celeb news Try Guy, Ned Fulmer cheats on wife with employee, fired: Try Guys release statement

[Gyal]

you're a ruuude cheating b*tch + that's why the girls don't wanna work witchuuu

 

try guys said dropped

[Otter]

27 minutes ago, Communion said:

Post A: Why would they fire him??? Who cares? Many co-workers date each other. 

 

Post B: Because consensual relationships are not legally a thing between a subordinate and boss in the context of labor laws. 

 

You: You can't just say it's non-consensual! It's consensual....even if the emphasized "consensual" aspect of therelationship at work still makes the employer legally liable for harm to the employees and their co-workers. 

 

I hate yall.  The desperation to defend unethical, and yes, often legally harmful behaviors. 

 

People whose employment you're responsible for are not your dating pool. This shouldn't be that hard to understand. Ned made an awful decision because his desire to sleep with a coworker means whatever value he brought to the brand does not outweigh the potential legal challenges him working over Alex could cost them. Imagine if he went back to his wife, as he likely is, but kept working. How would they then as an employer ensure Alex couldn't claim she felt retaliation against her because now her boss may resent her because his wife is angry at him for cheating on her with his employee? Like it's insanity. 

You're interpolating between two topics...

You said its not legal, you then backtrack and say labour laws specifically to california (are they based there?) would give favour to the subordinate "If" they or a co-worker wanted to sue. This is not the same as saying it cannot legally be consensual, which would imply inherent legal action upon the relationship being disclosed. If the law specifically requires the sub-ordinate to claim harm, lack of action renders the relationship consensual.

I have no difficulty understanding the ethical problem and why a company would want to fire an employee to protect themselves/others, you initial statement was just to loose and needed correcting. 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Otter

[Otter]

And we don't need a *** for tat, lets just avoid spread misinformation

[Attitude]

The other 3 probably asked the guy to resign since his little scandal was affecting the brand. They can't fire that Alex chick because it opens them up to potential lawsuits. 

[sxmescudi]

i thought the employee got fired and thought wtf

[Communion]

44 minutes ago, Otter said:

(are they based there?) 

Lecturing people but being confused why I'm citing California law and that I should specify if they are based there when anyone familiar with them knows they are.  Why would I randomly cite California law if they *weren't* based there?

 

I'm not one to talk but sis this is now you wanting to fight over pedantry.

 

You're trying to emphasize "well its still technically legal and not a crime and only legally considered harmful when someone actually acts on their right to claim harm" but the post *I* was replying to explicitly asked why he would be fired or forced out for simply having a relationship with his subordinate. 

 

You have to ignore what I'm replying to and blindly engage in bad faith to think anyone needs someone to come in and make sure we know it's not a crime to date a co-worker.  I promise you I understand and am not "trying to misinform" people that they'll go to jail for dating someone a work. 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Communion

[Dancehall Queen]

 

 

 

[yonsé]

5 hours ago, Otter said:

Errm, maybe this varies by country because its messy but I've known CEO's have relationship with employees openly. Its only a major issue if you're their direct line manager and it spills into work. Depends on the work culture too.

its really not that simple lol

[Khamis]

1 hour ago, Mendussy said:

 

 

 

Mess 

 

there you have it.

[Khamis]

I find it hilarious that this thread is mostly 6 pages discussing whether or not a company owner should get fired for f****** their subordinates. Never change ATRL 

[Gesamtkunstwerk]

It's always the "I love my wife!" types

[Patient Zero]

Monogamy is an illusion

[Otter]

2 hours ago, Communion said:

Lecturing people but being confused why I'm citing California law and that I should specify if they are based there when anyone familiar with them knows they are.  Why would I randomly cite California law if they *weren't* based there?

 

I'm not one to talk but sis this is now you wanting to fight over pedantry.

 

You're trying to emphasize "well its still technically legal and not a crime and only legally considered harmful when someone actually acts on their right to claim harm" but the post *I* was replying to explicitly asked why he would be fired or forced out for simply having a relationship with his subordinate. 

 

You have to ignore what I'm replying to and blindly engage in bad faith to think anyone needs someone to come in and make sure we know it's not a crime to date a co-worker.  I promise you I understand and am not "trying to misinform" people that they'll go to jail for dating someone a work. 

Misinformation doesn't haven't to occur by intent. As I said, your response was well overblown for what could of been simple clarification of your point. You saying you can't "legally" have a consenting relationship with your Boss is a misleading statement. Even in response to the person you were speaking to. It's not like a relationship between an underage student and a teacher, where regardless of what the underage student claims, its seen as un-consensual in the eyes of the law. That is what your statement implies. If you don't think that needs clarifying, be at peace with that fact several people immediately @'d you to clarify lol 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Otter

[Quiqui4eva]

2 hours ago, Mendussy said:

 

 

 

 

[Arthoe]

45 minutes ago, Otter said:

Misinformation doesn't haven't to occur by intent. As I said, your response was well overblown for what could of been simple clarification of your point. You saying you can't "legally" have a consenting relationship with your Boss is a misleading statement. Even in response to the person you were speaking to. It's not like a relationship between an underage student and a teacher, where regardless of what the underage student claims, its seen as un-consensual in the eyes of the law. That is what your statement implies. If you don't think that needs clarifying, be at peace with that fact several people immediately @'d you to clarify lol 

Why are you spending so much effort to gaslight somebody (who clearly knows more on the topic than you do lol)? You're literally doing everything that you accuse Communion of you doing, you're moving the discussion points IRL after you've been fact checked and proven wrong.

 

First it's "F*cking you subordinates is ok, nobody should get fired for it." Now it's suddenly "You were to vague in your initial statement, you were intentionally misleading people, you were spreading misinformation" to deflect from the egg on your face. Is this like a personal vendetta or something? 

[mercurialworld]

 

https://www.tmz.com/2022/09/28/try-guys-ned-fulmer-wife-cheating-wedding-rings/

'Try Guys' Ned Fulmer & Wife Still Wearing Wedding Rings Amid Cheating Allegations

 

TMZ on the case now. 

Edited September 28, 2022 by mercurialworld

[Otter]

9 hours ago, Arthoe said:

Why are you spending so much effort to gaslight somebody (who clearly knows more on the topic than you do lol)? You're literally doing everything that you accuse Communion of you doing, you're moving the discussion points IRL after you've been fact checked and proven wrong.

 

First it's "F*cking you subordinates is ok, nobody should get fired for it." Now it's suddenly "You were to vague in your initial statement, you were intentionally misleading people, you were spreading misinformation" to deflect from the egg on your face. Is this like a personal vendetta or something? 

Why can't anyone just have a normal communication on this site  
what exactly did I say that has you so on lively? No one is gaslighting, be at rest...

1. I said it must vary by country because I've been in places where it was open and never raised legal flags. 

2. I responded to Communion who said an employee cannot legally consent, asking if they made that up because I couldn't see anything to back that up.
3. Communion responded in an obviously emotionally driven fashion thinking we were "bragging" about work misconduct. In amongst their paragraphs, they explicity state that there is no law barring said relationships, only that the workplace is responsible in cases of harms reported, which is not the same as saying that there can be no consenting relationship legally (for example, if there are no harm reported) 
4. Ironically its communion who went through paragraphs of effort to just say that I'm being too pedantic. All I'm saying is that words matter, and if you say blanket statement don't be confused when people take it literally. Equally just clarify what you meant instead of the essays rewording something relatively simple in order to cling onto your original false statement.

Edited September 29, 2022 by Otter

[PoisonPill]

On 9/27/2022 at 3:58 PM, FightForTanas said:

Because he is MARRIED?

Lol an employer can't fire someone for having an extramarital affair. He was axed because he had an affair with a coworker... but I'm guessing there's some nefarious business dealings at play also.

[Protocol]

Straight men get rich/famous so they can bang girls, wbk

 

Gays have it so much easier, all you have to do is work out and be good at selfies and you have unlimited sex

[FightForTanas]

13 minutes ago, PoisonPill said:

Lol an employer can't fire someone for having an extramarital affair. He was axed because he had an affair with a coworker... but I'm guessing there's some nefarious business dealings at play also.

I know that?

[shookspeare]

imagine going to Yale just to end up making dumb youtube videos 

[Gorgeous]

Only in America a man would be fired for cheating on his wife. Also a consensual relationship with your employee is also legal. It seems to me that his friends fired him to save the brand image instead of helping him and his family get back on track. 

[1DES]

21 minutes ago, Gorgeous said:

Only in America a man would be fired for cheating on his wife. Also a consensual relationship with your employee is also legal. It seems to me that his friends fired him to save the brand image instead of helping him and his family get back on track. 

Well it looks like they sided with the wife. 

[mercurialworld]

32 minutes ago, shookspeare said:

imagine going to Yale just to end up making dumb youtube videos 

tbh his dumb YouTube videos did gain him a net worth of 10 mill  seems like he was in the bag until he decided to be a *****

[Harrier]

I can see the argument it might be unjust to fire him if he was just some small-fry employee - infidelity happens - but he's not. The four Try Guys own & run that business and their brand is what keeps the whole thing afloat.

 

If the others don't see a path forward with him now they have every right to do this imo. It's a business relationship. I mean the man's whole image was being the 'wife guy' and that's proven to be a complete farce. I'd want him gone too.