Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

Do Conservatives agree autistic employees shouldn't be fired?

Suppose there was a job that requires financial analysis, developing spreadsheets, creating ideas.

But like pretty much any job, you also need to have good communication skills, look presentable, be taken seriously, eye contact, good nonverbal learning, interpersonal skills, etc.

Now here's the scenario.

1) An employee hits it off well with a manager, and the employee is hired after many failed attempts.

2) The employee contributes significant value to the organization, and gets many raises for doing so.

3) In Year 3, the company falls under management. The new management is more rigid about how you appear and your gestures and interpersonal skills.

Since the employee has mild autism and has a mild hard-to-detect disability, the employee cannot improve in this area. However, the condition does not have any impact on the employee's quality of work.

4) Based on mere observation, the employee, unable to demonstrate the nonverbal appearance required of the new management, he/she is terminated.

Shouldn't a person like this be protected? Or not

Update:

but if an employee has a disability, and an employer wants to fire that person on that basis, that employer may want to keep the following in mind:

1) The terminated employee with the disability has potential for a discrimination case under the ADA.

2) The disabled employee is free to use the media, the newspapers, and many foundations at his/her disposal. The employer may want to weigh in what that publicity can do to their image, and perhaps the message to consumers.

3) It just may be many non-disabled employees would be a LITTLE BIT skeptical of joining a company that can have 0 tolerance for people with disabilities. What does that say about the company's morale?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • bwlobo
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    If this autistic employee actually helps the company, then maybe the employer could have an "in-service" meeting for employees on the topic of autism and how to relate. However, employers don't have the obligation to make their company into a refuge for disabled in order to look nice for the public. If this company were a publicly held stock option company, the stock holders would appreciate the fact that the CEO is compassionate, but they still would want their stock to rise. A competent & creative CEO would do both.

    Source(s): bwlobo
  • 1 decade ago

    This is a great question. Well thought out, and complete in its given facts.

    I wish there were more like it.

    But it's still in the wrong category.

    Though to answer; I'd probably assess what skills the individual possessed, where they excelled, and where they were a liability, and place them in a different part of the organization where they could do the most good, without being an embarrassment in places where they would not perform well.

    Do they deserve special governmental protection? No. You said yourself; they can do a fine job. Therefore, they are not handicapped.

    If I took over the management of a strip club.. I wouldn't hesitate to fire all the ugly strippers.

    It's just business.

  • 1 decade ago

    If the person with autism is able to produce the same quality of work as the person without autism then there is no just cause for termination. The employer should rightfully be sued.

    Consider this: Should a woman, who works just as well as any man in the American firm, be fired because the firm gained a contract with a Middle-Eastern corporation who does not view women as equals?

    The woman cannot be legally fired. Rather, she will be given a position that does not involve her directly relating with the Middle-Eastern corporation.

    The employee with autism would have to be treated the same way. If his mannerisms deem him unfit for direct customer contact then another position should be available for him to work in or the employer faces fierce litigation.

  • Dr.T
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    Not. It's a free country and the business owner is free to run it as they see fit. You also are free to make their firing of this individual public. If the general public agrees that it is reprehensible, then they will not frequent that business.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • V2
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    Unfortunately, no. Image is very important to majority of companies. If that employee is at least somehow exposed to client , he/she is gone.

    If he/she is not exposed to client, his/her value in the company is low, so he/she will be laid off first.

    During recession, competition among employees increases. They stab each other in the back just to survive. Your fiend is out of luck.

    P.S. I am not conservative .

  • 1 decade ago

    Nobody is entitled to a job for life and an employer should be able to hire or fire anyone.

  • Bethy
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    You make it all about the employee

    But what about the employer

    They want to project a certain level of professionalism to compete with others

    Why should they be trapped employing someone that can not reach the level of their excellence?

  • I don't know about conservatives, but I believe that if the person can do the job well, they should be able to keep it.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Whatever is best for the company.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yes... You cannot discriminate on a Handicap.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.