University Of Toledo Sued For Firing Christian Official
By John P. Connolly, The Bulletin
12/02/2008

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=20211051&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=638428&rfi=6

Following the article's appearance, Ms. Dixon was placed on paid administrative leave, pending an investigation. On May 8, she was dismissed from her job.

As a result of the firing, a lawsuit was filed yesterday in Federal District Court, Northern District of Ohio against the university, its president and its vice president for Human Resources and Campus Safety. The lawsuit asserts that the firing was a violation of Ms. Dixon's constitutional rights to free speech and equal protection of the law.

"It's clear that radical homosexuals have an inordinate amount of influence over the university president," said Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Law Center. "He openly brags about being friendly to 'lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender queer and questioning individuals.' But he doesn't care about the constitutional free speech rights of Christians."

The original op-ed identified her as a university employee. Whether she had written the piece as an employee or as a private citizen and then the paper added her credential would be the question, I'd think.

But, yes, she has every right to hold and express her personal opinions. She shouldn't lose her job for exrting that right.

Nichole

QuoteHuman Resources Department where Ms. Dixon worked

It would be difficult for a gay to get a job at the University if a manager of Human Resources is a bigot. Not knowing the whole story I wonder if she carried her opinions into her job?

Quote from: lisagurl on December 02, 2008, 02:15:12 PM

QuoteHuman Resources Department where Ms. Dixon worked

It would be difficult for a gay to get a job at the University if a manager of Human Resources is a bigot. Not knowing the whole story I wonder if she carried her opinions into her job?

Those seem to be impossible to discover. I mean no one is going to admit that, are they?

It's a forever type of thing that manages to make most lawsuits about hiring most minorities a moot point. Too hard to tell if a bias was actually used in a decision among a pool of applicants unless there is some measurable distinction, like no peope of color are ever hired although many apply or that no women or men are hired although many apply. 

Cereently it's ilegal to ask about sexual orientation so that bit of discrimination would be according to "how someone presented" and wouldn't be a measurable discrimination.

This is really scary.  She was fired primarily for espousing her religious views.  What is this country coming to?


Kristi

It might be good to do a little research before making judgments based solely on a news report.

Text of the termination letter:
http://www.toledoblade.com/assets/pdf/TO45760512.PDF

Relevant Policy and Procedures Manual section 3364-25-01 Standards of conduct:
"(C) Conduct/job performance
The following details various behaviors which employees can reasonably expect to be held accountable for. This list is not all inclusive.
(27) Unauthorized media contact without permission from the university institutional communications director (see media relations policy 01-019 and release of information to news media policy 01-064);"
http://www.utoledo.edu/policies/administration/humanresources/pdfs/3364_25_01.pdf
http://www.utoledo.edu/policies/administration/humanresources/index.html

Mission and Vision Statement sited in the letter:
http://www.utoledo.edu/depts/hr/mission.html

"Employees of the school are covered by a year-old governor's order barring sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination.... Dixon was given the option of taking a demotion and a pay reduction at the May 5 hearing, which she declined. Her university position paid $134,383 annually."
http://www.gaypeopleschronicle.com/stories08/may/0516082.htm

Quote from: Nichole on December 02, 2008, 12:48:56 PM
The original op-ed identified her as a university employee. Whether she had written the piece as an employee or as a private citizen and then the paper added her credential would be the question, I'd think.

I'm glad you were able to see the actual printed copy of the column.  The online version leaves out any mention of Dixon working for the University of Toledo.
http://www.toledofreepress.com/2008/04/18/gay-rights-and-wrongs-another-perspective/

Quote from: Lisbeth on December 02, 2008, 06:24:21 PM
Relevant Policy and Procedures Manual section 3364-25-01 Standards of conduct:
"(C) Conduct/job performance
The following details various behaviors which employees can reasonably expect to be held accountable for. This list is not all inclusive.
(27) Unauthorized media contact without permission from the university institutional communications director (see media relations policy 01-019 and release of information to news media policy 01-064);"
http://www.utoledo.edu/policies/administration/humanresources/pdfs/3364_25_01.pdf

I think the intent of that policy is prevent employees from acting as self-deputized spokesmen for the university. Arguably, her position was high enough that any column by her would have been connected to the university, so she should have sought permission ahead of time. Or write the column and have someone else submit it to the paper.... but would the paper have printed it if it had came from just anyone? Perhaps her holding a high position at the university is the reason it was published.

So the university may have a case against Dixon which will stick. But it sure looks bad in the press.

Quote from: Kaweah on December 03, 2008, 08:48:25 AM

Quote from: Lisbeth on December 02, 2008, 06:24:21 PM
Relevant Policy and Procedures Manual section 3364-25-01 Standards of conduct:
"(C) Conduct/job performance
The following details various behaviors which employees can reasonably expect to be held accountable for. This list is not all inclusive.
(27) Unauthorized media contact without permission from the university institutional communications director (see media relations policy 01-019 and release of information to news media policy 01-064);"
http://www.utoledo.edu/policies/administration/humanresources/pdfs/3364_25_01.pdf

I think the intent of that policy is prevent employees from acting as self-deputized spokesmen for the university. Arguably, her position was high enough that any column by her would have been connected to the university, so she should have sought permission ahead of time. Or write the column and have someone else submit it to the paper.... but would the paper have printed it if it had came from just anyone? Perhaps her holding a high position at the university is the reason it was published.

Back in the days when I worked for the University of Iowa, it was made quite clear to us that the policy included newspaper editorials (but not research journals). Usually it was a pro-forma thing, send it in and get a rubber stamp. I can't imagine the University of Toledo being any different, and I can't imagine the Communications Director diving permission for what she wrote.

Quote from: Nichole on December 02, 2008, 12:48:56 PM
<snip>
But, yes, she has every right to hold and express her personal opinions. She shouldn't lose her job for exrting that right.

Nichole

I agree, but I don't absolutely agree.  There are limits to what one has a right to express.  Fighting words, inciting to riot, conspiracy to commit a crime, etc. are not OK.  And it does not make a difference whether it is wrapped in, motivated by, or corresponds to religious rhetoric.  What if she had specifically written that people should round up gays and kill them?  What if she named a date and time when all believers should rise up and make war on the gays?  There are limits.

I think it could be argued that she crossed the line.  "Love the sinner; hate the sin, " can be read many different ways.  It could be "hate what they do while you nevertheless give them a hug and welcome them into your circle of friends;" or "Love them while you nevertheless gun them down because God says to put them to the sword."  She did point to that bible verse, I think, that says to put them to the sword.  Just saying.  The bible is full of hate speech too, and you take a risk when you quote those parts of it.

PS:  I checked, and the verse I am thinking of Leviticus 20:13.  She did not refer to that one. The worst thing I see is when she refers to the verse about destruction of Sodom as god's will to kill homosexuals.