A computer consultant believes he was fired from his job after a newspaper published his letter to the editor espousing his “conservative libertarian” views.
 Bill Cisco |
“To get somebody fired for the opinion they hold, yeah, I’m p—ed,” said Bill Cisco of Franklin, Tenn.
Cisco, who also hosts a weekend radio talk show was a contract worker for the Russell Corporation, an Atlanta-based marketer of athletic apparel with 17,000 employees worldwide and annual sales of $1.2 billion.
His saga began June 10 when he wrote a letter to the editor of the Tennessean, responding to a commentary about the welfare of children in the Volunteer State.
The text of his letter is as follows:
- “The poor have children they can’t afford”
To the Editor:
This is in response to the column by Mr. Dwight Lewis titled, ”Why can’t we Tennesseans take better care of our kids?” (June 6.)
Why is it that the left feels that any personal failing by individuals is something the government must address? Why not a massive campaign to educate young adults that having children while still in poverty themselves is not only going to assure their own continued poverty, but doom those children to the same?
Why is it my responsibility to take care of my three children and then have money I need for my family siphoned off to take care of children whose parents have not done their job?
I submit that the best way to ease poverty in this country is to convince the poor not to have children they are ill-equipped both mentally and financially to bring into this world. If this were done most of our social ills from teen pregnancy to urban blight would be addressed or greatly reduced.
Why is there no discussion in the media of how having children while in poverty is a bad thing that should be discouraged?
I am as compassionate as the next person, but until I see a concerted effort to educate the poor of this folly, I will not support higher taxation or even higher spending in this area.
William Cisco
At the end of the letter, Cisco’s corporate e-mail address was included. Cisco says he submitted it at the prompting of the Tennessean’s online form, and wrongly assumed it was for verification of his opinion, and not for publishing on the website and print edition.
Cisco, 48, says the letter was published two days later last Saturday, and he was informed of his termination on Monday morning without being given any explanation as to why.
While technically Cisco’s contract was simply not renewed and Russell was in its legal right to release him, Cisco says he had been expecting to work on other projects for the company for another one to three months.
He later called the company to try to find out why he had been dismissed, and says he was told it was in response to a complaint from a member of the public.
“Some no-life idiot in Nashville tried to find out who I worked for,” Cisco told WorldNetDaily.
A spokeswoman for Russell confirms she received a single complaint from a man who saw the corporate e-mail address and was “highly offended” by the content of the letter, stating he thought the company supported diversity.
“The man didn’t ask that we fire [Cisco],” said Nancy Young, vice president of communications for Russell. “He was concerned Russell would be taking a stand. … If we make a company stand, we’re gonna put our name on it.”
Young stresses it was not the letter’s content that prompted Cisco’s firing, but the fact Cisco violated corporate policy against publicly identifying the company in connection with a personal issue.
“Everybody has a right to his own opinion,” she said, but with Russell Corporation’s e-mail address viewable, “it’s very easy for someone to make the assumption the company supports the thought process.”
Young says had Cisco included a personal e-mail address or sent his letter to the editor via the U.S. Postal Service, his contract would not have been terminated.
“So, so true,” said Cisco. “It was a stupid mistake and I usually don’t do stupid.”
The case is reminiscent of New York resident Rolf Szabo, a 23-year veteran of Eastman Kodak, who was fired for objecting to a pro-homosexual memo in the company’s e-mail, as WorldNetDaily previously reported.
What Cisco finds interesting is the irony that people who support free-speech rights intentionally look to silence opposing viewpoints.
“Some left-leaning person who probably preaches ‘tolerance and diversity’ decided that what I wrote warranted tracking down my company,” he said.
“Rather than debate the issues, the left wants to prevent the other side from being present.”
Related story:
Kodak fires man over ‘gay’ stance
