Woman Fired For Flipping Off Donald Trump’s Motorcade
Woman Fired For Flipping Off Donald Trump’s Motorcade
A photo of Juli Briskman giving the middle finger to the president went viral. Her employer was not pleased.
By Jennifer Bendery
WASHINGTON ― You may have seen this photo of President Donald Trump’s motorcade winding down a wooded road last week as a woman on a bicycle pedaled by ― giving the middle finger to Trump.
The picture, snapped by a White House photographer traveling with the president as he left his golf course in Sterling, Va., went viral almost immediately. News outlets picked up the story when it appeared in a White House pool report. Late-night talk show hosts told jokes about the encounter and people on social media began hailing the unidentified woman as a “she-ro,” using the hashtag #Her2020.
The woman’s name is Juli Briskman. Her employer, government contractor Akima LLC, wasn’t so happy about the photo. They fired her over it.
In a Saturday interview with HuffPost, Briskman, a 50-year-old mother of two, said she was stunned that someone had taken a picture of her giving Trump the middle finger.
As the photo circulated online, Briskman decided to tell Akima’s HR department what was happening when she went to work on Monday. By Tuesday, her bosses called her into a meeting and said she had violated the company’s social media policy by using the photo as her profile picture on Twitter and Facebook.
“They said, ‘We’re separating from you,‘” said Briskman. “Basically, you cannot have ‘lewd’ or ‘obscene’ things in your social media. So they were calling flipping him off ‘obscene.’”
Briskman, who worked in marketing and communications at Akima for just over six months, said she emphasized to the executives that she wasn’t on the job when the incident happened and that her social media pages don’t mention her employer. They told her that because Akima was a government contractor, the photo could hurt their business, she said.
Virginia is an employment-at-will state, meaning employers can fire people anytime and for any reason. But Briskman said what’s been particularly infuriating is that a male colleague kept his job after recently posting lewd comments on his Facebook page that featured Akima LLC as his cover photo. She said this colleague was reprimanded for calling someone “a fucking Libtard asshole” on Facebook, but was allowed to delete the post and keep his job.
“How is that any less ‘obscene’ than me flipping off the president?” she asked. “How is that fair?”
A request for comment from Akima was not immediately returned.
Someone posted this graphic on Juli Briskman’s Facebook page after she flipped off the president’s motorcade. Briskman was amused.
Asked what she was thinking when she saw Trump’s motorcade roll up next to her, Briskman said it was a gut reaction to flip him off.
“He was passing by and my blood just started to boil,” she said. “I’m thinking, DACA recipients are getting kicked out. He pulled ads for open enrollment in Obamacare. Only one-third of Puerto Rico has power. I’m thinking, he’s at the damn golf course again.”
“I flipped off the motorcade a number of times,” she added.
Briskman, a Democrat, said she plans to look for a new job with an advocacy group that she believes in, like Planned Parenthood or PETA.
Despite getting fired, she said she has no regrets about the attention her public show of displeasure with Trump received. In fact, she said she’s happy to be an image of protest that resonates with many Americans.
“In some ways, I’m doing better than ever,” she said. “I’m angry about where our country is right now. I am appalled. This was an opportunity for me to say something.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/woman-flips-off-donald-trump-fired_us_59fe0ab4e4b0c9652fffa484
Tags
Who is online
92 visitors
The reason I posted this article is not to elevate the actions of one citizen about her displeasure with the President. The issue is how the company treated her policy violation opposed to how they treated a male's violation of company policy.
Please keep the discussion about the inequality of how men and women are treated in the workplace.
There are two main differences here which is what lead to her firing:
1) The male co-worker deleted the comment and most probably apologized for it.
2) She not only kept the picture up, she added it as a profile pic to TWO Social media outlets.
Most companies consider both to be policy violations, but the lady was not repentant of her actions thereby making herself open to being fired for cause.
What did we hear on this very site when Google fired the author of the infamous memo? We heard that it is within the companies discretion to fire anyone, especially when company policy is violated. Now all of a sudden this case is an exception. I have to ask Why?
Is it really about hypocrisy or is it about Trump?
Vic - Unfortunately, unless a article has a divisive political spin on it, it doesn't generate much interest. I knew this would draw attention from both side but the issue is not about the President.
The issue is about how men and women are treated differently at the work place. What are you thoughts about a male employee who violated policy but was asked to delete his post and was able to retain his job while the women was not given that opportunity but fired.
I know you want to frame the argument, but it most certainly is about Trump. She could have given that gesture to most anybody and nobody would have known about it. She did it as a Presidential motorcade passed by - Trump's motorcade - which meant it got picked up on social media and eventually the liberal mainstream media got a hold of it and was so giddy about it that it became an iconic photo. She should have known that. If you read her comments within the article you have to admit she had strong political views.
From the article: "Despite getting fired, she said she has no regrets about the attention her public show of displeasure with Trump received. In fact, she said she’s happy to be an image of protest that resonates with many Americans."
She put her political views above the welfare of her children. Enough said. She is happy and I'm happy.
Yes, but the male employee also put his political views on his public facebook AND he did so with the company's logo.
According to Briskman!
I am not touching that until we have more info - and from a source which wasn't just fired.
Fair enough. If an update comes out shortly I'll post it.
We don't care about HIM, this story is about HER.
He called someone a name, She made the picture her main photo. Two very different things.
I doubt i would agree with this gal much but i like it. Flipping off the man is an age old tradition. Good on her. Now complete the process with class and take the consequences of your actions like a woman/man.
Related to why the guy wasn't fired? In todays political environment i doubt calling someone a "libtard" will hurt most government contractors much. Now a couple years ago it might have.
Such is the type of distinction one must make in cases like this.
Good point but the male employee actually had something on his post that identified the company and the women did not. So, his violation could be connected to the company but her's could not.
What are your thoughts?
Yeah, i hear you, that is different but my perspective as a business owner is i don't think that really matters.
A policy is a policy and ones association with the company they work for is generally public knowledge. It could be discovered anytime in this day and age of social media being everywhere.
If it were up to me, I would not have fired this woman. But, the company has the right to do so.
I do find it amusing that this bothers some on the left. They organized en masse get the Google Engineer fired. They orchestrated a witch hunt remove Brendan Eich for a political donation he made years earlier when it became public.
Here's an example of their fanatical, silence all dissent mindset at work:
So unless you were opposed to the firing of the google engineer or the Eich witchunt, I find the liberal concern over this firing selective in the extreme.
The concern is about the wildly different treatment the female and male suffered. Virginia is an employment-at-will state, just like Maryland. I've had to sign documents in both states that say my employer can fire me for no reason at all. They could have just brought her a cardboard box and told her to pack up, without any discussion about why.
Yes, that is why most employees just show up, do their jobs, and shut up.
If they're doing government contacts, her actions might be detrimental to the company.
Not enough information available to ascertain that at this time.
As a practical matter all states are "employment-at-will" except for Montana. Plus that doesn't really apply here since the employer explained why she was being fired.
I'd be pissed IMO my employer has NO business in my personal life.
What I do on my time is MY business. What I do on their time is their business.
If they cant separate that... I can, and have.
I think the difference is that the country has come to expect deplorable things from deplorable people (aka Trump supporters), but it's just too much of a shock to see a liberal raising their middle finger.
Hal........(PJ shakes her head). I'm trying to have this discussion with as little political pollution as possible.
You're a professional man who works in an office setting so what's your opinion on how the women versus the man was treated based on the information we currently know.
what's your opinion on how the women versus the man was treated based on the information we currently know
I don't know that my opinion is all that relevant. As I have stated here numerous times, I have never, nor will ever, have a facebook or twitter account. If Trump passed by me, I would do the same thing she did, but I'd keep my job by not posting that picture to my non-existent social media account. It would remain my own personal event to relish, and it would be highly unlikely that my actions would ever be attributed to me at all, much less in a capacity to justify my dismissal.
Dude - you've shown yourself to be one of the biggest non-thinkers on this site. Do you really want to go there?
You are free to disagree with other members points and opinions but I'm trying to keep this seed on topic and not about the members.
I have only in the last year created a FB account associated with the real me and I did so only to get certain types of notifications. I don't otherwise use it and the reason is precisely because I'm a principal in a company which does have federal contracts. While we don't yet have a formal social media policy our HR folks some time back did email all our employees a caution about posting anything which reflects poorly on the company. I can guarantee though that we wouldn't have done what Briskman's employer did since there was no direct association to the company. Or at least we wouldn't with our general employees per se, but with our principals it likely would be an issue.
As in liberals doing deplorable things? Well, if you're going to have standards, I see you think you should have more....in fact, double.
I think you're going to have a difficult time keeping the comments focused solely on the female/male aspect of the employer's handling of this. As you have already noted, the divisive political angle is the story. The company's potential disparate treatment of male and female employees is an aside. She's pissed. I probably would be too. One was fired for making a gesture to the sitting president, who ran on the republican ticket. One made a negative remark about liberals. That's the real story. Show me an instance when the company fired a woman for making derogatory remarks about liberals, or failed to fire a man that made derogatory remarks about republicans.
The real story is that a company who gets government contracts felt it necessary to fire an employee for expressing herself because they believe as most of us do that Trump is so thin skinned that he'd retaliate against the company for a single employees rejection of him and his administration.
I am sure the company felt embarrassed by one of their employees gesturing the President of the US to f off.
Don't you?
"They told her that because Akima was a government contractor, the photo could hurt their business, she said."
They certainly aren't doing it to placate the public who aren't their employers.
Considering the amount of disrespect shown the former President by conservatives I think that would be enormously hypocritical.
Hypocritical of who? Your post makes no sense.
Did someone in the company give Obama the same gesture?
I think the disrespect shown to the current president in the short time he has been office is immeasurably higher than the entire 8 years of the last one.
The real story is that a company who gets government contracts felt it necessary to fire an employee for expressing herself
That could be motive but there are so many government contracts that it would be extraordinary that someone would dedicate time to research that angle. Since this story is still developing I wouldn't rule out anything.
The amount of disrespect shown President Obama was far worse than a cyclist giving the finger. From Republicans shouting "You Lie!" during his speech, the New Yorker cover, a Republican congressman commenting on Michelle's "large posterior" to a Republican congressman calling him a "tar baby", not to mention the racist depictions of the first family as apes and the racist placards used by Tea Party demonstrators, the disrespect of the current President pales in comparison.
What does that have to do with her firing?
The King of the Birthers has earned every bit of that disrespect. Even the few sane Republicans who still exist are ashamed of him.
I am kinda with XDm9mm on this one. I doubt anyone would get that close to a presidential motorcade. That said, if it was the President I find it humorous that she will never know how many guns were probably pointed at her.
With the above said, I am sure it had little to do with sexism. The cases, as others have suggested, are not similar. One was a localized post that received no national attention the other (hers) received a lot of national attention. That, to me, is the deciding factor, not the sex of those involved. A few other factors to consider:
I copied the above from Willjay9 who states he did more research into the situation and if it is true that she was in charge of the company's social media presence this just makes it a little worse. She is in effect acting in a way that is counter to reason she was hired in the first place?
Let's follow it up with this tidbit as well. Had it been a fit of pique for her and she only did it once, there is the chance that it would not have been photographed at all and this would be a non issue.
I would finally add that she is only six months on the job and we do not know the tenure of the male employee. A lot of employers have a probationary period for new hires (most jobs I held that was about one year) where the companies have a lot more leeway in firing of employees within their policies which have nothing to do with state or federal regulations. Was she still on probation? Did a possible longer tenure on his part make it more difficult for them to dismiss him than her as far as company policy is concerned?
Keeping that in mind, I do agree that getting that close would be a bit on the imaginary side. Kind of like just happening upon a failed Presidential candidate on a forest trail.
In regular traffic.....bizarre!
It would be great if my bestie would weigh in on this.....
Additional information is being learned that may impact how some look at this situation:
"I wasn't even at work when I did that," Briskman said. "But they told me I violated the code of conduct policy."Her bosses at Akima, who have not returned emails and calls requesting comment, showed her the blue-highlighted section 4.3 of their social media policy when they canned her.
"Covered Social Media Activity that contains discriminatory, obscene malicious or threatening content, is knowingly false, create [sic] a hostile work environment, or similar inappropriate or unlawful conduct will not be tolerated and will be subject to discipline up to an [sic] including termination of employment."
But Briskman wasn't wearing anything that connected her to the company when she was on her ride, nor is there anything on her personal social media accounts - where she wordlessly posted the photo without identifying herself - to link her to the firm.
She identifies herself as an Akima employee on her LinkedIn account but makes no mention of the middle-finger photo there.
Wait. It gets even more obscene.
Because Briskman was in charge of the firm's social media presence during her six-month tenure there, she recently flagged something that did link her company to some pretty ugly stuff.
As she was monitoring Facebook this summer, she found a public comment by a senior director at the company in an otherwise civil discussion by one of his employees about Black Lives Matter.
"You're a (expletive) Libtard a------," the director injected, using his profile that clearly and repeatedly identifies himself as an employee of the firm.In fact, the person he aimed that comment at was so offended by the intrusion into the conversation and the coarse nature of it that he challenged the director on representing Akima that way.
So Briskman flagged the exchange to senior management.
Did the man, a middle-aged executive who had been with the company for seven years, get the old "section 4.3" boot?
Nope. He cleaned up the comment, spit-shined his public profile and kept on trucking at work.
But the single mother of two teens who made an impulsive gesture while on her bike, on her day off?
Adios, amiga.
(courtesy of WillJay9)