Top French Weatherman FIRED for Writing a Book Critical of Climate Change Dogma
- Thread starter The Tradition
- Start date
Of course its material. It calls his reasoning ability into question and invalidates him as an expert able to deliver scientifically based projections and opinions.
So, if there are people taking bribes to fudge information, you don't think that should be reported on, right? Because it seems that is the gist of a lot of the book. That he is pointing out how much money there is to be made by making sure "climate change" is real. In other words, you are perfectly fine with squashing whistleblowers and shutting them up for good. Didn't take you as one of those.
Are you reading them? Because if you believe this, then you have capitulated and now agree he should be fired.
Its just the reverse actually, but you do make my point. You see all the experts agree 2+2=4. The weather man wants to say its 5 and you want to defend his right to keep broadcasting that.
So, if Walmart employees agitating for unionization say, "Walmart customer service sucks and the union will make it better" should Walmart be allowed to fire these employees?
He didn't broadcast anything other than the weather forecasts. He wrote a book about Climate Change in his spare time.
You're getting close. Keep going down this logic line and then apply it to AGW.
Do you realize you're making shit up or are you obtuse to the details? They were all researchers. This guy is a spokesperson. This guy's job is to deliver the company line. If Galileo was a priest, he should have rightly been fired for not holding the company line too.
Not a huge fan of people being let go for private political beliefs.
Quite frankly it's amazing to me that McDonald's has not fired all the people protesting for a higher minimum wage.
Quite frankly it's amazing to me that McDonald's has not fired all the people protesting for a higher minimum wage.
Let's try this again.
My guess is that publishing the book probably went against clauses within his contract such that the ability to adequately perform his job (accurately predicting/reporting the weather) might be of concern. I'm not saying that's the case, but let's say 80% of the viewers have a certain belief about climate change and this meteorologist has published a view that is counter to the majority of its viewers. I could see where the perceived integrity of the meteorologist might come into question for the viewers, potentially losing viewership and anything that results from that scenario (e.g., ad revenue perhaps?).
Without knowing any more facts than have been presented by the links already provided I suspect there is something in his contract that he violated, thus the termination.
I'd be willing to bet some serious cash that his 'book' is loaded with incorrect information and typical climate change denier 'myths' that have been debunked for years....
This same thing would happen to a UI staff physician if they were to publish a book outside their field of expertise, and claim they were an expert on something with respect to un-proven medical supplements. In fact, I believe the AMA has made similar statements targeting Dr. Oz, regarding his position on unproven 'health supplements'.
Not sure where it stands, but many physicians were trying to get him kicked off the faculty at Columbia Medical.
You certainly have the right to 'free speech', but don't expect your employer to respect that right if what you are saying is not consistent with mainstream science or medicine (or the position your employer takes on an issue), particularly if your 'speech' is based mostly on disinformation just to drum up $$ for yourself...
No. The statement that "Walmart's customer service sucks" is not untrue. Therefore, there's no defamation. Employee gets to keep her job.
If they are 'alternative medicine' options that are UNPROVEN and PREVENTING people from using proven methods, then, yes, he can lose his license. Dr Oz has gotten into some hot water w/ AMA over his pushing of unproven weight loss supplements, and AMA is generating new language within their charter to prevent doctors from using their title for personal financial gain that goes against mainstream medicine and/or is based on completely unproven/unscientific claims.
I think you are going a bridge to far.
If you wrote a book disagreeing with the views of your boss should they be able to fire you?
You are on point here.Nope, doesn't do anything to my spine.
My guess is that publishing the book probably went against clauses within his contract such that the ability to adequately perform his job (accurately predicting/reporting the weather) might be of concern. I'm not saying that's the case, but let's say 80% of the viewers have a certain belief about climate change and this meteorologist has a known view that is counter to the majority of its viewers. I could see where the perceived integrity of the meteorologist might come into question for the viewers, potentially losing viewership and anything that results from that scenario (e.g., ad revenue perhaps?).
Just a guess on my part without any conclusions one way or the other.
France Télévisions said its rules “prevent anyone using their professional status … to push forward their personal opinions”.
Probably so. If I'm a paid spokesman for my company and I use that fame and celebrity to advance a book that questions the very message I was hired to deliver, I should rightly risk losing my job.
Yep, probably have more practical knowledge about weather and climate than anyone on this board as well.
Infind it hilarious to hear one side claim the other is ignorant when both sides are equally so.
A few issues here.
Is a weatherman a paid spokesman that is suppose to deliver a company/state line?
Was he hired to deliver the message that climate change is here or to deliver the weather. Kind of goes against the argument that weather and climate change are two different things for me. What if he would have written a book saying that climate change is man made and everything agreed with the company/state line - should he still be fired for agreeing with them but expressing his personal view?
You obviously don't know how to read, because that's not what the hell we're talking about.
The issue was whether or not the French station had the right to fire this meteorologist for writing a book contradicting some of the claims made by climate change scientists, not the actual claims about climate change.
Period.
Full stop.
Now, go back and read what was written and see if you can comprehend the issue raised by Tradition.
Climate is defined as "average weather." Statistical changes in weather patterns can potentially help identify long term changes in 'climate.'
Everyone should know that climate change and weather are related and intertwined, but are not interchangeable terms.
I think that's likely the case. Don't you imagine when he was hired it was the case that he was to present the weather based on the various standard scientific tools and understandings endemic to his profession. If he had started predicting rain my surveying the arthritic flare ups at a nursing home and published a book that it was better than doppler radar which was all hype he would have rightly risked his job for that too.
I thought you guys believed in "at will" employment? What happened to that principle?
Don't know if you relate the day to day reporting of the weather with climate change.
I think for me it would come down to how his argument is presented in the book.
Like free speech, "employment at will" is not absolute. Employment at Will means the employee or the employer may terminate the employment relationship at any time for any reason not prohibited by law.
That last part is the important one.
I think it comes down to wording in his contract that he likely violated. Specifics such as that might never be made public, though.
Run down this hole. What law do you want the government to enforce around this topic? Be careful.
I was responding to a single post. Not the whole thread.
That's why I quoted it.
Period
Full stop.
And explain how this translates to French employment law. Reports from French media indicate he was fired for violating the station's ethical rules.
The principle of "at will' is not known in France.
French Employment Law: Dismissing Employees in France
Whilst this list should not be held to be exhaustive, the following points might be of particular comparative interest to practitioners used to the quite different provisions of many Common Law systems.
Employment in France is not 'at will' and thus dismissals may only come about on demonstrably and limited objective grounds, which must be brought to the attention of the employee in writing.
Dismissals are subject to stringent, and often bureaucratic, procedural statutory constraints.
Redundancies, or lay-offs on economic grounds, are subject to separate and complex procedural and substantive constraints particularly in the case of multiple dismissals.
There are a number of French State Agencies which have a statutory right to be advised of, and in some cases to authorise, proposed dismissals by private sector employers.
It is extremely easy and at virtually no cost for an employee to start litigation against his (ex) employer before separate Labour Courts.
Labour Relations Courts (Conseils de Prud'hommes) are generally made up of lay judges who are elected from the ranks of employer/employee organisations.
It is rare that the plaintiff be other than an employee and just as rare that claims be dismissed with no award whatsoever being made against the employer. The foregoing is not intended to be exhaustive and for specific information relating to dismissing employees in France, please click here
.
I don't know the specifics of employment law in France.
However, in this country, you're right, there's no specific law that could be invoked to prevent the termination in this circumstance. And certainly employers can terminate for off-duty conduct (think drug testing or criminal conviction). But I also feel that this is widely abused, and believe that employees should be protected from being fired for exercising their freedom speech, or holding political views, or participating in all the other individual rights granted us by the constitution.
Latest posts
-
-
-
COMMIT: Iowa Lands 2026 Iowa City West, Three-Star OL Colin Whitters
- Latest: clayborn_94
-