Yikes

[ArbanRubank]

There will be due process. Management tends to win more court cases than unions do b/c management can pick their battles. If an employee is a part of a union, then the union has the obligation to their whole membership to fight the good fight, whether they know they have a good case or not.

[sungfw]

Do you consider summarily firing someone preceding any hearing or any other legal defense, due process? Guilty until proven innocent?

Have you bothered Googling screenshots of Ms Salas' posts? [NB: posts, plural, not singular.]

Quite apart from the fact that the presumption of innocence is a principle of criminal jurisprudence, and therefore not applicable to the current case, Ms Salas has neither denied posting those statements or proffered any sort of extenuating explanation (my account was hacked, I was drunk/high/OD'ed on prescription meds, etc.) for the posts originating from her Facebook account under her name, and has deleted her Facebook account, i.e., attempting to destroy the evidence: actions which disintereted {NB: free from selfish motive or interest, unbiased] observers might reasonably construe as a tacit admission of guilt.

Furthermore, as the announcement on the ASO Facebook Page makes clear, she was not fired summarily or precipitately:

We would like to thank the community and let you know that your voice was heard. Once alerted, we were appalled by the comments as they are clearly not reflective of who we are as an organization. We began to work quickly and closely with the American Federation of Musicians, our orchestra committee, staff and other key members. At this time we can state that the musician is no longer employed by the ASO for there is no place for hate within our organization. At this time we can state that the musician is no longer employed by the ASO for there is no place for hate within our organization. Thank you for your patience while we navigated through the necessary channels.

Given that employers have a positive LEGAL duty to create and maintain a healthy workplace environment. Given Salas' history of racially charged rants, and given that a least six, and as many as eleven, ASO musicians are "BLACK" [Salas' term], "1/2 black" [Salas' term], Hispanic, or Asian, her continued employment by the ASO would unquestionably contribute to a hostile workplace environment.

[timothy42b]

I don't think very many employers check references. I once faked an educational record (well past any statute of limitations now) for a single mom. She got hired for a position that she could do very well but wasn't technically qualified for on paper. They never checked to see if she actually had the "required" education. She worked out just fine for them.

Long ago and far away, I worked for a large state hospital.

The medical director of the whole place by all accounts was a good administrator and manager and did a good job, as he had done at a couple of previous stepping stone hospital positions.

Then one day he committed a crime, and they ran his prints. Surprise, that wasn't his name. He'd flunked out of college, never went to med school (think of the debt he avoided!), but used his roommate's name to get jobs. And he'd apparently been quite good at his work.

They terminated him and removed his portrait from the executive conference room.

[ArbanRubank]

That's what happens in the cases we hear about. It makes we wonder how many aren't caught! And it goes to prove that once you get past HR, you're in - provided you keep your nose clean and not wave any red flags in front of law enforcement, or as is the case these days - in front of social media.

So, I wonder how many Principle trombone players have been in symphonies who are self-taught and how many trombone teachers there are who have no sheepskin. That's different. We are allowed to not have "official" creds in our field. It's a can-do field and those who can do are good, regardless of education. It's all about performance - and as we now know - BEHAVIOR!

[Gary]

That she posted something abhorrent, but LEGAL, does not mean due process may be waived.

[Posaunus]

That she posted something abhorrent, but LEGAL, does not mean due process may be waived.

Gary,

This is not a criminal case, where "due process" would be required. The employee did nothing "illegal." As we all do, she has the legal right (within certain limitations) to speak and write freely.

This was not a prosecution; it was instead simply the dismissal, after thoughtful consideration, of an At Will employee whose behavior was detrimental to the organization. I expect the (now-former) employee has little recourse to protest from a legal standpoint.

What would you have done if you were part of the symphony management?

[Bach5G]

Due process is a criminal law issue governing the relationship between the individual and the state.

In an employment law scenario HR probably likes to bandy about terms like procedural fairness and natural justice. Reading between the lines, it sounds like Austin went some way down this path eg discussions with the AFoM.

[slipperyjoe]

I wonder how at-will employment co-exists (if it does) with a union contract. Since the ASO acted so quickly, apparently in consultation with the union, I'd be curious to learn about the termination process. Is it indeed final? Is it subject to future arbitration? Does the trombonist have any other recourse?

I know from public school experience that a union contract can outline procedures for handling a potential termination case, including arbitration. An attorney relative of mine served as an arbitrator between public schools and teachers or administrators and cases could take months.

[BGuttman]

During arbitration the person affected is no longer an employee. If the arbitration case is found in favor of the employee they are then rehired.

This is intended to prevent a fired employee from exacting further damage to the employer during the process.

[slipperyjoe]

Systems must vary. In NYC, public school teachers accused of misconduct retain employment, continue to draw salaries and accrue pension benefits while a case is in progress. A lot has been written about reassignment centers, a.k.a. 'rubber rooms,' for teachers awaiting the outcome of arbitration.

[BGuttman]

Rubber Rooms were created because teachers accused of child abuse have to be kept apart from children. It would probably behoove the NYC School System to lay them off pending resolution of the cases.

[slipperyjoe]

Rubber Rooms were created because teachers accused of child abuse have to be kept apart from children. It would probably behoove the NYC School System to lay them off pending resolution of the cases.

Agreed.

[brassmedic]

A symphony musician is normally a tenured position. Termination is typically only allowed for playing deficiencies, misconduct, or failure to meet minimum attendance requirements. It's possible they will have to pay her to get rid of her. I apologize if this was already discussed; it's a very long thread.

[CalgaryTbone]

Most symphony contracts have a clause that allows for "firing for cause" - behaviour that is wildly anti-social, or dangerous in some way. If she had shouted these comments during a rehearsal or concert, that would have been the end. Likewise, posting them on social media fits that definition, at least as far as her employer is concerned. This is N. America, so I would guess that she will find a lawyer, and this will be challenged in court. I doubt she'll win (who knows?) but she may get a severance payment, just to make the matter go away. In the contracts that I'm aware of, there is much more likely to be some sort of a payment attached to a dismissal for playing deficiencies than for "cause".

In an earlier post someone referred to her as a Principle Trombone - she was actually a Principal Trombone, but ironically was fired for her lack of principles.

Jim Scott

[brassmedic]

Most symphony contracts have a clause that allows for "firing for cause" - behaviour that is wildly anti-social, or dangerous in some way.

I'm not sure that's true. Maybe Austin Symphony does, maybe they don't. Here's an example of language from an orchestra CBA:

The only causes for non-renewal of tenured members of the orchestra shall be: (1) two or more unexcused absences from Services in any one season; (2) two or more instances of tardiness (including tardiness following Intermission Time)without reasonable cause; (3) continued severe breaches of professional decorum after a Musician has received a warning; (4) persistent and marked inability to continue to maintain the artistic standards

There is nothing about "anti-social behavior". If the language is similar to this, there could be a dispute as to whether posting on social media in your spare time is a breach of professional decorum, and it doesn't appear that any written warning was issued. Their CBA might be different; I'm just speculating here. I think what frequently happens is that some sort of monetary settlement is reached to avoid a legal battle. I support what the Austin Symphony did and even if they do have to pay out it is worth it to take a stand against racism.

[Bach5G]

You can almost always fire someone for “cause” but what might constitute “cause” could be difficult to pin down. Austin might very well be writing Ms B a cheque.

An argument might be: I’ve been exercising my first amendment rights on social media for years. You knew or ought to have known I was a racist when you hired me.

[brassmedic]

You can almost always fire someone for “cause” but what might constitute “cause” could be difficult to pin down. Austin might very well be writing Ms B a cheque.

An argument might be: I’ve been exercising my first amendment rights on social media for years. You knew or ought to have known I was a racist when you hired me.

Yep. Or might not even need such an erudite defense. It could be as simple as, "You didn't follow the specified procedure in the CBA that is required to terminate someone", like warning letters by certified mail, hearings, or whatever. Procedures are usually pretty specific in CBAs.

[Gary]

What would you have done if you were part of the symphony management?

I would put her on administrative leave until a thorough investigation is completed.

[Burgerbob]

My wife, who works in orchestra management, says that they wouldn't release a statement saying she was let go at all unless they had consulted the union first. The union is always the first call when dealing with terminations or changes to employment anyway.

[CalgaryTbone]

You can almost always fire someone for “cause” but what might constitute “cause” could be difficult to pin down. Austin might very well be writing Ms B a cheque.

An argument might be: I’ve been exercising my first amendment rights on social media for years. You knew or ought to have known I was a racist when you hired me.

Yes, I didn't mean to imply that contractual language for "firing for cause" would have specific examples - the words I used in my previous post were mine and not from any specific contract. I know that my orchestra's contract has a clause on this topic that is not all that specific. I'm pretty sure that would be the case most of the time - nothing to gain from trying to describe specifically what behaviour is unacceptable.
I've negotiated several contracts, and am familiar (or at least was familiar) with some other contracts from the preparation work that's involved in negotiating. I will say, however, that this particular kind of clause has never come up in any negotiations that I've been involved in - it's just a given.

It is quite possible that there was a payout involved in her termination, or that there will be if there's a lawsuit. Very often a settlement that avoids court is the best decision for all concerned. Some posts have mentioned the union's role in this, but in addition to representing the player involved, they also represent all of her colleagues - many who could feel injured by her words. The union's role in these matters is one that involves some careful balancing of the needs/rights of many people.

Jim Scott

[brassmedic]

What would you have done if you were part of the symphony management?

I would put her on administrative leave until a thorough investigation is completed.

I don't think "administrative leave" is a thing in most orchestra CBAs. I think you are either a probational member, a tenured member, or you are terminated. You can take a leave, but I don't believe you can be PUT on leave. At least not in any CBA I've ever seen.

[8parktoollover]

I guess it all boils down to be careful what you say.

[Burgerbob]

I guess it all boils down to be careful what you say.

Also don't be racist, though. I'd rather people either out themselves or change their ways in that case.

[Doug Elliott]

Have you actually known someone to "change their ways?" All I see is people digging in deeper.

[Burgerbob]

Have you actually known someone to "change their ways?" All I see is people digging in deeper.

It's the rosy view, for sure. Those that won't change? I'd rather they just say it, so we know who they are.

[8parktoollover]

Have you actually known someone to "change their ways?" All I see is people digging in deeper.

It's the rosy view, for sure. Those that won't change? I'd rather they just say it, so we know who they are.

People should allowed to have an opinion without being forced to admit it so you can shun them. And anyways, why does it matter if they don't talk about it?
I personally don't care if someone is racist. As long as it doesn't affect how they treat people and they don't harm
anybody because of it.

[harrisonreed]

It's the rosy view, for sure. Those that won't change? I'd rather they just say it, so we know who they are.

People should allowed to have an opinion without being forced to admit it so you can shun them. And anyways, why does it matter if they don't talk about it?
I personally don't care if someone is racist. As long as it doesn't affect how they treat people and they don't harm
anybody because of it.

If someone is a racist, it affects how they treat people, and they do harm EVERYBODY because of it.

Otherwise they aren't a racist.

[8parktoollover]

It is possible to be racist and not let it affect how you treat people. It just takes some effort. But regardless, limiting how people think is called facism and it's just as bad as racism and in my opinion, much worse.

[harrisonreed]

It is possible to be racist and not let it affect how you treat people. It just takes some effort. But regardless, limiting how people think is called facism and it's just as bad as racism and in my opinion, much worse.

You're digging a deep hole man. I didn't advocate that anyone be limited on how they think. I'll put what I said a different way:

We know that asparagus is a very healthy vegetable. If someone truly hates it, even if they never tell anyone, how often they choose to eat it will be affected, and even if they try to eat it to be polite, it will be obvious that they don't like it and don't want to eat it to everyone at the table eating with them. They may even begin to question if they should be eating asparagus, too.

Luckily people are not vegetables. You can't say, that person looks like asparagus, so they must also taste like asparagus, too. But there are people who treat others like they are vegetables. Even when they are being polite. They're called closet racists.

[8parktoollover]

So if you are polite then what's the problem. If a racist choses to minimilize interactions then it seems like a win win situation to me. They don't have to deal with a racist and the racist doesn't have to deal with people he doesn't like. Just like how I chose not to interact with specific people I don't like being around. I can still be polite and respectful. I just don't like them.
So if your point us that thoughts affect actions, then yes but it doesn't have to be in a bad way.

[8parktoollover]

And about the facism bit. I was more talking to burgerbob
Sorry I didn't make that clear.

[Burgerbob]

Again... This feels like a pretty hopelessly naive view of things. I applaud you for thinking positively, at least.

[harrisonreed]

So if you are polite then what's the problem. If a racist choses to minimilize interactions then it seems like a win win situation to me. They don't have to deal with a racist and the racist doesn't have to deal with people he doesn't like. Just like how I chose not to interact with specific people I don't like being around. I can still be polite and respectful. I just don't like them.
So if your point us that thoughts affect actions, then yes but it doesn't have to be in a bad way.

And their children? And family? And friends? I'm not talking about individuals who are people you don't want to hang around with. I'm talking about dismissing or avoiding thousands of people for no legitimate reason

[8parktoollover]

So if you are polite then what's the problem. If a racist choses to minimilize interactions then it seems like a win win situation to me. They don't have to deal with a racist and the racist doesn't have to deal with people he doesn't like. Just like how I chose not to interact with specific people I don't like being around. I can still be polite and respectful. I just don't like them.
So if your point us that thoughts affect actions, then yes but it doesn't have to be in a bad way.

And their children? And family? And friends? I'm not talking about individuals who are people you don't want to hang around with. I'm talking about dismissing or avoiding thousands of people for no legitimate reason

If that is what you have to do to avoid toxic interaction, then yes. Of course it's better to learn to work with different people even if you still think you're better than them. But again the best thing to do is not be racist but as long as it doesn't harm anyone, I'm happy.

[8parktoollover]

The point is you can be racist but not behave in a racist fashion. As long as you don't harm anybody then I see no problem. It really isn't that hard to do. In fact we do i all the time.

[harrisonreed]

The point is you can be racist but not behave in a racist fashion. As long as you don't harm anybody then I see no problem. It really isn't that hard to do. In fact we do i all the time.

I'm sorry for you that you think that that is actually possible.

[8parktoollover]

The point is you can be racist but not behave in a racist fashion. As long as you don't harm anybody then I see no problem. It really isn't that hard to do. In fact we do i all the time.

I'm sorry for you that you think that that is actually possible.

Oc course you can't rid all racism from all of your actions but again, everybody has biases.

[Mv2541]

People should allowed to have an opinion without being forced to admit it so you can shun them. And anyways, why does it matter if they don't talk about it?
I personally don't care if someone is racist. As long as it doesn't affect how they treat people and they don't harm
anybody because of it.

You're clearly not interested in (the collective) our fight. A lot of us here in this thread are pushing towards an end to prejudice and a world where everyone can feel equal. Fundamentally speaking, how can some people feel equal knowing there are those who view them as lesser? Even if they do not 'harm people' physically, it can cause them emotional, economic, and social harm.

Stating you do not care if someone is racist means you are okay with the continued existence of a racist subpopulation. You also mention that people should be free to have an opinion without being outed and thus shunned. The problem is that this is what keeps oppressive systems in place. Maybe a person is an employer and closeted racist who just happens to bin the resumes of any applicants of color. He can pretend to be cool and treat everyone nicely to their faces, but behind the scenes he is a cog in the machine we're trying to dismantle.

[timothy42b]

Fundamentally speaking, how can some people feel equal knowing there are those who view them as lesser? Even if they do not 'harm people' physically, it can cause them emotional, economic, and social harm.

That doesn't seem right to me.

Of course a person can be unaware of their biases and end up doing harm through their actions, I don't disagree with that.

I do disagree that we are entitled to not having anyone have opinions or attitudes that they are aware of and carefully keep to theirselves, just as I disagree that college students of the current generation are entitled to safe spaces where they are protected from any contrary positions. (not quite a parallel, but it came up in something I just read.)

If someone is harmed by either knowing or just mistakenly thinking that someone thought them lesser, didn't they actually harm themselves?

[8parktoollover]

In the end it's kind of a problem with no solution. It's impossible to rid the world of racism because since people will see that their views aren't accepted by society they will keep them to themselves. If you think that we need to somehow find every racist, even those that are keeping to themselves and aren't harming anybody then that is just plain fascism.
There is also something to be said about just ignoring what people think about you and moving on with your life. I now for a fact that there are a lot of people who look down on me for both legitimate and non- legitimate reason. But instead of getting all caught up in what they might be thinking I just move on.

[Burgerbob]

There is also something to be said about just ignoring what people think about you and moving on with your life. I now for a fact that there are a lot of people who look down on me for both legitimate and non- legitimate reason. But instead of getting all caught up in what they might be thinking I just move on.

Oof.

[8parktoollover]

There is also something to be said about just ignoring what people think about you and moving on with your life. I now for a fact that there are a lot of people who look down on me for both legitimate and non- legitimate reason. But instead of getting all caught up in what they might be thinking I just move on.

Oof.

I'm not sure that I know what you are trying to say here.

[Burgerbob]

Oof.

I'm not sure that I know what you are trying to say here.

Let's put it this way. The people we are referring to (Black people in the United States) do not get the privilege of "ignoring" what others say about them. You are missing the point entirely.

[8parktoollover]

I'm not even taking about people saying things. I'm talking about getting upset over the fact that some people might not like you. Nobody deserves to get abused about such petty things but nobody is entitled to think that everybody must like them or they will get all upset and start calling it racism.

[Burgerbob]

I'm not even taking about people saying things. I'm talking about getting upset over the fact that some people might not like you. Nobody deserves to get abused about such petty things but nobody is entitled to think that everybody must like them or they will get all upset and start calling it racism.

Not everyone needs to like everyone. But people need to not think others are subhuman because of their skin color. That's a pretty large distinction that I think you're not quite grasping.

[8parktoollover]

You can try to educate on racism but you can't force somebody to not be racist. I'm responding to Mv2541
where he said that people might not feel equal just because there are people that think that they are better. There really isn't anything to do about that unless you support a fascist government so why spend so much energy focusing on that when you can use it to actually do something productive.

[Burgerbob]

You can try to educate on racism but you can't force somebody to not be racist. I'm responding to Mv2541
where he said that people might not feel equal just because there are people that think that they are better. There really isn't anything to do about that unless you support a fascist government so why spend so much energy focusing on that when you can use it to actually do something productive.

So, do nothing?

[8parktoollover]

First of all, to be clear, we are talking about closeted racists. As I said, You can try to educate but if that fails, there really isn't anything you can do but ignore it.
What's your suggestion?

[slipperyjoe]

First of all, to be clear, we are talking about closeted racists. As I said, You can try to educate but if that fails, there really isn't anything you can do but ignore it.
What's your suggestion?

You (and everyone else) would benefit from reading:
So You Want to Talk About Race by Ijeoma Oluo
https://tinyurl.com/yd3fcfgm

One might argue that ignoring racism is indeed perpetuating racism.

[harrisonreed]

I'm sorry for you that you think that that is actually possible.

Oc course you can't rid all racism from all of your actions but again, everybody has biases.

I will say that your statement here 100% contradicts what you were talking about. Yes! A racist person cannot rid that bias from their actions. It is a detriment to a modern society.

Maybe if you are living with Wilson the volleyball on a deserted island, you won't hurt anyone with this kind of behavior. But say this person's job was to teach trombone at a university and they didn't out themselves like the person from the symphony in this topic. YES! They will act based on this bias! How many fantastic black trombonists (or women, or middle eastern, or anyone you can have a bias against) might get turned away from being accepted to the program because of this? And they won't have a concrete reason. There is no room for it in ANY society.

I used to be, not biased, but shy around people who were different from me when I was your age. As much as for the fact that I didn't know how they might be, as how I wondered what they might think of me. Not just people from different backgrounds, but different ages and genders too. I think this is normal for any young person. Starting with college and moving through to my job now, I can say that I am coming from a different perspective than you have. I have trained with black Soldiers, and struggled through grueling ruck marches with them. I was trained to be a soldier by Puerto Rican and Black drill sergeants. I was trained to shoot by a black sniper in the Army, and one of the most stellar people I've ever met. I deployed with him, and his leg was destroyed by an anti aircraft shell, and he no longer is in the Army. I have broken bread with Afghans, and talked to them about what they hope for for their futures. I've patrolled the streets of Gardez with Afghan police, fighting to save their city from the same non-sensical fear of the "other" that this topic is about. I've done the same with Poles. I've broken bread with Kuwaitis and people in Kazakhstan, and talked to them about the same things. I've shared meals and played concerts with Korean people. I've played many gigs and had many conversations with Japanese people about what is going on, and the relationship between the US and their country. Everywhere I go, there are good people, and we have the same hopes and dreams around the world. And we NEED to accept and work with each other. In fact, having people with different backgrounds involved in any project makes that project better informed, and better overall in the end. It IS harmful to say, oh, I just need to avoid XYZ and everyone will be better off. No. The more involved in society, your company, or your school you are, the more you will see that it just isn't so. You don't know where someone is actually coming from unless you talk to them and work with them. Asparagus looks like asparagus and tastes like it too. People look like all sorts, bur none of them think or act the same. There is no room for racism, period, in a functioning society.