Santa the hostile workplace employer

Tonight CBS is airing the annual holiday special celebrating discrimination based on a physical disability with regards to a reindeer, bullying, workplace prejudice, ADA violations, Title VII claims and possible OT violations. Yep, Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer is on. The annual special that teaches children about bigotry, cruelty, and the triumph of discrimination.

Let's start with bigotry. Santa  promotes a hostile workplace, where management is allowed to discriminate against a potential employee because he is "different." And I'm not just talking about Rudolph. Look at what happened to poor Hermey the elf who wanted to be a dentist. Forced out because he wouldn't conform. Granted he was hired as a laborer, not a dentist, but to ostracize him from his own community just because he was different? Shame on Santa for allowing this to happen. I shudder to think what would happen if a couple of same sex elves wanted to hook up. 

And what is this nonsense about allowing his employees to not allow Rudolph to play in any reindeer games while they laughed and called him names? How cruel. Though it seems to me that those games were part of the workplace environment, meaning Santa should have made an accommodation for Rudolph's disability, Santa is at the North Pole and not subject to the ADA. Outsourcing is good when you want to avoid regulation. Still, if Santa were a stand up guy, he would have put a stop to this cruelty as soon as became aware of it, especially the name calling. That he did not speaks volumes of Santa's inner corporate heart. Of course what do you expect from a man who straps spare reindeer to the roof of his sleigh? And though I am not sure if there are possible OT violations in Santa's workshop (no idea what the law is in the North Pole), by working those poor elves non-stop I suspect he is violating his workshop's mission statement of bringing happiness and joy to all.

Face it, the only reason Santa put an end to the discrimination is because Rudolph had something Santa needed. Fine, all employers do that to an extent but Santa craftily put Rudolph in the no win situation of either accepting the years of harsh treatment and helping Santa or disappointing millions of children world wide. Let's face it, if Rudolph was shunned by his peers for just being born with a birth defect, how would he have been treated once the news broke that Rudolph refused to to use his special skill because he was just too emotionally depressed to get over his years of terrible treatment (good thing there was no social media back then)?  Well played Santa, well played. Personally I would’ve told Santa which part of my red-nosed anatomy he and the others could kiss but I guess I'm not as good a man as Rudolph. And, if it wasn't a foggy Christmas Eve, would the discrimination against Rudolph have continued? I bet a lump of coal that it would have.

Maybe he was just having a bad day. Santa is kind of a self centered jerk through the whole thing, which goes against his reputation for being a jolly old elf. Could be he was mad at his agent for getting caught in such a lame story? Or maybe he is a man whose past his prime and should be given a gold watch and thanks for his many years of service. A corporate leader with his skill set wouldn't last five minutes in today's environment. He has this weird mix of bullying those he perceives as weak while promoting the idea that if someone is not "useful" (Rudolph, Hermey, the Island of Misfit Toys) they are worthless. And he is so blinded by old ideas that he can't even see when something different can be an asset. Perhaps it is time for new management at Santa's Workshop?

So, in conclusion, light the fire and make some hot chocolate as you tell this true corporate tale. Time to indoctrinate a  new generation of serfs to know their place in life. Marginalized people are not supposed to rise above their station in life. If a bigoted employer wants to make you his bitch that is his right.

Springtime for Hitler and Germany

I love Mel Brooks' The Producers, in which Broadway producers fail in an attempt to lose money to make money when the complete flop they finance, "Springtime for Hitler," turns out to be a hit, despite the play's trivializing of Nazi Germany. Like Hogan's Heroes, the 1960s TV comedy that took place in a Nazi POW camp, Brooks managed to to mine a horrible historical event into some funny. When done correctly, these type of programs can humor and not offend people. When done incorrectly it can invoke fear and hatred, allowing bigots to exploit their hatred.

Recently, in NYC, a Jewish Parks Department worker was offended when he walked into a break room and saw his co-workers conducting a Nazi skit. The article fails to mention whether the skit was a parody as in The Producers, or something more ignorant, such as the Black to the Future skit in Queens 10 years ago, produced by NYC police and fire department officers, that parodied a then recent dragging death of a black man. Somehow, I suspect it was the later. Interestingly, the police officers, who were initially fired by the Mayor when news of the skit made the news (and this was before the YouTube era), were initially re-instated on First Amendment grounds as they did the parody on their own time in a public place, before being fired once again as a higher court ruled that the city was able to fire them as unfit for duty due to the perception they were violating the public trust with their racist act, despite the First Amendment. Some might be tempted to defend the nazi parks department workers on the same First Amendment grounds and argue that parks department workers should not be held to the same speech standards as emergency responders.

However, this was not about free speech, it is about a hostile workplace. The employee felt threatened by his co-workers' action, making for a hostile workplace and, if the sources quoted in the article are accurate, it appears their employer, the Parks Department, agrees. If you want to dress like a Nazi, do it on your own property and on your own time, not your employer's property. Of course, if your employer is the City of NY, or some other government entity, you may have to worry about a perception of a violation of the public trust, but I suspect that racist parks department workers aren't as much a concern as racist police and fire department workers, whose job it is to protect and not harm the public. Freedom of speech applies to the government, not employers (even if they have happen to be the government). Once offensive speech crosses into the workplace, there is going to be a problem.

As to the other ignorant comments associated with the article: I would hope those posters are just trolling but I suspect not. This type of bigotry is not unique to Staten Island. It happens all over the NYC metropolitan area and not just to Jews (just ask some of your minority associates). I suspect this happens all across the country as well. The one thing they all have in common is a basic xenophobic hatred that the actors attempt to camouflage in freedom of speech. This was not a First Amendment issue; it was a hate issue, it was a bullying issue and, since the victim was forced to be transferred, it is more.

One thing for sure, the parks department workers were pretty stupid to do a Hitler parody in a break room on their employer's property. In this day and age, one would think it would be common sense for employees to know they would do best to keep their personal views to themselves. I don't know the intent of the parks department employees so I can't judge without more evidence of whether they thought they were being funny with a co-worker (for all we know it could've been an ongoing joking insult thing that got out of hand) or something more; though since the Jewish employee felt insulted enough to complain and argument can be made that it was the later (if it walks, swims and quacks like a duck it is usually a duck, even if called a dog). However, at the least, these employees really need to read the section of their employee handbook regarding tolerance.