No idea whether he had a for-cause contract or not. Either way, what his bosses did was dishonest (making up a new rule and calling it retroactive), and they deserve all the publicity he can give them for how they handled it. And it hasn't hurt his own notoriety, either. However they may be bowing and scraping to the White House, they're probably not thrilled to lose the author of their most-read article ever.
I wish I could express certainty that he will. But too much has gone to Washington. It's hard to do well, now, if you lack official sanction. Someday we need to look to that.
5 comments:
If it happened the way he said, it was a particularly sleazy firing. I hope he lands on his feet somewhere else.
Well, freedom of association, right? At will employment and all that?
Maybe someone will do right by him, and maybe not.
No idea whether he had a for-cause contract or not. Either way, what his bosses did was dishonest (making up a new rule and calling it retroactive), and they deserve all the publicity he can give them for how they handled it. And it hasn't hurt his own notoriety, either. However they may be bowing and scraping to the White House, they're probably not thrilled to lose the author of their most-read article ever.
As to their pains of loss, I find I can't care at all. But if he's a man of Johnny Paycheck's sort, I hope he'll do well.
I wish I could express certainty that he will. But too much has gone to Washington. It's hard to do well, now, if you lack official sanction. Someday we need to look to that.
Can't care? No schadenfreude at all? You're a better humyn than I.
Post a Comment