Bluth Corporation wrote:Tekania wrote:Bluth Corporation wrote:Sitspot wrote:Bluth Corporation wrote:
Two (or more) people initially buy some property, and they have some agreement among themselves to deal with situations in which they're not all in agreement on what to do, and then later on they let others in provided they also accept the terms of that agreement (or whatever other terms they wish to attach).
This one would seem to be the relevant one in this case. If you had read the thread you would realize that one of the conditions these shareholders vest authority to their store manager under, is that she does not discriminate on basis of sex , politics or religion. One of the other conditions of her vested authority is that she does not use her position to break any laws. They also agreed with their employee that she would be treated in accordance with those policies and laws. This was an agreement that they had entered into voluntarily about conditional use of their property.
Were that true you'd be right, but I don't see that being mentioned anywhere.
Furthermore, the fired employee still wouldn't have any authority to make a court case. The shareholders can deal with the manager however they wish, and they can choose to reinstate the employee if they wish--but it's still not a matter for the courts, absent a conflict between the shareholders themselves over the terms of their agreement.
Don't think you quite grasp the concept of corporate law....
No, you simply don't grasp the entirety of my argument.
I do not promote ideas in an intellectual vacuum, but rather in the context of all the other ideas I promote.
I don't care what "wrongful termination" law says, because such law is inherently illegitimate. I was talking about an agent of the shareholders violating an internal policy of the shareholders.
Except that's not what happened here, that's not how the company spoken of is structured, and the laws of the land are held to be legitimate by both those in authority AND the company owners, who are JUST as fast to use said laws and courts when those same laws and courts favor them.
Please keep to the topic and leave your theories for your own thread.











