Will Cindy and George's Behavior Affect Their Employability?

[RR0004]

...do you think CA, GA or LA are even employable at this point, much less have jobs waiting for them?

I find it hard to imagine anyone either keeping them on as employees or hiring them, given the outrageous behavior, lies, etc.

It kind of makes me think that this is a big reason for the desperate need to keep the donations coming in to whatever that foundation or fund that was set up.

I can't help but think this is why the attempt to discredit TM and EquuSearch.

Deep down they know future employment is not a possibility, perhaps?

I'm glad you asked. I wonder if CA is going into the "missing children" business. I mean no disrespect by that. It seems from the tone of the phone conversation with the woman that runs a Caylee website that she wants to be the "go to" person. Seems like she's pretty angry that donations are going to TES and not to her new foundation. I think it's part of CA trying to recreate herself. Not sure if nursing is in her future.

 

[pb6656]

I actually find this discussion rather sad. None of the Anthony's have been charged with anything except KC. None of them, to my knowledge have been name POI's.

***shakes head***

 

[passionflower]

IMO, with ALL the lies/cover up etc..........I'd be afraid to have GA for MY 'security' and CA as MY 'nurse'

 

[JusticeorJustUs]

I don't disagree with your line of thinking.

I'm merely supposing that some employer will feel sorry for her & decide to give her a chance. Not to mention, the legalities of refusing to hire a qualified person for certain 'social' reasons might work in Cindy's favor.

Personally speaking I would NEVER deal with any company that employed Casey or Cindy. Life is too short to deal with nasty people, isn't it?

I believe Florida is a right-to-work state. Even if it weren't a prospective employer need only advise, "the position's been filled" and doesn't need to provide any other information.

I think it's very possible that some employers may feel sorry for her but I think possible future liability issues resulting from her employment might prevent them from jeopardizing that which they've worked hard to build...their business and clientelle.

I agree. I would never deal with anyone who employed any of them and for the same reason.

 

[Chilly Willy]

I believe Florida is a right-to-work state. Even if it weren't a prospective employer need only advise, "the position's been filled" and doesn't need to provide any other information.

I think it's very possible that some employers may feel sorry for her but I think possible future liability issues resulting from her employment might prevent them from jeopardizing that which they've worked hard to build...their business and clientelle.

I agree. I would never deal with anyone who employed any of them and for the same reason.

How would hiring Cindy create a liability issue?

 

[pb6656]

Chilly - Am I the only one that finds this discussion rather - malicious?

 

[Brini]

If she wanted to practice, again, there could be an issue with patient confidence and receptiveness.

If she left Gentiva, she could be a telephonic case manager or advice nurse. Or, a bill auditor. These days, there are a TON of jobs for RNs that don't require bedside nursing. When I did telephonic, I only used my first name.

Otherwise for CA and GA... Ringling Brothers? Or, maybe that's for the lawyers.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I actually find this discussion rather sad. None of the Anthony's have been charged with anything except KC. None of them, to my knowledge have been name POI's.

***shakes head***

While it is true they haven't been charged or considered POIs to date, it still doesn't absolve them from wrongdoing here.

It was wrong to wash Casey's pants when the smell of decomp was on them while recognizing the smell ahead of time as per her 911 call. There are many such instances where both have been caught in lies during press junkets. These incidents do speak to the credibility of both GA and CA.

They willingly became public figures in this by their repeated appearances on various news shows as guests or while granting interviews. What happens during the interviews should be reviewed by possible future employers and consideration made as to credibility issues stemming from them.

 

[LI_Mom]

Chilly - Am I the only one that finds this discussion rather - malicious?

"Malicious" is a strong word.

Once Cindy attacked law enforcement, the media AND the general public in her feeble attempts to defend Casey she opened the door to people questioning her TRUE motives.

You can't blame people for being disgusted with a family who loudly & proudly enables someone THEY themselves said is a "sociopath."

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Chilly - Am I the only one that finds this discussion rather - malicious?

It is not "malicious". It is a discussion on how present actions can and possibly will affect the future of these grandparents.

Again, I remind you they put themselves out there to become public figures by press junkets and interviews. This carries with it the responsibility they must take in the public viewing their personal lives and leaving themselves open for scrutiny.

 

[JusticeorJustUs]

How would hiring Cindy create a liability issue?

Would you hire her in a position involving patient care (in-home or hospitalized) or in a position involving anything that involves confidential and personal information?

Chilly - Am I the only one that finds this discussion rather - malicious?

Yes, well, CA thinks that the prosecution of KC is malicious as well. This is a discussion about employabilty considering credibility as displayed, dreadfully, all over the 6:00 news.

If she wanted to practice, again, there could be an issue with patient confidence and receptiveness.

If she left Gentiva, she could be a telephonic case manager or advice nurse. Or, a bill auditor. These days, there are a TON of jobs for RNs that don't require bedside nursing. When I did telephonic, I only used my first name.

Otherwise for CA and GA... Ringling Brothers? Or, maybe that's for the lawyers.

Yes. Exactly. I'm afraid she'd still have access to confidential information, however.

While it is true they haven't been charged or considered POIs to date, it still doesn't absolve them from wrongdoing here.

It was wrong to wash Casey's pants when the smell of decomp was on them while recognizing the smell ahead of time as per her 911 call. There are many such instances where both have been caught in lies during press junkets. These incidents do speak to the credibility of both GA and CA.

They willingly became public figures in this by their repeated appearances on various news shows as guests or while granting interviews. What happens during the interviews should be reviewed by possible future employers and consideration made as to credibility issues stemming from them.

<<<bold mine>>>

Yes. Credibility is a huge issue. Trust that they would be telling the truth in a situation where credibility is needed is another.

All of that leads to liability issues in a litigious society. And we live in one.

 

[LI_Mom]

It is not "malicious". It is a discussion on how present actions can and possibly will affect the future of these grandparents.

Again, I remind you they put themselves out there to become public figures by press junkets and interviews. This carries with it the responsibility they must take in the public viewing their personal lives and leaving themselves open for scrutiny.

Exactly!

I've said all along that the Anthonys have shown from day one, they do NOT stop to consider the consequences of their words or actions.

And it's not that people expected them to know how to deal with this horrific nightmare.... that's why it's so important to contact a reputable organization IMMEDIATELY so they can introduce you to a professional spokesman to help you deal with the media onslaught.

Instead, the Anthony family waited until all the damage was done to finally hire a spokesman. And even then, they only hired a spokesman who was willing to repeat the same exact NONSENSE they were trying to sell to the public themselves.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Chilly - Am I the only one that finds this discussion rather - malicious?

No, you're not. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that Cindy is in any way unable to perform the job that she's trained and licensed to do. No one is aware of any blotches on her work history and apparently her current employer is happy with her or they wouldn't be holding her job open waiting for her to return.

Cindy's inability to cope with her granddaughter's death and her daughter's alleged responsibility for the murder have nothing to do with her ability to perform her job.

Cindy seems to be a strong willed person who cares very deeply, perhaps too deeply, for people she's close to. Those are both excellent qualities in a nurse, IMO.

 

[JBean]

It is not "malicious". It is a discussion on how present actions can and possibly will affect the future of these grandparents.

Again, I remind you they put themselves out there to become public figures by press junkets and interviews. This carries with it the responsibility they must take in the public viewing their personal lives and leaving themselves open for scrutiny.

I think this is the intelligent level of discussion we are looking for in this thread.
It has the potential to become malicious if posters go there, but as long as the discussion is reasonable it is ok.
They have put themselves out there by going on talk shows and the like, which does open them up to scrutiny, there is no way around it.
But, like others have said, they are not charged and have been reported by LE as cooperative and helpful. With that in mind they should not be open to blatant bashing as they are still victims on some level in this fiasco.

 

[JBean]

No, you're not. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that Cindy is in any way unable to perform the job that she's trained and licensed to do. No one is aware of any blotches on her work history and apparently her current employer is happy with her or they wouldn't be holding her job open waiting for her to return.

Cindy's inability to cope with her granddaughter's death and her daughter's alleged responsibility for the murder have nothing to do with her ability to perform her job.

Cindy seems to be a strong willed person who cares very deeply, perhaps too deeply for people she's close to. Those are both excellent qualities in a nurse, IMO.

Very good point and I am inclined to agree with you.

 

[JusticeorJustUs]

It is not "malicious". It is a discussion on how present actions can and possibly will affect the future of these grandparents.

Again, I remind you they put themselves out there to become public figures by press junkets and interviews. This carries with it the responsibility they must take in the public viewing their personal lives and leaving themselves open for scrutiny.

Thank you.

It is not meant to be malicious in any way, shape or form.

 

[pb6656]

Maybe malicious is too strong a word for what I mean.

As Chilly has pointed out. Her employer thus far has not indicated any other intent but to hold her job for her.

Washing the pants was wrong....yes. At that point I don't think Cindy was thinking at all - whether it be rationally or irrationally.

And as far as is known, GA has been working most of the time. From what I understood, he does have a job that involves more than shining a flashlight and checking locked doors as someone alluded to earlier. My DH used to work in security. Some of the duties did involve this - but there is a lot more involved depending on the situation.

 

[CaliKid]

I could've sworn that George made a comment recently that he'd lost his job and was currently unemployed. But if I was hiring, I wouldn't want either him or Cindy working for me.

 

[pb6656]

I could've sworn that George made a comment recently that he'd lost his job and was currently unemployed. But if I was hiring, I wouldn't want either him or Cindy working for me.

When was this? Remember the day they towed the car home he went on to work?

 

[CaliKid]

When was this? Remember the day they towed the car home he went on to work?

No, it was within the last month. Someone mentioned it on an interview.