Post: #26

(04-25-2017 05:36 PM)Jetset Wrote:  That, or she's filing pro se because she thinks she's Perry Mason.

Bitch looks like she ate Perry Mason...

Post: #27

Someone please explain to this fat dumbass simple restaurant, and quite frankly, general business economics. The 80/20 rule.

No potential regular that visits this type of chain is going to come sit at this bar and be subjected to the visual that would be forced upon them on their drinking night. Whatever night she works will be dead. Bartenders at these places make serious money from their night shifts. Like $300-400 take home on a fucking Monday. But they depend on their regulars to get there. Not only would this fat slob not make the bar money, but she's negatively impacting every other employee the day she works. I know it, the other girls know it, and this fat bitch knows it. Go work at Applebee's as an assistant manager and get the fuck out the customer's line of sight until you lose the damn weight.

Post: #28

Most women this fat don't last as waitresses very long. The job requires a lot of walking and standing. She won't be able to handle it for an eight-hour shift.

Post: #29

(04-25-2017 08:57 PM)puckerman Wrote:  Most women this fat don't last as waitresses very long. The job requires a lot of walking and standing. She won't be able to handle it for an eight-hour shift.

Not to mention the thousands of dollars a week in profits they're losing from her skimming french fries off the top.

Post: #30

As for eye bleach, guys, luckily we didn't have to go to Tilted Kilt's competitors:

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #31

Somehow I doubt all of them are Scottish. WNB!!!

Post: #32

(04-25-2017 10:19 PM)Transsimian Wrote:  Somehow I doubt all of them are Scottish. WNB!!!

Post: #33

If she wins, then next a fat bald short 60yo man can sue fashion houses for not hiring him as a catwalk model.

Post: #34

I can tolerate fat and/or stupid and/or ugly people as long as they have some fucking dignity and social grace.

What shits me about this bitch is that the proprietor was nice enough to give her a reason for refusing to hire her that allowed her to save face. "We already filled the position".

Of course, they both know the reason she wasn't hired, but the guy(?) was polite enough not to simply laugh at her when she walked in before telling her "waddle away, fatty. It's not gonna happen."

And how is that politeness and social grace rewarded?

"I have 6 years of experience and his stated reason for not hiring me is clearly false!"

No fucking shit, you miserable land-whale. He was letting you down nicely, you fat, ungrateful cunt."

Post: #35

(04-25-2017 09:19 PM)la bodhisattva Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 08:57 PM)puckerman Wrote:  Most women this fat don't last as waitresses very long. The job requires a lot of walking and standing. She won't be able to handle it for an eight-hour shift.

Not to mention the thousands of dollars a week in profits they're losing from her skimming french fries off the top.

Not just that, but fat people working in restaurants, especially as servers, create all kinds of problems. You need to be able to quickly get out of other people's way, you need to squeeze into places, and you can't be taking up too much space. Pretty much every fat person I have seen try to work as a server at busy, successful restaurants didn't last, for obvious reasons.

Post: #36

Maybe Tilted Kilt didn't hire her because of her appearance, but I'm sure that's not the only restaurant in her town. If she can't even get a job at a place that doesn't require their servers to be hot women, why would she expect to get a job there?

I don't think she ever expected to get a job, I think she was after something that is much more valuable than money (at least to her). And she got it.

Post: #37

(04-26-2017 05:53 AM)FireStarter Wrote:  I don't think she ever expected to get a job, I think she was after something that is much more valuable than money (at least to her). And she got it.

Raising Spherical-American Awareness?

Oh, attention.

Yes.

Post: #38

Hey I forgot, getting a tit restaurant to hire a non-hottie was already tried in Texas back in the 90s







At least he wasn't fat.

Post: #39

That she claims she was hoping to get a job, was shocked they didn't even interview her, and then turns around says that their stated reason for not even giving her a chance "I was really mad. I knew it was probably because I did not portray the brand image they wanted" shows that she's lying through her teeth and is being difficult to get fame and accolades.

Also a good look at female thinking.

Quote:Terrance Robinson, a Houston labor and employment attorney, explains that laws protect people who are discriminated against for race, sex, national origin, religion and disability - but that's it.

"There's no protection under the law for weight," Robinson said. "There's nothing for bald people, short people, heavy people. There's just not protection under the law."

That's because being black, white, male, or female is not a choice.

Being fat is.

G

Post: #40

Reminds me of the hairy guy in the 90's who failed to get a waitress job and sued

Post: #41

It's only fair that the restaurant hire waitstaff that can fit between the tables.

Post: #42

Come on guys, she did it on purpose, knowing they wouldn't hire her. She states, "I was really mad. I knew it was probably because I did not portray the brand image they wanted,"

She walked in there, knowing she didn't meet the image and set them up for this. Her precious 15 seconds of attention.

They probably should have let her apply, but why should they have to cater to a fat, entitled, SJW wanna-be? Maybe she's got "6 years" restaurant experience but the article doesn't seem to say if it is at nice places or at McDonald's. lol.

Post: #43

(04-26-2017 01:33 PM)Ironbutt62 Wrote:  Come on guys, she did it on purpose, knowing they wouldn't hire her. She states, "I was really mad. I knew it was probably because I did not portray the brand image they wanted,"

She walked in there, knowing she didn't meet the image and set them up for this. Her precious 15 seconds of attention.

They probably should have let her apply, but why should they have to cater to a fat, entitled, SJW wanna-be? Maybe she's got "6 years" restaurant experience but the article doesn't seem to say if it is at nice places or at McDonald's. lol.

Next time an obese monster comes in the companies will simply let the lardballs fill out the forms, maybe do even a mock interview and then be silently rejected for no apparent reason.

Also it seems that this has happened before to another overweight girl, who was slimmer but still not worthy to wear the uniform:



http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/20...kilt-girl/

Post: #44

^^^WNT

Hell hath no fury than a woman scorned, of course.

Let's be real - women were never good at being rejected.

Post: #45

Why are people saying the restaurant has to prove their claim that the other candidates were more experienced? It is not against the law to lie to a job applicant, nor is it against the law to reject a fat/ugly candidate for a position in which pleasing appearance is explicitly part of the job. This lawsuit is 100% devoid of merit on both moral AND legal grounds.

Post: #46

(04-26-2017 09:31 PM)Delta Wrote:  Why are people saying the restaurant has to prove their claim that the other candidates were more experienced? It is not against the law to lie to a job applicant, nor is it against the law to reject a fat/ugly candidate for a position in which pleasing appearance is explicitly part of the job. This lawsuit is 100% devoid of merit on both moral AND legal grounds.

Haha - moral and legal grounds.

We live in times in which the very own top-down scientists tell you that gender is a social construct.

We live in a society where law makers define every sexual encounter as rape - even retroactively if a woman regrets it 2 years later. /thread-62358.html

The psychos, the fat-acceptance activists and SJWs are testing the waters for more insanity.

And I cannot blame them really - if beauty is a social construct, then they may be able to get 200k out of being rejected for being too fat. Insanity is followed by more insanity.

Post: #47

(04-26-2017 03:26 PM)kaotic Wrote:  ^^^WNT

Hell hath no fury than a woman scorned, of course.

Let's be real - women were never good at being rejected.

I think this is where the real anger of feminism is rooted in.

Whereas men are (or should be) taught to be responsible and hard working, and even then life isn't fair. Society tells women that they are all beautiful and perfect, and they can be anything they want.

When they don't get the job they want, or Chad Thundercock turns her down, they are unable to cope and go apeshit. Society then doubles down and blames 'the patriarchy'.

(04-27-2017 02:24 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(04-26-2017 09:31 PM)Delta Wrote:  Why are people saying the restaurant has to prove their claim that the other candidates were more experienced? It is not against the law to lie to a job applicant, nor is it against the law to reject a fat/ugly candidate for a position in which pleasing appearance is explicitly part of the job. This lawsuit is 100% devoid of merit on both moral AND legal grounds.

Haha - moral and legal grounds.

We live in times in which the very own top-down scientists tell you that gender is a social construct.

We live in a society where law makers define every sexual encounter as rape - even retroactively if a woman regrets it 2 years later. /thread-62358.html

The psychos, the fat-acceptance activists and SJWs are testing the waters for more insanity.

And I cannot blame them really - if beauty is a social construct, then they may be able to get 200k out of being rejected for being too fat. Insanity is followed by more insanity.

Feminists: We march for science!

Also Feminists: Healthy at any size! Gender is a social construct!

Post: #48

(04-26-2017 09:31 PM)Delta Wrote:  Why are people saying the restaurant has to prove their claim that the other candidates were more experienced? It is not against the law to lie to a job applicant, nor is it against the law to reject a fat/ugly candidate for a position in which pleasing appearance is explicitly part of the job. This lawsuit is 100% devoid of merit on both moral AND legal grounds.

In this particular case, I'm not sure, but generally & unfortunately they reversed the burden of proof in the initial "pretext" part of the lawsuit in 1990, with Bush Cuck #1 signing it.

Quote:Civil Rights Act of 1990, also known as the Kennedy-Hawkins Civil Rights Act, sought to protect job discrimination against minorities and women after six Supreme Court decisions the previous year made the burden of proof of discriminating hiring practices rest on the employee, not the employer.

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/04/opinio...-1990.html

Welcome to the cuck-jungle, we have fun & games

Post: #49

I'd be all for this if it meant we could sue women who won't give us the time of day due to being not good looking and/or tall enough

Post: #50

(04-25-2017 04:57 PM)kaotic Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 04:54 PM)Baldwin81 Wrote:  Now this idiot restaurant is going to have to prove that the other (presumably thinner) candidates were more experienced or $ettle.

In a weird way I hope she wins.

Fuck no I hope she doesn't win.

She doesn't deserve anything and isn't entitled to a job.

Fatties are using the same tactics used by the LGBT lobby, go from bakery to bakery ordering gay cakes and and the sue the one that refuse, is not really about the cake.