Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: ACLU Accuses Asian Attorney of Using 'Coded' Racism; Fires Her; ACLU Sued by Government
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 12:59:28 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 300
Message-ID: <4bv50jpbuolcjqf2rvqp6otvok9dc2024q@4ax.com>
References: <Z7adnT2Sdef_TJz7nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com> <jrr30j926orq1m3o5c8h8p3t5pbetcl8hb@4ax.com> <17c031331a3628f5$2091$3384359$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com> <atropos-AFC521.08483526032024@news.giganews.com> <17c05d056b6af891$53454$2218499$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 16:59:32 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9da95962575bcdedde34bc8eeb68135c";
	logging-data="2041338"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19JZF2rZCmUQShgKsNFDPlSrEUTVhQvp0w="
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YBMOhdK+pZDME8brznztzoRDzzE=
Bytes: 18132

On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 12:22:15 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com>
wrote:

>On 3/26/2024 11:48 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> In article <17c031331a3628f5$2091$3384359$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com>,
>>   moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 3/25/2024 5:59 PM, shawn wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 19:32:50 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So now expressing fear of one's boss or describing his behavior as
>>>>> "chastising" is racist if the boss is black.
>>>>>
>>>>> And this is the ACLU we're talking about. Anyone who still thinks the ACLU
>>>>> is the constitutional rights advocate that it used to be needs their head
>>>>> examined. It's nothing but a shill for the most extreme and radical woke
>>>>> policies.
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/22/us/politics/aclu-employee-fired-race-bia
>>>>> s.html
>>>>>
>>>>> The civil liberties group is defending itself in an unusual case that
>>>>> weighs what kind of language may be evidence of bias against black people.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kate Oh was no one's idea of a get-along-to-go-along employee. During her
>>>>> five years as a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, she was an
>>>>> unsparing critic of her superiors, known for sending long, blistering
>>>>> emails to human resources complaining about what she described as a
>>>>> hostile workplace.
>>>>>
>>>>> She considered herself a whistle blower and advocate for other women in
>>>>> the office, drawing unflattering attention to an environment she said
>>>>> was rife with sexism, burdened by unmanageable workloads and stymied by
>>>>> a fear-based culture.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then the tables turned and Ms. Oh was the one slapped with an accusation
>>>>> of serious misconduct. The ACLU said her complaints about several
>>>>> superiors-- all of whom were black-- used "racist stereotypes". She was
>>>>> fired in May 2022.
>>>>>
>>>>> The ACLU acknowledges that Ms. Oh, who is Korean-American, never used any
>>>>> kind of racial slur, but the group says that her use of certain phrases
>>>>> and words demonstrated a pattern of willful anti-black animus.
>>>>>
>>>>> In one instance, according to court documents, she told a black superior
>>>>> that she was "afraid" to talk with him. In another, she told a manager
>>>>> that their conversation was "chastising". And in a meeting, she repeated
>>>>> a satirical phrase likening her bosses' behavior to suffering beatings.
>>>>>
>>>>> Did her language add up to racism? Or was she just speaking harshly about
>>>>> bosses who happened to be black? That question is the subject of an
>>>>> unusual unfair-labor-practice case brought against the ACLU by the National Labor
>>>>> Relations Board, which has accused the organization of retaliating against
>>>>> Ms. Oh. A trial in the case wrapped up this week in Washington, and a
>>>>> judge is expected to decide in the next few months whether the ACLU
>>>>> was justified in terminating her. If the ACLU loses, it could be ordered
>>>>> to reinstate her or pay restitution.
>>>>>
>>>>> The heart of the ACLU's defense-- arguing for an expansive definition of
>>>>> what constitutes racist or racially coded speech-- has struck some labor
>>>>> and free-speech lawyers as peculiar, since the organization has
>>>>> traditionally protected the right to free expression, operating on the
>>>>> principle that it may not like what someone says, but will fight for the
>>>>> right to say it.
>>>>>
>>>>> The case raises some intriguing questions about the wide swath of employee
>>>>> behavior and speech that labor law protects-- and how the nation's
>>>>> pre-eminent civil rights organization finds itself on the opposite side
>>>>> of that law, arguing that those protections should not apply to its
>>>>> former employee.
>>>>>
>>>>> A lawyer representing the ACLU, Ken Margolis, said during a legal
>>>>> proceeding last year that it was irrelevant whether Ms. Oh bore no racist
>>>>> ill will. All that mattered, he said, was that her black colleagues were
>>>>> offended and injured.
>>>>
>>>> And there is the major issue. It does not matter what she thought but
>>>> only what others thought or at least said they thought. Been there
>>>> done that where I was accused of something similar by someone who
>>>> remained nameless but who I'm sure I know because she was known to be
>>>> a troublemaker. Luckily in my case it wasn't taken as seriously given
>>>> that there was no evidence I did anything, but in Ms Oh's case it
>>>> doesn't matter that she did nothing wrong, but that her complaints
>>>> ended up bothering her colleagues enough that they finally complained.
>>>>
>>>> So her complaints did not matter but their complaints did. How does
>>>> that happen?
>>>>
>>>>> "We're not here to prove anything other than the impact of her actions was
>>>>> very real-- that she caused harm," Mr. Margolis said, according to a
>>>>> transcript of his remarks. "She caused serious harm to black members of
>>>>> the ACLU community."
>>>>
>>>> He doesn't address if her complaints had any basis in reality. If her
>>>> complaints did have a basis does it still matter if the others felt
>>>> she caused them harm?
>>>>
>>>>> Rick Bialczak, the lawyer who represents Ms. Oh through her union,
>>>>> responded sarcastically, saying he wanted to congratulate Mr. Margolis
>>>>> for making an exhaustive presentation of the ACLU's evidence: three
>>>>> interactions Ms. Oh had with colleagues that were reported to human
>>>>> resources.
>>>>>
>>>>> "I would note, and commend Ken, for spending 40 minutes explaining why
>>>>> three discreet comments over a multi-month period of time constitute
>>>>> serious harm to the ACLU members, black employees,” he said. "Yes, she
>>>>> had complained about black supervisors, Mr. Bialczak acknowledged, but
>>>>> her direct boss and that boss's boss were black. "Those were her
>>>>> supervisors," he said. "If she has complaints about her supervision,
>>>>> who is she supposed to complain about?"
>>>>
>>>> Wait, so the complaint is that she complained to HR about her
>>>> supervisors over months, but not to others? How is that even an issue
>>>> that should lead to her firing? Isn't HR's role to help mitigate those
>>>> sorts of interpersonal issues.
>>>>
>>>>> Ms. Oh declined to comment for this article, citing the ongoing case.
>>>>>
>>>>> The ACLU has a history of representing groups that liberals revile. This
>>>>> week, it argued in the Supreme Court on behalf of the National Rifle
>>>>> Association in a 1st Amendment case, but to critics of the ACLU, Ms. Oh's
>>>>> case is a sign of how far the group has strayed from its core mission--
>>>>> defending free speech-- and has instead aligned itself with a progressive
>>>>> politics that is intensely focused on identity.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Much of our work today," as it explains on its website, "is focused on
>>>>> equality for people of color, women, gay and transgender people,
>>>>> prisoners, immigrants, and people with disabilities."
>>>>>
>>>>> And since the beginning of the Trump administration, the organization has
>>>>> taken up partisan causes it might have avoided in the past, like running
>>>>> an advertisement to support Stacey Abrams' 2018 campaign for governor of
>>>>> Georgia.
>>>>>
>>>>> "They radically expanded and raised so much more money-- hundreds of
>>>>> millions of dollars-- from leftist donors who were desperate to push
>>>>> back on the scary excesses of the Trump administration," said Lara
>>>>> Bazelon, a law professor at the University of San Francisco who has been
>>>>> critical of the ACLU. "And they hired people with a lot of extremely
>>>>> strong views about race and workplace rules and in the process, they
>>>>> themselves veered into a place of excess. I scour the record for any
>>>>> evidence that this Asian woman is a racist and I don't find any."
>>>>>
>>>>> The beginning of the end for Ms. Oh, who worked in the ACLU's political
>>>>> advocacy department, started in late February 2022, according to court
>>>>> papers and interviews with lawyers and others familiar with the case.
>>>>> The ACLU was hosting a virtual organization-wide meeting under heavy
>>>>> circumstances. The national political director, who was black, had
>>>>> suddenly departed following multiple complaints about his abrasive
>>>>> treatment of subordinates. Ms. Oh, who was one of the employees who had
>>>>> complained, spoke up during the meeting to declare herself skeptical
>>>>> that conditions would actually improve.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Why shouldn't we simply expect that 'the beatings will continue until
>>>>> morale improves'," she said in a Zoom group chat, invoking a well-known
>>>>> phrase that is printed and sold on t-shirts, usually accompanied by the
>>>>> skull and crossbones of a pirate flag. She explained that she was being
>>>>> "definitely metaphorical".
>>>>
>>>> Ah, she made the mistake of saying what she was thinking and so made
>>>> herself a target for more beatings.
>>>>
>>>>> Soon after, Ms. Oh heard from the ACLU manager overseeing its equity and
>>>>> inclusion efforts, Amber Hikes, who cautioned Ms. Oh about her language.
>>>>> Ms. Oh's comment was "dangerous and damaging", Ms. Hikes warned, because
>>>>> she seemed to suggest the former supervisor physically assaulted her.
>>>>
>>>> This should have seen the ACLU laughed out of court for suggesting
>>>> such a thing.
>>>>
>>>>> "Please consider the very real impact of that kind of violent language in
>>>>> the workplace," Ms. Hikes wrote in an email. Ms. Oh acknowledged she had
>>>>> been wrong and apologized. Over the next several weeks, senior managers
>>>>> documented other instances in which they said Ms. Oh mistreated black
>>>>> employees.
>>>>>
>>>>> In early March, Ben Needham, who had succeeded the recently departed
>>>>> national political director, reported that Ms. Oh called her direct
>>>>> supervisor, a black woman, a liar. According to his account, he asked
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========