[The Cthulhu]

What sets her aside from other applicants? Apparently her sense of entitlement. That will get her hired.

LOL!

FAILICAN!

[jlstyle]

LOL.....
27 yrs old graduate with 2.7 GPA....haha...
Why even hire this bitch over hot ass 21 yrs old graduate with 4.0 GPA?
Cheek needs a reality check.

[TK-421]

Oblivious cunt

[tlav17]

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

The behavior (and trend) of people not taking accoutability and responsibility for their own actions and instead, blaming others for their shortcomings.

Exactly! People feel that they are entitled to everything. What happened to good old fashioned hard work? ...Have some pride in yourself

[Couch]

Originally Posted by tlav17

Exactly! People feel that they are entitled to everything. What happened to good old fashioned hard work? ...Have some pride in yourself

Welfare system.............that's what.

[yomama69]

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

The behavior (and trend) of people not taking accoutability and responsibility for their own actions and instead, blaming others for their shortcomings.

Let me start off by saying that I don't condone people lacking personal accountability; However, I do condone the legal system and proper justification for remedy where remedy is lawful. That being said, I want you to realize that the news media often lacks factual basis or puts a negative spin on legal claims, i.e. Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants. You're probably one of those people who thinks that the above referenced lawsuit is frivolous, but perhaps with the background of the facts, you'd change your mind. What the media failed to portray was that Stella Liebeck's 3rd degree burns from spilled coffee were a result of McDonald's negligence in that the store kept the coffee pot at 180 degree, far greater than that of comparable franchises and at that temperature, 3rd degree burns would occur in 2 seconds of constant skin contact. If the temperature was lowered to 150 degrees (that of comparable restaurants) 3rd degree burns wouldn't occur for 12 seconds, giving a person adequate time to wipe the coffee off of his or her skin.

Juxtaposed, is the case where a New York man sued Starbucks because he slammed his dick in a bathroom toilet seat, causing damage to the organ. This man was at fault and at no way was there any liability on Starbucks for defective toilet seat. This litigation is unnecessary, unethical, frivolous, and lacking personal accountability.

Companies owe implied legal duties to their patrons, and when those duties are breached and cause damage to said patrons, patrons have every right to seek compensation for their damages. I highly condone one engaging in said practices, but only if it's permitted by law and within ethical guidelines.

I understand that the layman doesn't know the tort elements, applicable law, and how to apply it to the facts, but there's a clear difference in the 2 cases I referenced as far as frivolousness is concerned. I don't expect you to understand, but I'd like you to know that I'm by no means unethical.

EDIT: For all the "fail" and "cunt" comments, I just want y'all to realize that you don't have all the facts. Do you know that the University didn't advertise or promise employment within a certain time period of graduation? How can you make such claims with your assumptions?

[DenverJayhawk]

Originally Posted by yomama69

Let me start off by saying that I don't condone people lacking personal accountability; However, I do condone the legal system and proper justification for remedy where remedy is lawful. That being said, I want you to realize that the news media often lacks factual basis or puts a negative spin on legal claims, i.e. Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants. You're probably one of those people who thinks that the above referenced lawsuit is frivolous, but perhaps with the background of the facts, you'd change your mind. What the media failed to portray was that Stella Liebeck's 3rd degree burns from spilled coffee were a result of McDonald's negligence in that the store kept the coffee pot at 180 degree, far greater than that of comparable franchises and at that temperature, 3rd degree burns would occur in 2 seconds of constant skin contact. If the temperature was lowered to 150 degrees (that of comparable restaurants) 3rd degree burns wouldn't occur for 12 seconds, giving a person adequate time to wipe the coffee off of his or her skin.

Juxtaposed, is the case where a New York man sued Starbucks because he slammed his dick in a bathroom toilet seat, causing damage to the organ. This man was at fault and at no way was there any liability on Starbucks for defective toilet seat. This litigation is unnecessary, unethical, frivolous, and lacking personal accountability.

Companies owe implied legal duties to their patrons, and when those duties are breached and cause damage to said patrons, patrons have every right to seek compensation for their damages. I highly condone one engaging in said practices, but only if it's permitted by law and within ethical guidelines.

I understand that the layman doesn't know the tort elements, applicable law, and how to apply it to the facts, but there's a clear difference in the 2 cases I referenced as far as frivolousness is concerned. I don't expect you to understand, but I'd like you to know that I'm by no means unethical.

EDIT: For all the "fail" and "cunt" comments, I just want y'all to realize that you don't have all the facts. Do you know that the University didn't advertise or promise employment within a certain time period of graduation? How can you make such claims with your assumptions?

I know you're a lawyer, so I won't attempt to debate the legality of the McDonalds suit. I see your point in not knowing all the facts before jumping to a conclusion. I will say as a layman, however, when I go to a Mexican restaraunt and order fajitas and they bring it out on a cast iron skillet that is sizziling, I know enough not to touch it because it's scalding hot. Now if I were to accidently touch it and get a third degree burn, does that make the restaraunt negligent in protecting their consumers for serving a meal on a scalding plate? Furthermore, if a patron orders such a meal for their one year old daugther and she proceeds to burn herself, is it the restaraunt's fault or parent's fault for being a dumbass and ordering something innappropriate for a child?

The problem with these frivolous lawsuits are that they set a precedent saying it's not the consumer's responsibility and the small business owner will have to pay the price through increased insurance premiums. You can say these lawsuits don't cost us anything because the large corporations have insurance to pay out these types of settlements. But in the end, we the consumers, absorb the overall increased cost. And yes, I beleive my Mc BLT with fries will go up a few cents because of increased insurance premiums.

I agree the media does not always potray all the facts and can spin things in their own light. Regarding said college graduate, I'm unclear on your last statement. Did the college gurantee her job placement upon graduation and is this a fact? If so, then I can see the justification in the lawsuit.

[inabis]

She is an idiot. A 2.7 GPA??? Seriously? AND she went to all her classes?? I don't know about business....but the cut off point at engineering was a 3.0. If you were lower than that....good luck. ROFL...I can't believe she's suing her school. If she wins, they should nullify her diploma. Only 3 months??? GTFO

[yomama69]

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

I know you're a lawyer, so I won't attempt to debate the legality of the McDonalds suit. I can say as a layman, however, when I go to a Mexican restaraunt and order fajitas and they bring it out on a cast iron skillet that is sizziling, I know enough not to touch it because it's scalding hot. Now if I were to accidently touch it and get a third degree burn, does that make the restaraunt negligent in protecting their consumers? The problem with these frivolous lawsuits are that they set a precedent saying it's okay to be a dumbass and the small business owner will have to pay the price through increased insurance premiums.

I agree the media does not always potray all the facts and can spin things in their own light. Regarding said college graduate, I'm unclear on your last statement. Did the college gurantee her job placement upon graduation and is this a fact? If so, then I can see the justification in the lawsuit.

The answer to your first question, in my opinion, is that it depends. For the majority, the customer assumed the risk and knows that no matter what, the skillet was cooked over a flame and is going to be so hot that it will cause burns; However, if someone was never subjected to that delicious Mexican dish before and was not warned by the server that the skillet was hot, then yes, it's possible. That's why the servers usually tell you to "be careful" and "not touch it."

The answer to your second question is that I don't know and neither does anyone else posting in this thread. What I do know, is that I don't know any attorney who would take that case without such a promise or advertising made.

Operating costs, such as insurance, are already built into the price of your McShit. Those prices haven't increased in ages.

[E90SLAM]

And she can't even afford to hire a lawyer...she's going to represent herself....let's wait and see when the judge will throw this case off....

[Maestro]

oh my god.... If the courts let this one go past her filing the compaint they too should be shot.

I like the claim she seems to think that the college is responsible to make sure companies call her since she submitted a resume...

This also goes right up there with that... My nephew told me parents are showing up at jobs fairs with their kids to help them interview for jobs and make sure the companies speak to their kid.

My nephew said any time a parent walks up with a kid at a job fair the resume goes into a special pile, which is do not call. He said about 40% of kids show up with a parent. That is good way to tell a possible employer you do not need your hand held and your a self starter.

I can tell you this, when I was in college I submitted 100 resumes for jobs, got about 25 on campus interviews, 10 second interviews and 3 offers, it is a numbers game even today and I had an Engineering degree.

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

I agree the media does not always potray all the facts and can spin things in their own light. Regarding said college graduate, I'm unclear on your last statement. Did the college gurantee her job placement upon graduation and is this a fact? If so, then I can see the justification in the lawsuit.

I would hope someone one it the college placement office did not make that claim to her, however, it does not sound that way, based on her reasons for filling a claim, like the companies who she sent a resume too did not call her, he seem to have an expectation she would get a call from every company.

To that point, there are some many rules and laws that a company must follow when the interview a person they are so careful these days on who they consider an "applicant" many company do not send or contact anyone until they are sure they want to even talk to you or if there might be a fit. Long past are the days when companies would brings lots of people in just to get and idea about you. To that point, even though she contacted them they may take months to even consider talking to her.

All I can say she had some expectation which she believes was set by the college. From the sound of it, it could be one of those college that advertise that the IT field is growing and most all their grads get a job in the IT field

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by Maestro

From the sound of it, it could be one of those college that advertise that the IT field is growing and most all their grads get a job in the IT field

Even so, she's got a 2.7 and obviously a screw loose. Unless they guaranteed her placement in the field upon graduation, regardless of GPA or how much of an idiot she was, I don't think she has much of a case.

But, as has been said before, we don't know all the specifics. We can only assume. And I trust my assumptions. I assume she's an idiot and needs to wake the f up. I can't believe anyone is actually paying her any attention.

[Bomex]

she hasn't been looking long enough to complain.

[335_i]

wow...just..wow

[jkwhat]

Originally Posted by Joey Babs

Dude... it goes right along the lines of that mother and her kid who sued McDonalds b/c McDonalds was making her kid an even fatter shit than he already is. People like that have nothing better to do and should be sent off into space to never be heard from again......

The cost of sending them to space would probably be enough to have them live comfortably for the rest of their lives. Why not just push em off a cliff? I'm kidding of course.

[BrianDesigns]

shes probably a hot brat forced to go to college by her rich parents. Now that she can't find a job after 4 years of "hard work" she feels like she got tricked. and wtf i only have 4 posts...

[tlav17]

Originally Posted by BrianDesigns

shes probably a hot brat forced to go to college by her rich parents. Now that she can't find a job after 4 years of "hard work" she feels like she got tricked. and wtf i only have 4 posts...

i don't think Off-Topic posts count towards your total

[Desi]

Two points.

One, that I'm totally stealing from another forum, if they do end up having to pay out anything at all to her they should do so on the condition that she forfeit her degree. She wants a refund, she should have to return the "goods". Watch her do an aboutface.

Secondly, 2.7 GPA, a BCom and she can't get a job? I'm graduating with a god damn Political Science degree with a shittier GPA at the end of the next month and am already working for one of the most prestigious Canadian government departments and have a couple of other pretty tempting offers to consider. My university hasn't and isn't doing shit for me either, yes the economy is shitty, and I'm even less qualified then this lady. I also have just about zero family connections I can exploit in my field. In these situations nobody is going to hand you -anything-, you have to go out and actively fight for a job. Of the ~6 job offers I've had in the last 3 months, I only formally applied to one, the rest were through networking. Break in to the right circles, wow the right people and everything else will fall in to place.

[The Cthulhu]

Assuming that she is accurate in her statement that the college focused recruiting efforts on those with a 4.0 GPA, I don't see how she could be compensated for lost wages for the months following graduation. For my major at Penn State, the 1 year post-graduation employment rate was only about 90% with a B.S. & thesis. That was in December, when recruiters were still looking to take on new hires.

They also told us that if you have below a 3.0 GPA, recruiters generally aren't going to be interested. Combine a relatively unknown college with a low GPA and the current economy and I don't see how one can expect a job directly out of college within a few months. I don't think there is a reasonable expectation, there. There are many students who have just graduated from ivy league schools with good GPAs who are struggling to find employment after a year.

The student career office should have worked to find all interested students employment, but it won't be clear whether or not they made the effort until it goes to litigation, anyway. They should have, and if they did, and she didn't find a job within a few months, tough.

[M_Six]

I've worked in academia for more than a decade and I know of no institution that promises employment, especially after only 3 months. The fact that she's representing herself goes to show that no attorney sees merit in this case. But the second someone in the legal system touches the paperwork for her lawsuit, it costs me money; my tax money, which is being wasted on this stupidty.

As for the McDonald's coffee case, I fully understand the merits of that lawsuit. There was clearly extensive medical damage and McD's had been warned before about their ridiculously hot coffee. I have no problems with that case. But show me the damage here. She bought credits towards a degree and she received the degree. She didn't buy credits towards a job. Unless she has some written proof that she would be guaranteed a job upon graduation, she has nothing.

[yomama69]

Originally Posted by M_Six

I've worked in academia for more than a decade and I know of no institution that promises employment, especially after only 3 months. The fact that she's representing herself goes to show that no attorney sees merit in this case. But the second someone in the legal system touches the paperwork for her lawsuit, it costs me money; my tax money, which is being wasted on this stupidty.

As for the McDonald's coffee case, I fully understand the merits of that lawsuit. There was clearly extensive medical damage and McD's had been warned before about their ridiculously hot coffee. I have no problems with that case. But show me the damage here. She bought credits towards a degree and she received the degree. She didn't buy credits towards a job. Unless she has some written proof that she would be guaranteed a job upon graduation, she has nothing.

How is this so? Are you a resident of New York? Is this institution even public?