Likes Likes:  0
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Karate Spotlight News - KARATE KING IN 'FAT' SPAT

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Gardena
    Posts
    2,842
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default Karate Spotlight News - KARATE KING IN 'FAT' SPAT

    CHOP SUING: KARATE KING IN 'FAT' SPAT

    By KATI CORNELL SMITH - NEW YOUR POST
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------


    October 9, 2003 -- Who'd have the guts to call a black belt in karate "fat"?
    Karate king Daniel "Tiger" Schulmann, that's who, according to a federal lawsuit filed by a martial-arts instructor who says he was fired from Schulmann's chain because he couldn't keep off the pounds.

    "Tiger Schulmann told me, 'Your problem is you have no self confidence because you're heavy,' " Elliot Spiegel, 38, told The Post. "He truly believes that my fat was a character flaw in my person."

    Spiegel claims that his heft hadn't stopped him from earning a black belt through the organization in 1999 and developing a strong following as an instructor.

    But, the suit claims, he was fired from a Brooklyn location after hearing rumors that "Schulmann did not want fat karate instructors."

    The suit against Schulmann and his company seeks unspecified damages based on alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and state human-rights laws.

    Schulmann's lawyer, Scott Levenson, said Spiegel was fired because "he told another employee that he had no respect for Tiger Schulmann."
    Prince Loeffler
    Shugyokan Dojo

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    3,784
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    As being fat is a choice, not something you are born with - I see no issue with canning somebody because of their weight. This is the same logic that says that if you have a restaurant staffed with busty young women with nice bodies, and that is an advertised draw, then you don't have to hire a 50 year old woman who is a size 28. If you are running a gym, you expect your instructors to be fitter than average. This is no different from enforcing dress codes or telling somebody that they have to shower daily and wipe their behind.

    Likewise, if you are paying somebody to be a karate instructor, you can expect certain levels of fitness and expertise from them. It is not unknown for people to be stripped of their rank for not being able to perform at an adequate level. This is your business and you have the right to make sure your employees project the image you want.

    Harvey Moul

    Fish and visitors stink after three days - Ben Franklin

  3. #3
    bruceb Guest

    Default pretty poor attitude ....

    First ... before anyone gets the wrong idea ... you can fire anyone at anytime because they are at the behest of the employer who is giving them employment to earn a living assisting the owner in their endeavor. So too, any employee can end their employment and seek employment elsewhere for any reason, giving both the employer and the employee equal footing under the law.

    Now ... as far as someone being able to train some one, training has nothing to do with personal fitness, unless the actual performance of those dutys is the crux of the contention.

    If in fact, the model image of Tiger Schulmann's teaching staff is part of the employment, then they are fully within their rights to terminate employment. I wonder if this person was given warnings, either verbal or written?

    On the other hand, as an instructor, not as a model or as an advertisement such as being a model, or used as a means to advertise a business, an instuctor should be fit, not judged upon the their girth, but if they are able to perform to the same standards as the other instructors. Many older shihans are not the fit young standards that we imagine for the younger instructors and they still teach into their retirement years? Should we throw them away because they are physically able to train the younger students, or they are putting on some weight, or slightly infirmed? Never happen.

    There is very little information as to this case, but within the legalitys of the law, an impartial examination may be in order, and a court case may clear the air as set a precedent.

    I don't think this 'Fat' person will win, but there will eventually be some compensation and some more forms that each instructor will have to sign to acknowledge that they are hired at the behest of the employer, and working within a set of given parameters which must be met.

    We are all fascinated to see someone who is termed 'fat' who is still able to physically do his/ her job with equal or better ability in comparison to the 'Fit' instructor.

    I don't know about you, but if a person can do their job, and they have the will power to keep up with the rest of their peers, I don't think being fat should be a problem, unless one is so obese it is a detriment to himself or others.

    Usually, if a business keeps a person who is overweight, they are given other management duties or give the choice to search for employment elsewhere. Never, have I seen an employer so stupid as to play the race card, or lay someone off because they are fat?

    I am interested to see how this turns out.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    3,784
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    It would be interesting to see just what is being called "fat" in this case. Is it a case of needing to lose 3 pounds to get into the under 10% body fat condition, or does the guy have an extra 40 lbs flopping over his belt?

    Harvey Moul

    Fish and visitors stink after three days - Ben Franklin

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Tulsa, OK
    Posts
    229
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default Re: pretty poor attitude ....

    Originally posted by bruceb
    First ... before anyone gets the wrong idea ... you can fire anyone at anytime because they are at the behest of the employer who is giving them employment to earn a living assisting the owner in their endeavor. So too, any employee can end their employment and seek employment elsewhere for any reason, giving both the employer and the employee equal footing under the law.

    Bruce,

    That may not be true in all states. The state that I live in is an "at-will" state. Either party can terminate the employment relationship at any time for any reason. Not all states are "at-will", though. California, for example, requires documentation of cause if the employer wants to terminate employment, and any "cause" that might smack of discrimination doesn't fly well in that state.

    In today's PC world where fat people are considered appetite restraint challenged by some, who think it's some sort of disability to be fat, I am not surprised this caused a lawsuit.

    I agree that it is reasonable for an employer to have criteria for fitness if that is related to the job (such as a MA instructor). The question will probably be whether the employer gave the employee a chance to remedy the issue before giving him the sack.

    Best,

    Chris
    Chris Guzik


    "You can never do a kindness too soon,
    because you never know how soon it will be too late."

    Ralph Waldo Emerson

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    503
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    The capabilities of the indivdual, whether obse or not, would certainly play a part, but the first and most important item from a business standpoint is the image. If the first time you walk into a dojo you see a fat guy up there teaching, the first thought in your head may be, before you ever see what he'she is capable of, is that the standards are low. This could obviously be a turn off for many potential customers and affect the profit line of the business. The guy in question, from one article I read, is 5'8" and 300 lbs - that's pretty damn big.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/front/sto...p-112160c.html

    Having said that, a few years ago there was a complaint filed by an overweight Jazzercise instructor. You can find that information at the link below. Since it was in San Francisco, it just reinforces my image of them as a city of liberal idiots. I think any business, whether it be aerobics or martial arts, that has a focus on fitness should have the right to hire individuals who have the appearance of fitness.

    http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/...ettlement.html
    Rob Thornton

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    NORTH INDIANA
    Posts
    250
    Likes (received)
    0

    Angry yOU CAN NOT FIRE FOR FAT

    okay here you can not fire somebody because they are over weight.You can fire them if they can not do there job. Even in right to work states you can not discriminate against people on this basis. As we all know not all fat people are huge because of being pigs some have problems with their glands. I am a big mf but in semi shape can still kick a little !!!
    JOhn T sChAeFeR

    THOSE WHO MOCK ARE CLOSED MINDED

  8. #8
    Iron Chef Guest

    Default Re: Karate Spotlight News - KARATE KING IN 'FAT' SPAT

    Originally posted by Prince Loeffler
    ...
    Schulmann's lawyer, Scott Levenson, said Spiegel was fired because "he told another employee that he had no respect for Tiger Schulmann."
    Shouldn't that be grounds enough. If you don't respect a martial arts teacher why in the hell are you his student and why do you teach in his name? Chain store karate.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Charleston, IL USA
    Posts
    441
    Likes (received)
    1

    Question one other question begs to be asked

    The question being: what was his condition when he was hired? If in fact, as Starkjudo noted, he is 5" 8" and 300 lbs. and he was hired at or near that weight, than firing him smells of something else in the works.

    If he was only 200 lbs. and ballooned up like that, well, that's another story. We get no mention of what kind of shape he had been in. I assume pretty good shape knowing Tiger Schullmans reputation. From that same reputation, however, there may be a more controlling factor at stake.

    It will be interesting to see what comes out of this case.
    With respect,

    Mitch Saret

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    876
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default Re: yOU CAN NOT FIRE FOR FAT

    Originally posted by Bushi Jon
    okay here you can not fire somebody because they are over weight.You can fire them if they can not do there job. Even in right to work states you can not discriminate against people on this basis. As we all know not all fat people are huge because of being pigs some have problems with their glands. I am a big mf but in semi shape can still kick a little !!!
    Unfortunately, they don't need any reason at all to fire you. You could be the best damn MAist in the world and they could simply fire you because they dislike your overly long ear-hair. They fire you because they gave you the job in the first place, and because you're not needed any more. Ultimately, companies are compelled to fire people (even if they'd rather not) to increase productivity just like they're compelled to pay you as little as possible for the same reason. You don't have a choice, they don't have a choice; they're simply dictating the rules of the game, and if you don't like them, you can starve (or at least loose a couple of pounds).

    'could he do his job?' is a fecund question. They simply didn't want him around either because somebody didn't like him or because he's not productive. Either way he is subordinate to his employer who can dispose of him at will -and did. There's no overarching question of moral culpability here. The system doesn't allow for it.
    Iain Richardson, compulsive post-having cake eater-wanter.

    "He shoots first who laughs last."
    - Alexsandr Lebed,

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Tulsa, OK
    Posts
    229
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    For the record, according to my understanding, Right to Work and At Will are completely separate, independent issues.

    At Will means an employer can let you go without needing to provide any reason whatsoever (what Iain said).

    Right to Work means that union contract clauses that prevent employers from hiring non-union workers are invalid. Right to Work has nothing to do with whether or not an employer can fire an employee or what reasons are justifiable for such action -- it has only to do with what unions can require of employers.

    Chris
    Chris Guzik


    "You can never do a kindness too soon,
    because you never know how soon it will be too late."

    Ralph Waldo Emerson

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •