Fire chief fired after gay comments in book

[resodko]

I believe he said he gave it to a few people who he already had a more personal relationship with and understood that they were Christians. You talk as if he was handing it out to anyone or he left it in the lunchroom for all to see.

Also, coworkers can exchange stuff at work without it coming from their job position or representing the company.

like i said - he's never had a real job :idunno:


prolly doesn't happen flipping burgers

 

[Jose Fly]

I believe he said he gave it to a few people who he already had a more personal relationship with and understood that they were Christians.

During work hours and in a work building, which means he was doing it on gov't time and as a representative of the gov't. Then there's the issue of him being in a supervisory position as well.

You talk as if he was handing it out to anyone or he left it in the lunchroom for all to see.

The complaint was originated by some of his staff after he gave them his book. So at least some of the people he gave it to didn't want it.

Also, coworkers can exchange stuff at work without it coming from their job position or representing the company.

He was in a supervisory role on gov't time and in a gov't facility handing out to his staff his self-published book that contained anti-gay language and stated that he viewed his position as Fire Chief as a means to use the part of the gov't he was in charge of "to cultivate its culture to the glory of God." The city has a policy of nondiscrimination against gays and you're not supposed to distribute religious literature during gov't time, at a gov't facility, and in your role as supervisor. That's why he was suspended. Then, while on suspension, rather than work with the city to resolve the issue he went public and doubled down on his stance. So they fired him.

It's pretty simple really.

 

[kmoney]

During work hours and in a work building, which means he was doing it on gov't time and as a representative of the gov't. Then there's the issue of him being in a supervisory position as well.

I disagree that doing it at work necessarily means that the person is doing it as a representative of their place of work. If my boss gives me something to read it's not necessarily as an employee or representative of our company. I certainly wouldn't take it that way. Co-workers talk and have relationships beyond work matters.

I will agree that him being a supervisor creates more potential for harm. For instance, if he handed the book out to someone based solely on knowing they are a Christian then there could be a situation where a subordinate accepts it and may feel pressure to respond in a positive manner because it's coming from their boss. But the way Cochran describes it he only gave it to people with whom he had a deeper friendship and understanding.

The complaint was originated by some of his staff after he gave them his book. So at least some of the people he gave it to didn't want it.

I don't think it's clear how the upset person obtained the book, which is why I questioned earlier how they got it. According to Cochran he said he gave it to 3 people and then someone else obtained it. It doesn't sound like the complaint came from someone who Cochran directly gave the book to.

He was in a supervisory role on gov't time and in a gov't facility handing out to his staff his self-published book that contained anti-gay language and stated that he viewed his position as Fire Chief as a means to use the part of the gov't he was in charge of "to cultivate its culture to the glory of God." The city has a policy of nondiscrimination against gays and you're not supposed to distribute religious literature during gov't time, at a gov't facility, and in your role as supervisor. That's why he was suspended. Then, while on suspension, rather than work with the city to resolve the issue he went public and doubled down on his stance. So they fired him.

It's pretty simple really.

I do agree that if he was talking about cultivating a culture of glorifying God then it would be problematic for a gov't employee who is in charge of others. I'm curious about when and how he suggested that was his responsibility. And if he distributed this book as an explicit step toward that then it calls that into question.

I'm not saying that he definitely did NOT do anything wrong, I just think more information is needed to decide.

 

[annabenedetti]

I do agree that if he was talking about cultivating a culture of glorifying God then it would be problematic for a gov't employee who is in charge of others. I'm curious about when and how he suggested that was his responsibility. And if he distributed this book as an explicit step toward that then it calls that into question.

According to WSB, the quote comes from the book itself. I'd like to see it in context, though.

In the book based on Christian values, Cochran identifies himself as Atlanta's fire chief and says his first priority as chief is to run the department "to cultivate its culture to the glory of God."


​

 

[kmoney]

According to WSB, the quote comes from the book itself. I'd like to see it in context, though.

In the book based on Christian values, Cochran identifies himself as Atlanta's fire chief and says his first priority as chief is to run the department "to cultivate its culture to the glory of God."


​

:think: I can see how that could be a problem for a boss in a public job. But I am curious about what exactly he meant by it. In a practical way, what does he see as running the dept to cultivate glory of God? But it does get tougher to defend him in light of that.

 

[resodko]

I disagree that doing it at work necessarily means that the person is doing it as a representative of their place of work. If my boss gives me something to read it's not necessarily as an employee or representative of our company. I certainly wouldn't take it that way. Co-workers talk and have relationships beyond work matters.

people with any kind of work experience know this :idunno:

 

[kmoney]

people with any kind of work experience know this :idunno:

Yeah, seems like common sense. lain:

 

[Jose Fly]

I disagree that doing it at work necessarily means that the person is doing it as a representative of their place of work. If my boss gives me something to read it's not necessarily as an employee or representative of our company. I certainly wouldn't take it that way. Co-workers talk and have relationships beyond work matters.

Usually public agencies have pretty specific policies about supervisors giving out things like reading material to their subordinates. The issue is more amplified when we're talking about the head of the entire Fire Dept.

I will agree that him being a supervisor creates more potential for harm. For instance, if he handed the book out to someone based solely on knowing they are a Christian then there could be a situation where a subordinate accepts it and may feel pressure to respond in a positive manner because it's coming from their boss.

Not only that, what if any of his employees are gay? At their place of employment, he's just given out his own book where he equates them with pedophiles and people who have sex with animals. I don't think those employees would feel he was going to treat them equally.

And keep in mind, all that did was get him suspended. They were probably going to consider just sending him to some sensitivity training, but he decided to go public and make himself a martyr.

But the way Cochran describes it he only gave it to people with whom he had a deeper friendship and understanding.

The accounts from the local papers say multiple employees complained to the city after he gave them the book. Either way, he was still distributing anti-gay literature to his subordinates while on duty and on city property. And even that was only going to get him sent to training.

I don't think it's clear how the upset person obtained the book, which is why I questioned earlier how they got it. According to Cochran he said he gave it to 3 people and then someone else obtained it. It doesn't sound like the complaint came from someone who Cochran directly gave the book to.

Again, it doesn't really matter.

I do agree that if he was talking about cultivating a culture of glorifying God then it would be problematic for a gov't employee who is in charge of others. I'm curious about when and how he suggested that was his responsibility. And if he distributed this book as an explicit step toward that then it calls that into question.

I'm not saying that he definitely did NOT do anything wrong, I just think more information is needed to decide.

Not only was that passage in his book, but he wrote his book using his title as Fire Chief. Frankly, I'm surprised he wasn't fired immediately.

 

[resodko]

Usually public agencies have pretty specific policies about supervisors giving out things like reading material to their subordinates. The issue is more amplified when we're talking about the head of the entire Fire Dept.

my boss used to pass around golfing magazines and talk about golfing, but none of us went whining to his boss that we were being discriminated against because we didn't golf

Not only that, what if any of his employees are gay?

then they're perverts who should be executed :idunno:

At their place of employment, he's just given out his own book where he equates them with pedophiles and people who have sex with animals.

good for him! :thumb:

I don't think those employees would feel he was going to treat them equally.

who cares how some pervert feels?

 

[kmoney]

Usually public agencies have pretty specific policies about supervisors giving out things like reading material to their subordinates. The issue is more amplified when we're talking about the head of the entire Fire Dept.

Do they? But in any case, I still wouldn't really characterize this as 'a supervisor giving reading material to their subordinates'.

Not only that, what if any of his employees are gay? At their place of employment, he's just given out his own book where he equates them with pedophiles and people who have sex with animals. I don't think those employees would feel he was going to treat them equally.

Well, presumably his views on homosexuality aren't new so it shouldn't be hard to look into his job performance to see if he's been treating anyone unfairly. Of course, perhaps he's never had an openly gay employee and any prospective firemen or closeted ones would be afraid to work for him.

And keep in mind, all that did was get him suspended. They were probably going to consider just sending him to some sensitivity training, but he decided to go public and make himself a martyr.

Sensitivity training to teach him what?

The accounts from the local papers say multiple employees complained to the city after he gave them the book. Either way, he was still distributing anti-gay literature to his subordinates while on duty and on city property. And even that was only going to get him sent to training.

If that's true then it would seem he didn't exercise enough discretion in who he gave it to. And I'd be more OK with the characterization you give (distributing anti-gay literature to subordinates).

Again, it doesn't really matter.

I think it does.

Not only was that passage in his book, but he wrote his book using his title as Fire Chief. Frankly, I'm surprised he wasn't fired immediately.

I hadn't heard that either. Using his title for the book would put him more in the danger zone of mixing private views and his job as a public official.


I was re-reading the article in the opening post.

"This is about how we treat one another. And so those folks who are calling me and telling me I should retain him. I just want you to know one thing. His religious decisions are not the basis of the problem. His judgement is the basis of the problem," Reed said.

I'm curious to know what would have happened if he hadn't given it to any employees but his views in the book still got out.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Really? Why can't a gov't employee use public resources and his position of authority to preach to his subordinates?

The fact that you even have to ask that question shows how clueless the fundamentalist side is.

The fact that you dont realize a man who preaches on Sunday, can have another job at the same time - show you to be the clueless one.

 

[Angel4Truth]

I don't think it has been proven that he either used public resources or 'preached' to his employees.

Of course it hasnt, he has to make things up to have a point.

 

[Angel4Truth]

And thus we see why the fundamentalists consistently lose in court on this issue. They can't muster a valid legal argument.

Please show a legal argument that you cannot give a gift of a book to a couple friends in the workplace. Thanks.

 

[Angel4Truth]

According to WSB, the quote comes from the book itself. I'd like to see it in context, though.

In the book based on Christian values, Cochran identifies himself as Atlanta's fire chief and says his first priority as chief is to run the department "to cultivate its culture to the glory of God."


​

Colossians 3:23 Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord rather than for men

 

[Jose Fly]

Do they? But in any case, I still wouldn't really characterize this as 'a supervisor giving reading material to their subordinates'.

I don't know how it could be anything else. He's the head of the Fire Dept., and everyone who works for the FD is his subordinate. While on work time and at a city building, he passed out copies of his book to firemen.

None of those are in dispute by any of the parties.

Well, presumably his views on homosexuality aren't new so it shouldn't be hard to look into his job performance to see if he's been treating anyone unfairly. Of course, perhaps he's never had an openly gay employee and any prospective firemen or closeted ones would be afraid to work for him.

Doesn't matter. He still gave out anti-gay literature to his subordinates while at work and on city property. He still authored the book using his title as Fire Chief. You can't do those things.

Sensitivity training to teach him what?

I don't know. Probably a standard "here's all the things you can and can't do as supervisor".

If that's true then it would seem he didn't exercise enough discretion in who he gave it to. And I'd be more OK with the characterization you give (distributing anti-gay literature to subordinates).

That's what's being reported.

I hadn't heard that either. Using his title for the book would put him more in the danger zone of mixing private views and his job as a public official.

Yep.

I was re-reading the article in the opening post.

I'm curious to know what would have happened if he hadn't given it to any employees but his views in the book still got out.

Don't know.

 

[Jose Fly]

The fact that you dont realize a man who preaches on Sunday, can have another job at the same time - show you to be the clueless one.

??????????? Where did I say anything like that?

Of course it hasnt, he has to make things up to have a point.

You are disputing facts in this case that none of the actual involved parties contest. No one involved in this case disputes the fact that he wrote this book under his title as Fire Chief, and passed it out to his subordinates during work hours at a city building.

Please show a legal argument that you cannot give a gift of a book to a couple friends in the workplace. Thanks.

Really? A supervisor gives a book about how the holocaust was a hoax to his Jewish employees, and you need to have why that is inappropriate explained to you?

 

[Dialogos]

And this is why you guys keep losing in court. "The gays don't like it...so what?"

No.

The reason that religious liberty keeps losing in court is because our judiciary is composed of social activists who have forsaken the bill of right.

Nope. No one cares what you think. He was put on suspension for distributing anti-gay literature while on work time and in his capacity as Fire Chief.

A. Cochran was fired for writing what he thought.
B. There is no report that Cochran did so in his capacity as fire-chief, it was not an official document nor were any of the fire dept. employees required to read it for their jobs.
C. He may have been on work time, but people engage in personal communication on work time all the time and even if this is against the town's policy, the consequences are usually not termination for the first offense.

For example, while I worked in customer service, I received a book from my atheist supervisor written by Daniel Dennett.

That gift was not an official communication from the company, nor was it distributed in my supervisor's capacity as a supervisor and while it was given to me while both she and I were at work, it was clearly a personal gift not a professional communication.

I find Dennett to be profoundly offensive (in addition to being completely stupid.)
I didn't whine and cry. I didn't run to HR and file a discrimination complaint. I didn't lobby to have my supervisor fired because she distributed something at work that I didn't agree with even though the book made claims about Christians that I found to be deeply offensive. I simply thanked her for being thoughtful and went on my merry way.

Not only that, he gave it to subordinates who didn't request it. That's what triggered this whole thing in the first place...some of his employees complained.

And the whiners got rewarded with the attention they crave while a hard working civil servant gets punished for communicating his religious beliefs.

Your "if it agrees with me it's OK" blind spot is making you look ridiculous again.

Wrong again.

I am an advocated for the religious freedom of all. If my atheist supervisor wants to give me a book by an atheist philosopher despite knowing that I was a committed Christian, then I can either accept the gift with a "thank you" or refuse the gift with a "no thank you."

No one is forcing me to read it!

No whining allowed.

:nono:

He gave out anti-gay literature during work hours,

It was a bible study that was not focused on homosexuality but contained a commentary on the biblical viewpoint on homosexuality.

Incidentally, Cochran is right, homosexuality is an unclean behavior and it is condemned in the bible along with bestiality, pederasty and incest. According to the bible, those who practice homosexuality deserve to die for it, that's how much God hates it.

in his capacity as Fire Chief,

Cochran didn't write the book as the Fire Chief, he wrote a book as a private citizen, nor was it distributed in an official capacity. There at least 30 fire stations under the Atlanta Fire Chief. Cochran gave out 3 copies.

Are you really going to argue that he distributed the book in his official capacity as a Fire Chief?

to employees who not only didn't request it,

So what? I got a pamphlet from the democratic party that I didn't want the other day, does that mean my rights have been violated?

The city is no more advocating homosexuality than they are advocating being religious, black, or a woman.

That's a lie and you know it.

Homosexuals demand that they be treated as a privileged class in the USA.

Cases in point.

If a fire chief had written a book that was pro-Muslim wherein Christian were criticized and gave out three copies no one would be fired, I doubt it would even reach the HR reps desk.

If a fire chief had written a book that was pro-Feminist wherein traditional marriage roles were criticized and had given it to three employees no one would be fired.

If a fire chief had written a book that was pro-African American that criticized the privileges of whites in America and had given it to three people no one would be fired.

Hilarious. To you, "fascism" means "not allowing me to discriminate against gays".

What discrimination?

Do you even know what that means?

There is absolutely no evidence that anyone was refused a promotion, refused to be considered for employment, kept from a raise, treated unfairly disciplined, etc.. because they were gay.

Cochran simply published his views (which are true) about what the bible says regarding homosexuality.

My atheist supervisor thought it was stupid to go to church and didn't refrain for saying so but never kept a church-goer from career advancement, is that supervisor guilty of discrimination?

Thanks for making it perfectly clear what this is really about for you. You just want to be able to preach your anti-gay message whenever and wherever, and force everyone to listen.

:rotfl:
I preach, occasionally, at my church and even then, anyone is welcome to get up and leave anytime they want, nobody locks the doors. A book is even easier to escape. If you don't like the message, :sozo: stop reading! :duh:

Have you ever read a book?

A book requires a pretty high level of consent for it to be read. You have to open it and start reading and then you have to keep reading. Here's the thing about a book. You can stop reading whenever you want.


:doh:

Nobody is being "forced to listen" to anything.

Fortunately, we don't live in a theocracy.

Stop playing drama queen.



No one is advocated a theocracy. We are advocating for democracy. In a democracy, people can write books about things that some people might not like and they are protected from being punished by the state for writing them. But you have to have actually read the first amendment to understand this.

 

[PureX]

How was he being both at the same time?

He was passing out his "sermons" at work, in book form.

 

[PureX]

Why cant he be?

Because he was being paid to be the fire chief, and only the fire chief for 8 hours a day. If he just couldn't do that without preaching, he should have resigned.

 

[Jose Fly]

The reason that religious liberty keeps losing in court is because our judiciary is composed of social activists who have forsaken the bill of right.

I'm sure that's what you tell yourself.

A. Cochran was fired for writing what he thought.

You don't even have the facts of the case right. He was suspended (not fired at that time) for distributing anti-gay literature during work hours, on city property, and to subordinates who didn't want it.

He was fired because during his suspension he went public and doubled down on what got him in trouble in the first place.

B. There is no report that Cochran did so in his capacity as fire-chief, it was not an official document nor were any of the fire dept. employees required to read it for their jobs.

Again you don't even have the facts right.

"In the “about the author” section of the book, Cochran identifies himself as the Atlanta fire chief."

And it doesn't matter if he made the book required reading. What matters is that he authored anti-gay literature using his title of Atlanta Fire Chief, and during work hours and on city property handed out the literature to his subordinates, some of whom didn't request it or want it. And all of this in a city that has a very clear non-discrimination policy regarding gays.

C. He may have been on work time, but people engage in personal communication on work time all the time and even if this is against the town's policy, the consequences are usually not termination for the first offense.

Again you don't even have the facts of the case right. He was only going to be suspended for a month and then sent to training. But during that time he went public and doubled down on where he went wrong. Only then did they fire him.

For example, while I worked in customer service, I received a book from my atheist supervisor written by Daniel Dennett.

That gift was not an official communication from the company, nor was it distributed in my supervisor's capacity as a supervisor and while it was given to me while both she and I were at work, it was clearly a personal gift not a professional communication.

I find Dennett to be profoundly offensive (in addition to being completely stupid.)
I didn't whine and cry. I didn't run to HR and file a discrimination complaint. I didn't lobby to have my supervisor fired because she distributed something at work that I didn't agree with even though the book made claims about Christians that I found to be deeply offensive. I simply thanked her for being thoughtful and went on my merry way.

Irrelevant to the facts of this case. Just because you didn't complain, that doesn't mean the Atlanta firefighters who did complain were wrong to do so.

I am an advocated for the religious freedom of all. If my atheist supervisor wants to give me a book by an atheist philosopher despite knowing that I was a committed Christian, then I can either accept the gift with a "thank you" or refuse the gift with a "no thank you."

No one is forcing me to read it!

No whining allowed.

So do you think religious freedom is absolute and universal?

It was a bible study that was not focused on homosexuality but contained a commentary on the biblical viewpoint on homosexuality.

Incidentally, Cochran is right, homosexuality is an unclean behavior and it is condemned in the bible along with bestiality, pederasty and incest. According to the bible, those who practice homosexuality deserve to die for it, that's how much God hates it.

No one outside of you cares what you believe about gays.

Cochran didn't write the book as the Fire Chief, he wrote a book as a private citizen, nor was it distributed in an official capacity. There at least 30 fire stations under the Atlanta Fire Chief. Cochran gave out 3 copies.

Again you don't have even the basic facts of the case right. As has been demonstrated, he did write the book as Fire Chief, he distributed it to his subordinates during work hours and on city property, and he gave it to at least 9 people 3 of whom didn't want it and found it offensive.

It's funny how you're so sure of your arguments here, despite how you don't even have the basic facts straight. :rotfl:

Are you really going to argue that he distributed the book in his official capacity as a Fire Chief?

Of course he did. It was during work hours, on city property, and towards his subordinates. You don't get to say "For the next 5 minutes, I'm not the Fire Chief" and then do whatever you want.

So what? I got a pamphlet from the democratic party that I didn't want the other day, does that mean my rights have been violated?

Unless they were your supervisor, all you're doing here is showing just how desperate your side has become.

That's a lie and you know it.

Homosexuals demand that they be treated as a privileged class in the USA.

And here comes the fundamentalist rant....

Cases in point.

If a fire chief had written a book that was pro-Muslim wherein Christian were criticized and gave out three copies no one would be fired, I doubt it would even reach the HR reps desk.

If a fire chief had written a book that was pro-Feminist wherein traditional marriage roles were criticized and had given it to three employees no one would be fired.

If a fire chief had written a book that was pro-African American that criticized the privileges of whites in America and had given it to three people no one would be fired.

Your speculations are meaningless to the facts of this case.

There is absolutely no evidence that anyone was refused a promotion, refused to be considered for employment, kept from a raise, treated unfairly disciplined, etc.. because they were gay.

Doesn't matter. He wasn't suspended for discriminating against anyone, nor was he fired for it. He was suspended for writing the book using his title and distributing it to subordinates during work hours. He was fired for going public and doubling down on his rhetoric ("poor judgment" according to the mayor).

No one is advocated a theocracy. We are advocating for democracy. In a democracy, people can write books about things that some people might not like and they are protected from being punished by the state for writing them. But you have to have actually read the first amendment to understand this.

That's a pretty poor straw man. But, I guess it's all you have.