Fired for working in the adult film industry in the past

[MillCreek]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/26/stacie-halas-former-haydo_n_2019466.html

Should a teacher, doctor, lawyer, engineer, soldier or anyone else be fired for working in the adult film industry before becoming a teacher, doctor, lawyer, engineer, soldier or anyone else?  I would not want my wife, daughter or sister working in that industry, but I am thinking that it is irrelevant to the current employment, it was a legal job before the change in career, and it should not be grounds for firing.  If we can have disbarred lawyers convicted of felonies or physicians who were screwing their patients returned to their career, why the heck would we look to fire this person?  I have read other accounts describing her as a good teacher respected by the kids.

[never_retreat]

Nope, no ones business about what I did in the past.

[zxcvbob]

No.  But it's fair game for jokes until it gets old (it'll never get old)

[Northwoods]

Teacher I would object to.  Enough problems with schools without Jenna Jameson teaching my 14 year old son.  

Other professions more negotiable.

But pr0n stars should also recognize that many people don 't appove of such  a career choice, and they should consider any subsequent discrimination a hazard of the trade.

[Ron]

She was fired for lying on her resume according to the article.

The truth came out when both students and fellow teachers reported making the connection.

Something being legal doesn't mean it is necessarily acceptable behavior for a person that is entrusted with the care and instruction of children/youths.

For my fellow APS'rs let me give you some advice. If you want to have a career where you are entrusted with other peoples children, don't get involved in the adult film industry.

[Perd Hapley]

Not this stuff again.

Let the parents and the local school system make the call. They are close to the situation; you are (more than likely) not. They probably know what is going on better than you do, and will have to deal with the consequences. If the school loses a good teacher, it is their loss. If they keep the teacher on, and his/her past is a problem in the classroom, that is their loss as well.

Obviously, everyone's entitled to their opinion, and I'm not making that silly argument about how group x can't judge group y. Unless, of course, group x is the people in situ, and group y are the people making ill-informed judgments from 1000 miles away, based on articles on the web-ernets, written by journalists, who seldom get anything right.

[Hawkmoon]

She was fired for lying on her resume according to the article.

It doesn't say that. It says she omitted that job from her resume, but we don't know if the resume says to list ALL previous jobs held. Most job applications don't ask that ... they ask for all previous jobs that may have helped prepare you for the job being applied for (or something along those lines). The article does say something about lying to her boss, but if she wasn't under oath I don't see how that could be a firing offense.

[Ron]

It doesn't say that. It says she omitted that job from her resume, but we don't know if the resume says to list ALL previous jobs held. Most job applications don't ask that ... they ask for all previous jobs that may have helped prepare you for the job being applied for (or something along those lines). The article does say something about lying to her boss, but if she wasn't under oath I don't see how that could be a firing offense.

Oxnard school officials are unsympathetic. They say that they never knew she had appeared in pornographic videos until April, and that lying to her boss was grounds for dismissal, according to district spokesman Tom DeLapp. He said the fact that Halas listed being a lifeguard and working at Subway as prior employment but omitted her porn star past “is very telling.”

All I have to go on is the story linked and the quote from school officials.

[zxcvbob]

School officials view the situation differently, however, and maintain Halas’ past is too much of a distraction to allow her back in the classroom. She was put on administrative leave in April and eventually fired after some students and teachers reported they had seen her in a video they described as "hardcore pornography."

I'm more concerned about the students and other teachers watching hardcore porn.  (watching it together?   )

[Scout26]

Not this stuff again.

Let the parents and the local school system make the call. They are close to the situation; you are (more than likely) not. They probably know what is going on better than you do, and will have to deal with the consequences. If the school loses a good teacher, it is their loss. If they keep the teacher on, and his/her past is a problem in the classroom, that is their loss as well.

Obviously, everyone's entitled to their opinion, and I'm not making that silly argument about how group x can't judge group y. Unless, of course, group x is the people in situ, and group y are the people making ill-informed judgments from 1000 miles away, based on articles on the web-ernets, written by journalists, who seldom get anything right.

Oh where's the fun in that? 

This is America, where we give our uninformed and misinformed (and combinations thereof) opinions on every topic under the sun.  In fact, there are entire websites devoted to....errr....ummm....opine away !!!!!
 

[vaskidmark]

There's really no sense in wasting electrons discussing whether terminating her was "right" or "wrong" - unitl she decides to take the case to the EEOC and those worthies render a decision we can either agree or disagree with.

In the meantime, we could discuss various ways in which an employment candidate might address certain time periods they would rather not recount with the blunt truth.  Would it have been lying to have listed that time as something like "character actor" and let people presume she wore an oversized animal costume instead of nothing at all?

The "rules" for being allowed to teach our children have changed over the years.  http://blog.ivman.com/teachers-rules/  and
http://www.iptv.org/iowapathways/mypath.cfm?ounid=ob_000254

What seems to remain a constant is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOZPBUu7Fro .

stay safe.

[J.J.]

Teachers are held at a much higher standard than most other professions.  For such a low paying job it's sad.

My wife has to be careful we're we go out for on dates and shopping.  All hell has been known to break loose f a teacher is spotted drinking in a bar by a parent.  When we are shopping and a student and parent spots us, it's not uncommon for the paret to scan the basket to see what she's buying. 

It's a job.  When on the clock it matters what they do, they all have a past and personal life like rest of us.
Joking with the wife I suggest we stop at a novelty store and get ER something.... Her first reaction was about what if a parent saw her in the store, she would be fired.   That should NOT be on the radar IMHO.

[Lee]

It would depend how the parent/teacher conferences went.  Three-way conferences are interesting as well.
It's more of a distraction issue for me,rather than a moral issue.
Never understood why SOME people are punished when they try to turn their lives around.
If she was an ex homeless crack whore- everyone would be praising her.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

i would be very surprised if her app didn't have boilerplate at the sig line that said some version of fibbing is grounds for termination.  i had it on apps for chefs jobs 20 years ago

[Tallpine]

It doesn't say that. It says she omitted that job from her resume, but we don't know if the resume says to list ALL previous jobs held. Most job applications don't ask that ... they ask for all previous jobs that may have helped prepare you for the job being applied for (or something along those lines). The article does say something about lying to her boss, but if she wasn't under oath I don't see how that could be a firing offense.

I couldn't even begin to list all the "jobs" that I have had over the past 40+ years.

Many of them were a few days or less, working as a handyman type but not officially running a business.

Even the ones that were official employment are too many to mention, and there is no way I could remember all the names and addresses.  Some of the people that I have worked for are long since dead (I had nothing to do with their demise    ) or out of business (I may have had something to do with that  ).

My "professional" resume only lists the engineering projects that I have worked on.  It's not really any concern of current/future "clients" (I work as a contractor through an engineering firm) that I was a gas station attendant/mechanic, sawmill hand, timber faller, owned operated a logging outfit, hardware store clerk, carpenter, laquer booth operator, etc etc etc.

[Hawkmoon]

All employment applications I've seen recently asked only for the most recent five positions, or the last ten years, or for all jobs relevant to the position being applied for. At may age, any of those leave out a lot -- for a young teacher, I suppose it's not that cut-and-dried.

That said, I find it disconcerting that the same educational mafia that wants to teach kids that homosexuality is normal also want to punish this teacher (and others -- this is not the first such incident) for engaging in heterosexual activity entirely outside of the school system.

[lee n. field]

Some of the people that I have worked for are long since dead (I had nothing to do with their demise    ) or out of business (I may have had something to do with that  ).

With the exception of my current employer, every single place I've worked at for the last 20- years is defunct.  In most cases I have no idea how to get hold of anyone.

[Tallpine]

With the exception of my current employer, every single place I've worked at for the last 20- years is defunct.  In most cases I have no idea how to get hold of anyone.

The really funny thing for me is that my "boss" at the engineering firm that I contract with, was also my boss at the previous firm that I worked for 

When that company shut down one of it's offices, many of the folks hired on with my current employer.  So it looks really weird to list the same contact person for my "last two" jobs.     But it is really a pretty small industry in terms of numbers of engineers that do this particular kind of stuff.

But I've hardly ever got a job by filling out an app anyway.  Usually I get hired and then they say "oh yeah please fill this out for our records" and they don't care about the past employment section anyway - just the basics.  My resume is normally just used for prospective clients of my employer when they are looking to place me in a project.


I still can't believe the hypocrisy of parents/students watching porn and then saying the teacher isn't fit to be in a classroom.  This is just a little Peyton Place and they're all Harper Valley Hypocrites 

[Perd Hapley]

I still can't believe the hypocrisy of parents/students watching porn and then saying the teacher isn't fit to be in a classroom.  This is just a little Peyton Place and they're all Harper Valley Hypocrites 

That depends on whether the person(s) that found her out are the ones wanting her removed. You would expect whoever saw it to have told someone else, who told someone else, until all of the teachers, students and parents learned about it.

[kgbsquirrel]

I still can't believe the hypocrisy of parents/students watching porn and then saying the teacher isn't fit to be in a classroom.  This is just a little Peyton Place and they're all Harper Valley Hypocrites 

This. And if porn is such a moral outrage to the parents, why are they so uninvolved with regards to the rearing of their children that the kids are watching it.

... after some students and teachers reported they had seen her in a video they described as "hardcore pornography."

Now for my parting question: Why is it okay to discriminate against someone for engaging in one particular morally distasteful act (making porn) but not okay (and actually a federal crime) to discriminate against someone for engaging in a different morally distasteful act (being homosexual, and thus presumptively having gay sex)?

[Perd Hapley]

This. And if porn is such a moral outrage to the parents, why are they so uninvolved with regards to the rearing of their children that the kids are watching it.

See my above post.

Now for my parting question: Why is it okay to discriminate against someone for engaging in one particular morally distasteful act (making porn) but not okay (and actually a federal crime) to discriminate against someone for engaging in a different morally distasteful act (being homosexual, and thus presumptively having gay sex)?

Interesting question.

[lupinus]

Now for my parting question: Why is it okay to discriminate against someone for engaging in one particular morally distasteful act (making porn) but not okay (and actually a federal crime) to discriminate against someone for engaging in a different morally distasteful act (being homosexual, and thus presumptively having gay sex)?

What if she was making lesbian porn?

[Lee]

That not a valid comparison. It's not the activity in question, it the video piece.
I'm sure the same issue would be there if the movie involved gay sex.
Most school issues involve subjects that are distractions to the routine, whether it's dress codes, free speech, or something like this. Lesson for the kiddies is that it is nearly impossible to run from one's past in this digital age.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

teacher in florida  gay sex star  back teaching
http://gawker.com/5836593/porn-star-teacher-allowed-to-go-back-to-the-classroom

[kgbsquirrel]

That not a valid comparison. It's not the activity in question, it the video piece.

The comparison is not a video of a sex act versus a sex act in general, the comparison is applying moral judgment to someone in one case and not another. Morals are not universal and in the instance of human sexuality run the gamut from ancient Greek pederasty to Victorian age prudism. For this reason they make very poor rule-of-law leading to arbitrary, capricious and at times spiteful oppression of citizens where, as in this case, no demonstrable harm is present. I see discrimination against someone based on their prior legal activities as no better than the retributive witch-hunts engaged by employers against their employees who speak out about unsafe or illicit business activities. At best, at best, this could be called an instance of malum prohibitum determination, however I counter that compromising someone's livelihood and their ability to provide for themselves and their family because of a personal moral stance is most definitely malum in se.