NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20/NN_1992_20.iso/spool/misc/consumer/16590

Internet Message Format | 1992-09-15 | 2.0 KB

Xref: sparky misc.consumers:16590 alt.discrimination:4392
Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!amdahl!jsp
From: [e-mail] (James Preston)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Waldenbooks fires staff for refusing to sell racist book!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:32:09 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Distribution: usa
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 27

[e-mail] (Dowdy Jackson) writes:

}But is the decision really yours ? It seems to me that while it is true that
}you can pick and choose what you want to read , you are only picking from a
}limited selection which was selected by the store manager or who ever is
}responsible for stocking the store's selection.
}     Like I stated in a previos posting... There isn't a black history/interest
}section in many bookstores in white areas. So why isn't that censorship as
}defined by the postings I've seen so far ? Isn't the store manager suppressing
}my ability to obtain that information ?

For me, I believe that every store manager has the right to make the
business decision as to what he will carry and what he will not.  The
problem I have with the situation in question, as I understand it, is
that some employees took it upon themselves to _override_ the store
manager's decision to stock this particular book.  A clear act of
insubordination for which the store was justified in firing the employees.

Turn the situation around:  What if the store policy was to NOT stock
this book.  And then a few employees decided that they liked it, ordered
a bunch of them for the store, and put them on display.  Would the store
be justified in firing those employees?  If your boss wants you to work
on Project A, but you'd rather work on Project B so you just go ahead
and do that, would your boss be justified in firing you?

--James Preston