Sued for firing the unproductive.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6682827.stm

Yep, the Americans did it again. Bringing others to court because of your problems seems to be something that is incredibly easy to do in the states isn't it?

I really don't get it. He surfed for porn when he should have been working. Thats a loss of productivity for the company right there. They should have every right to terminate him, especially since he had already been warned not to continue.

Thats before we even consider the fact that he is a Vietnam war veteran that gets over his war trauma by surfing for porn. Apparently, we are supposed to treat his sex addiction just like drug addiction. His argument is that we sympathize with drug addicts but not sex addicts. IBM is supposedly discriminating against sex addicts.

At the end of the article, BBC asked if companies need to be more sympathetic of addicts. Well, thats a very subjective thing isn't it? If there is a genuine desire to quit, then I suppose the company does have a moral obligation to help out. The stigma with addiction is similar to the one attached to AIDS. Addicts are normally blamed for getting addicted in the first place, the same way people think the AIDS victims are getting what they deserve.

But in this case, we don't know if this man advised IBM of his supposed disorder when they first gave him a warning. If he did, then he might have a case. If he didn't then he's just after a quick $5 million and he can go fuck himself.