The term is “constructive dismissal”: altering the conditions of an employee’s job to get the employee to “voluntarily” resign, in a context where you can’t actually fire them. I don’t know whether this would actually rise to that standard, but it’s definitely something you’d take up with the teacher’s union (depending on state or country).
That’s a valid point. Permanently Naked workers no doubt face that kind of discrimination at times. That said, it seems equally likely that they really did want a nude teacher for those classes and, as Ryan said, simply put her where they thought she would be most valuable. Could be a tricky case if she decides contest it.
The term is “constructive dismissal”: altering the conditions of an employee’s job to get the employee to “voluntarily” resign, in a context where you can’t actually fire them. I don’t know whether this would actually rise to that standard, but it’s definitely something you’d take up with the teacher’s union (depending on state or country).
That’s a valid point. Permanently Naked workers no doubt face that kind of discrimination at times. That said, it seems equally likely that they really did want a nude teacher for those classes and, as Ryan said, simply put her where they thought she would be most valuable. Could be a tricky case if she decides contest it.
How is that discrimination? They’re just utilizing their staff in the most effective way, seems to me. Maybe she didn’t check her contract closely?
Yes, it does…