Man Fired in States for not getting thumbscan done for work.

If this guy is not willing to get fingerprinted for his job, let him bus tables. I've been fingeprinted for the military and a couple of jobs. It's no sweat off my boys or anyone else with an ounce of sense.

Originally posted by boogyman
So your saying they're going to create a system with no back up in the case of malfunction?
Its just going to be a thumbscan with no other means of verification? No keypad or ID card reader?
What happens when the thumbplate malfunctions what are you going to do hang around for a few hours waiting for tech support to show up to fix the malfunctioning gadget?

Thats what happens in the real world anyways even with low tech, say one of those simplex cypher locks jams, its the only door into the controlled area, do you wait for maintenance to open it or do you cut a new doorway into the area with no lock on it to access the area in case the secure door fails again? I think not.

Originally posted by boogyman
Because thats what it is a gadget a "gee whiz this looks cool lets order it from the catalog and impress the boss" gadget. Its not going to make the workplace any safer or secure. Its not going to keep hackers out of your servers or stop corporate espionage (Odds are the guy planning on selling you out already has access to your data because he works there anyway) All its going to do is run up costs (maintenance and tech support) and decrease efficiency ( time wasted while waiting for techsupport to fix the gadget).

No, but it might keep Johnny the disgruntled janitor form looking under the keyboard for a post it note with the password and accessing the files. You would be surprised how many dim wits actually put their passwords on post it notes that can easily be found .

Originally posted by boogyman

I dont agree with the man refusing to use the device. Frankly I think he was being silly and I would have used the device without issue myself. However I dont think a twelve year employee should be fired because of a whimsical change in corporate policy. I hate the pat answer of if you dont like it work someplace else because if you dont stand up against stupid policies like this sooner or later they get put in place everywhere. Where you going to work then?

Don't tell me you are one of the many cattle out there that thinks if they don't work for someone else they won't have a job? Here is a novel idea. Instead of living your life to make profits for someone else, start your own company and be your own boss. Oh wait, that requires risk to yourself and most people don't have the guts to do it. So instead of working for yourself and setting your own corporate policies, you trade your hours for a guaranteed paycheck. Unfortunately that guaranteed paycheck comes with some drawbacks, like a boss, loss of some individuality, etc.,

Essentially you trade freedom for security. It amazes me how many people here are rabidly anti-corporation , but in the same breath they say if I don't work for so and so where will I work. The reason the big wigs that run the corporations make the big bucks and get to set company policies and you don't, is because the guys at the top in most cases took all the risk of starting the company upon themselves instead of relying on someone else for a paycheck.

Have a lovely day,
Management






[edit on 26/2/05 by Skibum]

[edit on 26/2/05 by Skibum]

I'm sorry but I don't think that because some one took some risks in life that they automatically become a better person and should be given carte blanche to do what ever they want for the rest of their careers. Regarding starting your own business in order to do that you need to have a product to offer and nine out of ten people dont have a product to take to market. Also few people have the necessary capital to start a business most people have to take out a loan from a bank. Looks like your just exchanging one boss for another in my opinion.

Is this thumscan thing an access point for a room or a computer? If its a room then why not have keycard access as well as a secondary back up. Granted locks can break but I'm sure they're more reliable then something that gets its reliability degraded everytime some puts their greasy finger in it.

Originally posted by boogyman
I'm sorry but I don't think that because some one took some risks in life that they automatically become a better person and should be given carte blanche to do what ever they want for the rest of their careers.

No but it does allow you to run your business any way you see fit as long as it complies with the law.

Originally posted by boogyman
Regarding starting your own business in order to do that you need to have a product to offer and nine out of ten people dont have a product to take to market. Also few people have the necessary capital to start a business most people have to take out a loan from a bank. Looks like your just exchanging one boss for another in my opinion.

I guess that those 9 out of ten people will be forever stuck doing their employers will then. Exchanging their freedoms for a paycheck. Owing money to the bank does not make them a boss. They have no say in how you run your business.

Originally posted by boogyman
Is this thumscan thing an access point for a room or a computer? If its a room then why not have keycard access as well as a secondary back up. Granted locks can break but I'm sure they're more reliable then something that gets its reliability degraded everytime some puts their greasy finger in it.

I don't think it has been brought up as to how it was being used. I speculated on how it might be. It could be both, either or none. Keycards can be lost or stolen or even lent out to unauthorized people, codes for door locks can be guessed or compromised.
You don't implement a higher level of security and then have a lower level of security as well that can bypass the higher level. Makes the increased level totally worthless.

But anyway the employer chooses, as long as it violates no law, is perfectly acceptable. Its their company/ building/ room/ computer/ data/ whatever and they can safeguard it as they see fit. If an employee doesn't care for it, not to be trite but, he can tell it to the unemployment office while he is trying to claim unemployment benefits, which would most likely in my area be denied.


[edit on 26/2/05 by Skibum]

[edit on 26/2/05 by Skibum]

Originally posted by Nygdan

drbryankkruta
The goverment is to shady to give them this much info and to allow them to track us

You do realize that you are getting paranoid over a situation that only exists as a hypothetical right? THe government is not collecting DNA from everyone, and collecting it from rapists certainly makes sense. The rapists obviously aren't too concerned with who has their DNA since they release it into their victims on purpose.

It is not hypotetical a data dase is already in effect they are collecting DNA samples from goverment employees, some hospitals here where I live keep a data base of sample taken from all sorts people for anything from scientific , to unsolved crimes from assault to rape , this is only a beggins of the techology it is not a figment of imagination to beleive it is happening also almost all states are considering legislation right now on every person kept in jail for more than 30 days also be DNA tagged for furture comparison to crimes doesnt matter if you are there for a failure to appear on a traffic ticket,,,,also discussion is under way to tie DNA information into the visa and passport system ,,,,,the technololgy is in use it just takes some legislation to get it to go full force it is not paranoid for someone to be aware of a trend already starting.

Are you saying that you would quit your job if they used thumbscanners rather than swipe cards for security? You will move out of your apartment if it replaces its doorman with a thumbscan lock, hypothetically of course?

Welll actually in this case it is a violation when the mans dismissal violated the EOE on the religion basis

Nope would not quit let them fire me then I will sue for violation of my rights to reject the Idea or policy under religous rejection , I will go to court and sue over violation of EOE and I will have those nice little gettem all attorneys from the aclu or one of those organizations right next to me.

this is a discussion of right and laws and I wont let it go at what if it is wrong and its worth fighting for.

That arguement does not hold. The print is not required for all employement, its required for a single job. If they fired him for not wearing his company name tag, then it would be the same thing as this, iow, perfectly legal, regardless of his fear of being cast into some lake of fire.

I dont care what the reasons for the object religous disbelief in the process is enough, this mans case will set presidence and will the formation of policy it is wrong it doesnt matter if it was as you say a private compainy because realistically all jobs are privately owned except those that are goverment and tax supported ,, the very fact of privilage to private companies is wrong as there are no public companies , they all owned by a private person or group of persons.

What are you kidding? I think i insulted amuks heritage, culture and ancestry by making some unsavoury remarks about the confederacy, and I saw no reprisals for it. Hell the guy acted proper throughout and restrained himself even tho he was, undersandably, incensed. So this claim of yours is downright silly.

FIRST OF ALL nosey I didnt ask you opinion this was a GEST A JOKE directed at AMUK ,,,,,,,I and AMUK where the only intended participants period.

I know better of Amuk's charature and therefore the basis for the joke.

Amuk was told by me it was a joke and in fashion a joke was returned
you are just being judgemental of a situation based on you disagreement of
my statements and quite frankly I am not responding further because you sir have now pissed in my post toasties by butting in where you where not welcome.


Again so other ding bat vigil anti's dont join on this run


AMUK AND I WHERE JESTING stay out of it , I know Amuk's characture and he is very helpful as well I have no personal issues with him .......he has always been fair even when addressing me in a corrective manor.


You holier than thou I want to discredit and scrutinize everything types are the only ones who dont understand and thats often why you end up on the end of angry letters like this if you cant discuss then leave it alone if you dont know when two people are JOKING the go away you are not wanted in the conversation anyway ......

BYE THE WAY JUST TO KNOW WHERE I AM COMING FROM


I have all ten diggits on fingure print file with the following facilities for purposes of employment

DOC
BOP
US MARSHALLS
OSBI
ATF
OSBN
FBI
USN during inlistment



and any number of other agencies involved with the transporting inmates
and other lawenforcement , fire service and medic services , as well as to receive chaplain privaleges to enter into prisons,,,,,,,,,


My objection to the situation is only it is a clear violation of EOE policies and the mans rights period



GET OFF MY BACK FOR GIVING A DANG

[edit on 26/2/2005 by drbryankkruta]

Do you people who actually think this is a "freedom" concern think that submitting your name (and showing id) at an airline gate at or (an hour before) think it also violates your freedom? I've just been waiting for someone on this thread to quote Benjamin Franklin's "Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither."

Well, just to conclude my theory to myself about the mentality of the people here. I propose this substitute. What would all of you who think that the Fingerprint is ok, would also find this entire argument moot if it had been policy to have to have an R.F.I.D microchip implanted to work?

I want to see if I am right.

RFID chips can be part of a badge that is worn on a chain. No need to implant them under the skin.

Originally posted by Amuk
Help me out here.

How is showing a fingerprint any different from showing a drivers license? Both are just forms of ID.

Simply because a person chooses what he or she will carry as ID .They re trying
to stick us in uk with id card compulsary-----
choosing to do something ------being forced to do something ---that is the difference/

cheers blog

Originally posted by Murundi



Gates of hell people. cant have a job, cant buy or sell anything without it, thats the way its going people.

Your kidding me right!? Besides....if your going to believe what your bible says at least stick with it for Pete's sake! It says a mark placed on your hand or forehead....that doesn't fit scanning a thumb.

[edit on 2/27/2005 by LadyV]

By RFID do you mean simple the kind that they put it pets to determine who they belong to/are all their shots up to date, the kind that actively scans throughout the building when you pass through a checkpoint (e.g. Bob entered the cafetaria at 12:30 and didn't leave until 2 - kinda like a timestamp type mechanism - or like the ones used at Wal-Mart that let me simply fill up my cart and walkout without dealing with a machine or cashier) or a much larger device that actively and continuously tracks your whereabouts with a gps type mechanism? I'm not against prohibiting companies to force employees to use them as id - I mean, employers can fire you if you are a smoker (even on your free time) because they don't want to pay the increased insurance premiums and that's fine with me too.

I know it has taken me a while to answer to this question, but in my final conclusion, for I had to really think about all the options listed in full. I would ultimately have to say that any of the R.F.I.D chips are unwanted by me in any shape or form, and no, there is only one way to have them permenantly, that is with injection. A serious imployer would want it that way to cut costs on possible missing or replaced badges.

Man fired. Oh, no. How many others were fired the same day as he? If Alex Jones is the one reporting this, sorry, it is not news.