dress codes have always been rooted in racism & sexism. there’s absolutely no reason a job should control your hair unless it disrupts business, not for “offending conservatives”
Cost of living where I am is around $38-40 so I’m all out of whack with this, sorry. But on most contracts our first 2hrs of OT would be 1.5x, whereas you’re somehwere around 1.85x? So that’s neat.
The city where I live has a higher col then the surrounding rural areas. Our living wage is $15.34 and poverty wage is $6.35 I don’t have a report for the surrounding areas but my gut says somewhere around $10/$5.
In the US you have to get paid 1.5x for hours over 40. $30/2.5/1.5 = $8. And thats assuming no paycheck deductions such as tax, healthcare, alimony, etc
Personally i would've also gotten him on audio recording saying it, and then emailed that audio recording to myself through gmail to prove the time stamp of it was before you did the action. Also it would be good to take a picture of the work log and gmail it to yourself too. When records like work logs and corporate emails are in the hands of the company, they sometimes "disappear" when it would prove them wrong and you right.
Yes, they actually do. They’re probably conservative dickheads. They know that pink hair is code for “I am a tolerant and kind person; I might be gay but not necessarily; I support counterculture ideas.”
They hate the counterculture ideas. They don’t hate the color pink. Covering it up with a terrible wig makes it about something else.
Or anyway, so they think. What they’ve actually done is given her an opportunity to start conversations about the pink hair.
Hah! It doesn’t even take that. All you need is a middle-management who doesn’t support the rights of their workforce, is inconvenienced should a customer gin up complaints about OP’s hair-color (whatever it is), and is generally just lazy and indifferent, learning from upper mgmt that growth & profits are 99% the things that count, followed by limiting liability situations. The workers themselves are just an inconvenient expense in the equation.
I personally think the best "maliciouscompliance" act mods can do in the long term is to switch up all the subs.
So technology will be used for gardening, gardening will be used for android, android will be used for coffee, coffee used for pcgaming, etc. It'll make everything really confusing for new users and help slow their growth.
No this all seems too clever by half and is just putting more eyes on Reddit. People are drawn to drama. If mods were serious, they’d delete or pull all of their custom plug ins and delete their accounts. Let Reddit have the subs. Unfortunately a huge number of mods won’t actually endanger their positions, which means Reddit corporate has the ultimate leverage in the end. Just go. I respect the mods who have left. If more of them did it would leave a true void.
Image being Reddit corporate and waking up tomorrow and 5000 subreddits were open but all the mods and their mods tools were gone. No big dramatic pranks or drama from the mods, just a classy exit.
The problem with that is, someone else who doesn't care about the issues would take over as mod, and the sub would go on more of less normally. This way, it will eventually kill the sub without trying to delete it or take it private (both things Reddit can undo).
Ah, probably my favourite episode! I've never been a big fan of john oliver purely because I find him aggressively unfunny, but showing everyone the ridiculous cease and desist letter with "Let us neither cease, nor desist" is amazing.
It was a legitimate protest of a stupid law that uses a legacy of inconsistent thought and limited perception to do an end run around the first amendment, but the text of the law requires a poster per building, so if they have enough in English, there would be no "need" to accept or post them. Now, if a principal or administrator had some balls, I certainly don't see why they couldn't use one of these or to flank the posters they do post with lots of context or more diverse ideas.
Now, if a principal or administrator had some balls
You don’t become a public school middle manager in Texas by showing balls. You’d get weeded out before you even got through the substitute program for teaching gym class.
Elia Bonci, who also spoke to la Repubblica, said: “I took courage, used my deadname and signed up for Miss Italy because fighting transphobia is intersectional and even though I’m not a trans woman, I’ve decided to fight for their rights.”
I went to high school with a Ruth. She decided to change her name to Elizabeth when she went to college. She still goes by Elizabeth. Is she mentally ill because she doesn’t want anyone to call her Ruth?
So like, according to the organizers, if they were born with a penis, it doesn’t matter if they transitioned, they are considered men.
This trans man (a person born with a vagina who transitioned ) is entering the contest, because if trans women are considered men, trans men are considered women.
So this dude is entering a “female” beauty contest to show how dumb the rules are. He is allowed to do so because said dumb rules make him a woman in the eyes of the organization.
“Transphobia” idk I just think they don’t want certain ideologies in their shows. Makes sense to me but you guys will probably start spamming slurs at me if I keep speaking so…
Edit: I agree the rules are dumb and contradictory but calling it transphobia is just hilarious to me
Most uses of the misnomer “transphobia” are actually incorrect, because the people involved aren’t actually suffering from an irrational medical or psychological fear of transgender people.
What they actually are doing is more accurately called “transmisia”, because they are transmisic. This means they are heavily prejudiced against transgender women and believe that they shouldn’t be involved in the competitions.
Their reason for this are not because the transgender women don’t meet the beauty standards, or aren’t passing the judging categories, but because they just don’t want them there purely due to their trans-mysogynistic preconceptions.
In the vein of words like homophobia, these words’ definitions are not strictly in line with their etymology. Per every dictionary (but quoting Webster), transphobia is defined as:
irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against transgender people
And this might create some linguistic ambiguity, but I cannot seem to find actual documentation on a medical or psychological fear of transgender people at all. It seems this behavior is entirely (or almost entirely) a learned bigotry.
The other word, “transmisia”, has not really been officially adopted in any circle I can find. The only place I could find it with any prominance is a site called the “Trans Language Primer”, and I know nothing about it (except that it looks like geocities) so I won’t be linking it directly. Suffice to say, they speak negatively of the term (despite defending it as having a good intention) and favor “transphobia” for reasons of clarity.
Legally they had been served, so there was nothing they could do about it.
Somehow I doubt this.
Maybe it’s true but legally I know in California you are required to do your briefs in 12 point font. While that’s briefs, I would imagine evidence would be under the same banner. It definitely WOULD be illegal to do it in 1 pt font or intentionally making it unreadable. I would imagine if the other side wanted to make it an issue they could back to the judge and he’s probably have it out with you.
Maybe the lawyers wisely replaced your malicious compliance with correct sized print with out telling you, maybe the other side didn’t care.
I don’t think the font size matters too much in this, it’s just the printing the whole source code, including a lot of not directly relevant things, and sending all of that over in a few boxes instead of sharing the project files with them that is very malicious.
If you believe that there was any conversation like this at all, and it isn’t just some production line that places coupons at the same place on every box.
The community is “malicious compliance”. It would only be a perfect fit for here if it were actually malicious compliance and not just a funny coincidence.
Whether real or not, it is a joke about malicious compliance creating this funny placement. It could very well be real malicious compliance. That’s a very fitting place for this meme
I like the malicious compliance but I find that to be a bad way to do a poll. Better would have been one comment with the text "Upvote if you want John Oliver pics, downvote if you want it to go back to normal".
The way they did it if one group only upvote their alternative and the other also downvotes the opponent then the result isn't representative. Or at least could be claimed not to be.
you can't both upvote and downvote the same item. the last option you selected is the only one that's counted at any given moment.
edit: wait, i see. if they're separate comments, you could just upvote the comment you like and downvote the comment you don't. i was assuming one comment that said upvote or downvote.
maliciouscompliance
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.