready2change... yes even putting Burger King on your resume can help you. after all you show initiative in working while going to school, it shows a strong work ethic, as well customer service and following orders. any job experience can have skills you learned that transfers to whatever position you are applying for.
i think the issue is that she is a "society" and fashion writer.. society.. does not include strippers... and they also run the risk of her going to an event.. and running into a guy who is married, rich and high profile that put a 20 in her gstring the week before. seriously not cool.
Tseirpa: There is a difference between application and resume (curiculum vitae).
You think she was hired....for her ...journalistic...ability? That her looks were not considered at all to be a reporter? What news channel has any ugly women doing the news...weather, reports of anykind? NONE. As Lou Grant says....kid...you've got spunk.........
I...on the otherhand, do recogonize that she has a beautiful mind and that should be the only criteria for doing the news.
Readytochange..I say..ditto!
Anyone siding with Tessler is missing the point. I'm not buying her gym story, this has the feel of a liberal determined to undermine the organization; to drive a point home through lies and manipulation. She got a feminist lawyer too? That's never really a good sign. I hope the paper counter-sues. A majority of the comments supporting her sound like desperate men, so captivated by the thought of seeing skin, they forget to use more of their brains than their frontal lobes.
Something is amiss about this woman. Anyone going to voluntarily work in the sex industry, when they have a steady job, is questionable anyway. She has a masters degree in journalism and has to go to the strip club for exercise? Yeah right. A pair of running shoes and a resistance band can't be that expensive. Shoot, you can get zumba, or some cheap dance video, and workout at home. This is purely about Tessler's narcissism.Perhaps there was no specific question that directly asked: Are you a stripper, check yes or no, but i am sure, something similar was asked. I will hold my beliefs till I see the application. I'm sure she is lying and milking this for all it's worth.
If the question on the application reads something like "please list all current and previous employers" - then by not mentioning her second job, she is subject to the penalties for that omission. Which is usually termination. Or grounds for not being offered the position.
She was not actually an employee of the strip club because did not have a schedule and only worked when she wanted to. She was an independent contractor.
The manager does not tell the stripper how to dance or what songs to dance to. The manager only tells them to get the patrons to spend more money in their club. Some "dancers" may not even dance. They might just mingle with the patrons. Dancers dance for the tips and to entice patrons to buy them drinks at inflated prices.
I heard she was fired because she didn't tell her bosses she was stripping. They all wanted to take in the show but didn't know the address. But it was a gentleman's club, so they might have not gotten in anyway, even if they knew where it was!!
Even if she wins I would not take my job back if I were her. They will just find every excuse to fire her afterwards. Best for her to just take a settlement or judgement award and go elsewhere. This exposure...may help her finding another gig as a reporter.
Houston was crummy when I lived there (late 70s) How is it now?
This newspaper will fold like a cheap suit to Allred. Good for her. Its not like the person is a teacher around kids.
yeah, maybe she can get a job for a TV news station and start a new segment called "The Naked Truth", i know i'd watch.
Just a waste of money on attorney fees. In America you have the freedom to fire somebody for just about anything (save for a short list of things like race, religion, etc), just as an employee can quit for any reason. This kind of freedom is what makes America a great place to live.
My boss is free to fire me for going fishing during off-work hours if she pleases. And I can quit if I don't like the way she wears her hair. Don't change anything, this is the way it should be.
that's only in certain states. some states you have to have a good cause to fire someone. unfortunately i don't live in one.
Sorry Bernardo, but I believe you are wrong. There is such a thing as anti-discrimination laws in this country, even though many states are "right to work" states, that doesn't exempt them from the law.
Fortunately, this is NOT the way it should be.
Is it just me, or are all the wackos lately been from Texas and Arizona?
Hatr-Hunter....actually lying on a job application is a valid reason to fire anyone anywhere. Also...most employees in Texas are automatically on a six month contingent basis...She was only on staff for two months. Job openings at the Chronicle are rather hard to come by and maybe another equally qualified candidate would have been awarded the job if Miss Tressler had been open and disclosed all of her work experience and her current avenues for income.
Do you attend strip clubs?
Not often but it is fun to take a 100 $1's and 20 $5's and start a "shark" feeding frenzy on the stage.....
Hugh, it's not discrimination to not want a stripper working for you. If she had said she had stripped before during her interview, and they chose not to hire her after that, it would in no way be gender discrimination because as a reporter her personal history and reputation reflects on her employer (as evidenced by the exposure piece done by the other newspaper to sensationalize the association). It would be discrimination if they fired her because they found out she was a Mormon, or something along those lines. Strippers can be both male and female, and stripping is not a protected area like race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.. As long as they didn't keep a Chippendales dancer on staff after finding out about his night job, her discrimination claim is flimsy.
??but it is if she is gay, even if she didn't tell during her interview??
Bernardo, you may be right under common law, but does it make sense? If the person employed is doing their job properly and does not have any conflicts of interest that are undisclosed, why should an employer be free to fire anyone at any time for any reason? Shouldn't there at least be a job-related reason? You have way too much faith in employers and give them too much power.
Only specific forms of discrimination. 'Fishing' for example is not a protected class.
Sex, Religion, Race, Age, and Disability are examples of a protected class. That's why she is suing for sex discrimination and why they are using the 'strippers are mostly woman' angel instead of just discrimination against strippers..
Businesses want to make money, that is their #1 goal. A newspaper is no different. Reporting the news is secondary to making money. They decided that the liability for having a reporter also being a stripper was greater than hiring another reporter with a less 'controversial' past time.
(For the record I have nothing against strippers, it's a willing choice on their behalf)
Back to the money though, it cost money to train new employees. So no, they won't randomly fire people just because they can. That hurts the bottom line. But if they feel the person is costing them more to keep them, then to train up a new employee ... they are in every right to fire them in a Right to Work state.
I would think that a beautiful woman like her could ask about any question and get an answer for a report. I would think she would be an excellent asset in the media field.
Huh,huh...you said "ass"et.
Sounds like she's missing the attention garnered from her past noturnal employment. Nothing like a law suit to ring in round two of "15 Minutes of Fame"!
Exactly. She worked at the paper for all of two months, and she wants to create a federal case? Seriously. If this isn't attention-whoring I don't know what is.
Besides, good luck proving it was "gender discrimination." If they fire you for moonlighting or being dishonest in omission of facts in your job application...NEITHER of those two things pertain to gender.
I can admit that I have never filled out an application that didn't ask for previous employment history (maybe the paper's doesnt) and it shouldn't matter what a person's side job is the fact is is that this is a private company that has a right to hire and fire people as they see fit. If a person could tarnish the reputation of a company that I had, I sure wouldn't want that person working for me. The company is not to blame here, she needed to disclose this info when she 1st was hired, and it would be one thing if it was a job she had earlier in life as opposed to a job that she still has. I wouldn't doubt that she was the person who sent in the tip that she was stripping as a side job to get some publicity out of it. Hoping that a possible lawsuit might arrise from her being fired.
Allred the ambulance chaser! She should know that employers can terminate people just for having a second job, let alone being a stripper. On top of that, they have the right to terminate an employee for behavior negatively impacting the reputation of the employer and/or for moral issues. Gloria is just looking for a chance to get in front of the cameras again, to heck with her client.
How many of these reporters go to strip clubs in their off-hours?
Ozzi it takes a certain type of person to frequent strip clubs. To try and take the negative image off of it - they try to call them "upscale" - no matter which one you step into the activity is the same. To make men feel better about themselves - they try to make it feel right! There is NOTHING right about a strip club or the idiots that work in them. It is just another cover for prostitution or other illegal activity.
@Segdirb: do you not understand the concept of freedom? If nobody's being harmed, then there's nothing morally wrong with it.
Spartan: I'm splitting hairs here, but morals don't have anything to do with whether or not anyone is harmed. Morals are based on what is "right" vs "wrong", not on who gets hurt.
HadEnough,
That's true, but what's right for some is not for others.
For me, and perhaps Spartan, hurting people is wrong. On the other hand, if you aren't hurting others, then do what you will.
I'll agree that hurting others is wrong, but morals are not a sliding scale that applies differently to different people. Just as legality is defined by the laws of man, and ethics are dictated by society, morals are defined as a code of conduct that is judged as right or wrong.
While there is some overlap between the categories, what's "legal" is not necessarily "ethical" or "moral"
By act/rule utilitarianism, an action is moral if it results in more happiness overall for the affected parties. With rule utilitarianism, the ends do not justify the means, so the only remaining issue is distributive justice (not applicable here)--which is solved with the social contract theory, FYI. Out of the most prominent ethical theories that are workable, only Kantianism might be against actions that don't actually harm anyone. And so there isn't much reason to say that there's anything wrong with stripping as a side job per se.
Some just can;t stand The Naked Truth!
or the bare fact's...
So, is Texas one of them "Right to Work" states? If so, all of the lawsuits in the world won't matter.
@ Bernardo-#'s, That kind of "freedom" also results in broken lives, families, homes, etc. When any company has the right to FIRE someone for any reason that is not work related, then we have given the employer way too much power. When you couple that kind of power with a law that says you can fire anyone for any reason now you have a system where every worker is in peril and has to choose between possibly being exploited for profit reasons and maintaining self-respect and dignity as a hard working American citizen. I'm not sure we want to give the employer's that much power, especially considering how many people are having trouble finding jobs these days.
Really?
The ability to fire/lay off employees is vital to business. It allows business owners to hire more people by taking away some of the uncertainty of planning for the future. If times get tight, a business might need to lay off or fire employees to reduce operating expenses in order to remain solvent.
A business is in business to make a profit, not provide jobs. Jobs are created to provide labor to make that profit. This woman was "outed" and the newspaper obviously had an issue with either her choice of other occupation or the fact that she omitted that info from her application. I hope she gets her job back because she is obviousely talented and smart, but if the newspaper thinks her stripping will diminish the value of their product, then they have every right to fire her.
Yes, Texas is an at-will state (At Will is the proper term)
If she was an 'At Will' employee, she could be fired for anything or for no reason whatsoever.
Todd: Agreed. Carried a step farther, she could have been fired for the very fact that she was moonlighting (if it's against company policy), regardless of the nature of her second job. Bottom line, this is not a sexual discrimination lawsuit. Even a wrongful termination lawsuit would be a stretch, in my opinion.
Todd is correct.
I can leave At Will as we have no contract expressed or implied. However, IF she had been around longer there might be precedent for a case. Without it, I doubt it!
It's all about the unemployment benefits. If someone is fired without cause, they get to draw unemployment. If you fire them for a reason, and that reason hols up under appeal, stealing from the workplace for example, you can deny their unemployment benefits.
If there is a company policy against moonlighting, and they fired her for moonlighting, they're OK. If there is no company policy against moonlighting, and they fired her specifically for stripping, they may have a problem.
"You see one woman naked.....you want to see them all naked." ~Ron White
Love Ron White.
Texas is an at will employment state. She has no grounds for this lawsuit. The whole thing is just another attempt at publicity.
I think every state is an "at will" state - which means they can fire you for no reason as at all and without notice. Most individuals want to know "why" they were fired. The station can exercise"at will" if they wish and still win - but I think they have more than enough ammunition without it to justify her termination. Once an attention seeking whore - always an attention seeking whore! I just thought about something - I wonder which one I was talking about? Actually both! LMAO!
"At will" does not protect from discrimination on the basis of age, gender, race, orientation, etc.
Of course, that's *IF* you can make the case for discrimination.
I don't think this young woman has a leg to stand on (or, in this case, pole to swing around!) All they have to do is be consistent in their explanation and this will be dismissed faster than you can say "lap dance". Even if there was no place to disclose alternate current employment on her application, the company could claim conflict of interest. A lot of places don't allow you to even have a second job, for whatever their reasons.
Is she saying that all the other male stripper employees are still working? Hence she was discriminated against for being a female stripper?
If they haven't fired all the other employees who have held a second job...then that is definitely discrimination. If she filled in all the blanks on the employment form truthfully, then maybe the employer needs to fire the person who designed the form...strip them of their job, so to speak.
bagdadjoe - it is still not discrimination if they only fire her but not other employees who have a second job if those employees disclosed their second jobs and gained the proper approval. I would think this case is more about her lying on her employment applicaiton. She says there was no place for her to list that she worked as a stripper. I'm sorry, but I find that hard to believe in that employment applicaitons ask about your past work experience. She had worked at the strip club previously and did not disclose that or the fact that she still worked their occansionally. I have worked with HR over the course of my career and have had to fire new employees lying on their application in the past. Simple fact is, she did not disclose her employment on the job applicaton and therefore lied on the job application.
She said she told them about being a "dancer" on the application. Perhaps they only later they found out what kind of dancer. Whole idea seems ludicrous. High standards of a Texas newspaper threatened? Please.
I wonder if her boss hired her because she was hot? I know she has the degree, but still. A beautiful woman has it easier than an unattractive one. I knew a young girl who was told by her boss she was hired because she was cute.
Robert, That could have been a sexual harrassment lawsuit.
I am sure she signed a "Morals Clause" when she got the job... so good luck strippy...
When applying for a job, most applications have a section called 'Work History', where you're supposed to list current and past jobs. I'm not saying I agree with the decision to let her go, but let's be honest, every worker out there knows exactly what I'm talking about. Leaving a current job off the application, could be seen in a bad light, especially in a time when resumes/applications are being scrutinized due to dishonest inflation.
I may not agree with their decision to let her go, but I do believe any company bears the right to terminate any employee who isn't representing the company in the manner they see fit. It's their company, not hers. It's unfortunate, but, it would also be wrong to force companies to retain employees that represent an image they aren't comfortable with.
I personally don't see it as discrimination though.
If you're applying for a professional position, you probably wouldn't be listing your work at Starbucks. Same idea here.
@ Spartan: From what I read of the story, she still on occasion dances...that's not a previous job, that's something you're doing part-time. If the employer has a problem with what you're doing and the corporation feels it's not in line with their image, then they have the right to terminate you.
But you're correct, you target your application/resume to the profession you're applying for. No doubt.
It would be nice if she had all the goods on those that fired her to produce in a court of law! I'm sure if she dug deep enough, she'd find skeletons in everybody's closet! :-)!
Exactly. If folks pointed their finger at themselves as much as the did everyone else, finger pointing would finally become productive.
Thus is the most important aspect of the corporate image. Anything goes, as long as you keep your closet door firmly closed. Once that door opens, you probably will be subject to termination.
Gloria should ask "Have you ever been in a strip club?".
In a related story, enrollment for journalism majors at the University of Houston is up 20%!!
DP0609, Ha Ha Ha!
Hey Sweetie, you'll never get anything out of the EEOC, they have been corrupted by corporate political rule! Your best bet, if anything, is the ACLU and I'm not so sure they haven't been BOUGHT ! I had bad experiences with both! ZERO HELP when you most need it!!
Hey Sweetie, you'll never get anything out of the EEOC, they have been corrupted by corporate political rule! Your best bet, if anything, is the ACLU and I'm not so sure they haven't been BOUGHT ! I had bad experiences with both! ZERO HELP when you most need it!!
Actually working a strip club might just allow her to scoop her fellow reporters on news stories - people talk when tongues are loosened with likker and neked purty girls especially in Houston - they do like their drink there!
I don't see how being a stripper affects her job... But, let a judge and/or jury decide. She has a good enough lawyer. People get fired for less. I'm always happy when someone is able to make it harder for employers to terminate.
She has good looks and advanced degrees and an undeniable work ethic (three jobs!). Forget that newspaper, she will do well regardless...
I dare say that if EVERYONE filled out a job application that revealed the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth no one in this country would have a job.
she should be fired, but only if all the male journalists in that place who go to strip club are also fired. fair is fair
Don't forget the females! They go to the male strip joints too, if they aren't having male strippers at the parties!
Houston has like 300 strip clubs in the area. Exactly one caters to females. Doesn't seem to me that male strippers (for female clientele) is exactly a player in the scheme of thing.
yus, she is not fired for going to the strip clubs, so is fired for working as a stripper.
Who really cares? This is hardly news, folks.
MSNBC must be desperate for news. She was fired in March.
No juicy pole smoking butt bandit applauding politicians today to rave about?
Jello heads!
I'll bet the job offers will start pouring in from other papers soon.
you go girl!
My Ferrari is in the shop and it's just a cold sore.
WilliamOfRites. That's too funny. Good one.