Crazy ruling.

[deli_conker]

Ever think that you can take something too far? I think the following news shows that in some places you can take things way too far.

Click

 

[malkore]

Yep. that's why I'm not very 'politcally correct'

 

[talloulou]

What a load of crap! This stuff burns me up. If you can't do a job because you are too short, too tall, too blind, too weak, too big then that's that. I really don't see how the court ruled this way when it was a height issue and not a gender issue.

 

[lyquidphyre]

Thats almost as bad as saying that theme parks gender discriminate because they won't allow shorter people to ride rides.. its a SAFETY issue... not a gender biased one

 

[fishyrican]

In my opinion, the fault with this lies with judges and attorneys. When judges stretch plain meaning to fit a result (which, granted does not happen as often as some claim), they box themselves in a corner when the next issue is just a tiny bit outside the previous line drawn. It becomes easier to stretch the law just a little bit more. If you stick with the plain issue, there is no stretching. Sure, people get upset, but government does not exist to give everyone a good day.

I also fault attorneys because it seems that business pressures have removed the ability to tell a client, "No." I can fault attorneys because I am one. I know some collegues that would file suit for anything.

 

[Fishyfanatic]

All I can say: Oh geez.....

 

[kimberly]

Darned if you do, darned if you don't. If they have the height requirement they get in trouble for "gender descrimination" ...if they don't have the height requirement they have a greater opportunity to get sued for on the job injuries.

 

[deli_conker]

Thats almost as bad as saying that theme parks gender discriminate because they won't allow shorter people to ride rides.. its a SAFETY issue... not a gender biased one

hahaha

I had something like that in my original post, but I decided to hold back. Funny that it's thought that other people had as well.

 

[macman7010]

not a shocker, Im just amazed that didnt happen on american soil

 

[mr86mister]

these things are driving me nuts they are happening all over, but we do have to remember.....their form of judicial laws and standards are different than ours but straight to the point.....like kimberly said, the only reason they have those height standards is so employees dont get hurt and can sue Volvo, but its greed...this lady must of really needed a job bad and was stuck in life or death situation so she decided to just sue them just for the hay of it.....UFFA

 

[Toirtis]

Now wait for the ironic conclusion where the woman loses both arms in an accident caused because she was too short, and has pretty much screwed herself out of suing for that.

 

[deli_conker]

this lady must of really needed a job bad and was stuck in life or death situation so she decided to just sue them just for the hay of it.....UFFA

Or she just wanted to get paid. How many people would sue Burger King if they were liable for putting pickels on a burger when you ordered it without them? A lot more people than you think.

 

[FMJnaX]

Interesting story for sure. I'm one that doesn't like to stretch the rules at all, but the employer could have saved suit if they hired her from the beginning.... it's just 1 inch difference....

 

[deli_conker]

Interesting story for sure. I'm one that doesn't like to stretch the rules at all, but the employer could have saved suit if they hired her from the beginning.... it's just 1 inch difference....

Yeah that sounds somewhat reasonable, but I would make her sign something that tells her that this is the only job available and that she doesn't meet the high requirments dictated for safety purposes. She can have the job, but the company is not liable for her safety in this specific position.

Then again, you can "only one inch" it several times over. Next thing you know, 4'9" people would be working it. You have to draw the line somewhere and abide by it otherwise having a line in the first place is pretty much a waste of time.

 

[FMJnaX]

Exactly why I don't like to stretch the rules, even once. Most of the time, if you do it once, you do it again... and at an even more flexible level. Agreed that some sort of waiver would also be needed so that she couldn't sue when she got injured. Too many sue-happy people around, and even more lawyers available to represent them.

 

[BillyZ]

depending on other legal precedence, even a waiver insn't necessarily guarunteed protection.

 

[kimberly]

What Tortis said!