Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: nyu notesfiles V1.1 4/1/84; site acf4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!acf4!greenber
From: greenber@acf4.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Client Rights and Wrongs
Message-ID: <11300004@acf4.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 16-Nov-84 00:16:00 EST
Article-I.D.: acf4.11300004
Posted: Fri Nov 16 00:16:00 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 17-Nov-84 20:00:28 EST
Organization: New York University
Lines: 25
Nf-ID: #N:acf4:11300004:000:1080
Nf-From: acf4!greenber    Nov 16 00:16:00 1984


<>

Ron Rizzo asks:
> Forgive me for being blunt, but what if the propsepective employee
> were Jewish, insisted on wearing a yamulkah to work, & on taking
> time off for Jewish holidays (say, as sick time)?  Or if the prospec-
> tive employee were black?  Would you have entertained the argument
> you outlined in your posting at all?  Or would you rather have immedi-
> ately thought that the ONLY valid issue was discrimination?

Something strange here.... I've read the article a number of times, and
I thought I made myself 'perfectly clear'.  Guess not, sigh, sigh.

I don't care if the reason that the guy was fired was because he chewed
his nails, wore mismatched socks, or decided that Berkley wasn't better than
SysIII.  The client has some rights, say I, and one of those rights was
to determine who shall and shall not work for them FOR ANY REASON
WHATSOEVER.  Now I might not like it, but that doesn't matter, for I'm
not paying the bills.

Now, Mr. Rizzo,  what would you have done, and why??


Ross M. Greenberg  @ NYU   ---->  allegra!cmcl2!acf4!greenber  <----