The strange case of Megan Thomas, 20

Quite amused by a story in today's Daily Mail about "a 20-year-old secretary at a private club [who] won a landmark discrimination case after claiming she was sacked for being too young for the job".

The secretary in question, Megan Thomas, had this to say:

I was upset to lose my job. I was told I was too young and if they had met me a few years later there may not have been a problem.

They also said that I was deceitful, sly and lacked integrity, which was hurtful and untrue.

So there "may not have been a problem" with Megan working at the club if she had been slightly older, even though she was – in the club's opinion – deceitful, sly and lacking in integrity. A great approach to recruitment there...

7 comments:

Blue said...

So older and deceitful, sly and lacking integrity is preferable to young and deceitful, sly and lacking integrity. I guess I can see that.....

Roy said...

What concerns me is why are you reading the Daily Mail, JD?

JD said...

Why am I reading the Daily Mail? I suppose the obvious answer is 'looking for content for the blog'.

Hey, it worked!

Anonymous said...

My my my. Some people have to be bitchy to make themselves feel better. I was completely in the right and you have no idea what the quotes were about. The general manager said that to me after I went behind his back to place a formal complaint about him.

Why bother talking about something that you have no idea about. How sad that you spend your life writing about other people's lives instead of having one of your own.

JD said...

Hello!

I wasn't writing about the case, but about the Daily Mail's take on the case – especially the way it presented those quotes without giving them a full context and how it made a serious story quite ridiculous.

As for the rights and wrongs of the case, or the people involved, I don't particularly care either way. Not being callous, but this is a blog about language use and publishing rather than "other people's lives".

Hope things worked out for you though.

Gareth said...

The article here seemed pretty clear-cut. JD was simply reporting what others had written (and commenting on the way that had been done) and not offering his own opinion on the case. This approach is consistent with pretty much every other article on this blog.

If we're talking "sad", however, I would say that spamming a random blog with abusive feedback because they happened to mention your name isn't something to be particularly proud of - especially as I suspect the poster in question only ended up here through searching for her own name on the internet to see what people had been writing about her.

You could even say: how sad that you spend your life writing about yourself on blogs that you haven't even taken the time to fully understand.

Megan said...

Must have stepped on your toes Gareth...and no I wasn't searching my own name...I peruse various blogs.

This whole thing has annoyed me as certain comments made by "me" have surfaced everywhere...Including failry obscure blogs about language...I still fail to see how it all relates...


Merry Christmas all! Enjoy the Yuletide fun!