James Gunn dropped from GOTG 3

[Coal Tiger]

If Disney rehires Gunn, then Roseanne must be rehired too.
Otherwise she may have a discrimination lawsuit based on gender against Disney.

Gunn is still under contract with Disney. They never technically fired him or terminated his contract like they did with Roseanne.

[Raiders]

Despite Twitter being at the center of both stories, their situations were not remotely similar.

ABC has stated the show was cancelled because of her tweets.
Gunn was fired for his tweets.
There isn’t any real difference.

[AJBopp]

Gunn wasn't fired from a job. He was not picked up for the third GOTC. Big difference. Unless he had a hard contract with Disney to direct, they can do what they want.

That's not true. Disney and Gunn are, at this moment, still in negotiation about the terms of his departure. I expect the GOTG Vol 3 script figures prominently in those negotiations.

You don't negotiate with someone you never hired for a job they never had so that he won't do it.

[Kevinroc]

ABC has stated the show was cancelled because of her tweets.
Gunn was fired for his tweets.
There isn’t any real difference.

Gunn made those tweets before Marvel/Disney hired him to make the first Guardians of the Galaxy.
Roseanne made those tweets while her show was still on the air.

That, right there, is a humongous difference.

References to pedophilia does not make one a pedophile.
Making racist tweets does make one a racist.

That, right there, is another humongous difference.

[numberthirty]

If Disney rehires Gunn, then Roseanne must be rehired too.
Otherwise she may have a discrimination lawsuit based on gender against Disney.

You realize she would have to prove it was actually based on gender, right?

[Gray Lensman]

ABC has stated the show was cancelled because of her tweets.
Gunn was fired for his tweets.
There isn’t any real difference.

Except that Gunn's tweets are well into the past and Barr's were in the present. And that Barr was offered the choice of leaving social media rather than be fired where Gunn was just fired outright.

Maaaaybe there is a potential gender discrimination suit here....but not for Rosanne.

[Raiders]

Companies can and do fired people for something that happens before employment.
It’s doesnt matter if the incident is today or 10 years ago.

[Kevinroc]

Companies can and do fired people for something that happens before employment.
It’s doesnt matter if the incident is today or 10 years ago.

This was literally explained a few posts above (in a post I made).

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...firing-1133161

Sources say that Gunn, while under contract for the third movie, likely was not "pay or play,” a status that would require Disney to pay him his full fee regardless of whether his services are actually used. Filmmakers typically reach pay-or-play status when a movie is officially greenlighted or eight weeks prior to the start of production, neither of which had occurred. But Gunn is not said to have breached his contract because the offensive tweets were sent years before he first signed with Disney’s Marvel Studios.

Some experienced talent reps estimate that due to the unique situation, Gunn could receive a payout of $7 million to $10 million, if not potentially higher. And, more importantly, he would be free to take on another project immediately. Also affecting the negotiations is that Disney plans on using Gunn's script for the third Guardians pic, according to sources.

Now can you stop moving the goal posts? Can you stop arguing in bad faith?

[numberthirty]

Companies can and do fired people for something that happens before employment.
It’s doesnt matter if the incident is today or 10 years ago.

While that general reality is true, it really has absolutely nothing to do with this potential gender discrimination lawsuit you seem to think could happen.

[Kirby101]

The posts disagreeing with me really aren't disagreeing with me. So i'll put that to my failure to be clear.

Mainly I was saying that comparisons to people in 9 to 5 who are fired jobs are not equivalent.

[Raiders]

The posts disagreeing with me really aren't disagreeing with me. So i'll put that to my failure to be clear.

Mainly I was saying that comparisons to people in 9 to 5 who are fired jobs are not equivalent.

You’re talking about contract worker versus employee.
But it’s very little difference between the two.
A contract worker is still have to obey the code of conduct rules of the employer.

[Kevinroc]

You’re talking about contract worker versus employee.
But it’s very little difference between the two.
A contract worker is still have to obey the code of conduct rules of the employer.

He wasn't under contract with Disney when he wrote those tweets. And they never told him to remove those tweets in all the years he was there making Guardians movies.

This argument holds zero weight.

[Raiders]

He wasn't under contract with Disney when he wrote those tweets. And they never told him to remove those tweets in all the years he was there making Guardians movies.

This argument holds zero weight.

It’s doesn’t matter if he wasn’t under contract at the time of the tweets, Disney can still fired him for it.
Also it is not Disney responsibility to tell him to remove the tweets.
The fact is he shouldn’t been so stupid to write those tweets in the first place.
He should’ve known it would comeback and bite him in the butt one day.

[Kevinroc]

It’s doesn’t matter if he wasn’t under contract at the time of the tweets, Disney can still fired him for it.
Also it is not Disney responsibility to tell him to remove the tweets.
The fact is he shouldn’t been so stupid to write those tweets in the first place.
He should’ve known it would comeback and bite him in the butt one day.

If Disney didn't know what kind of movies he made before they hired him, that's on them. If they didn't know what kind of tweets he made, that is also on them. Disney is not a little mom & pop store.

They knew.

[Immortal Weapon]

It’s doesn’t matter if he wasn’t under contract at the time of the tweets, Disney can still fired him for it.

Actually they can't because since it was before his employment by Disney he's not in violation of his contract. He'll have a solid case against Disney if they tried to let him go over it.