Hmmm,
The way the reason is framed, "irresistible" (too pretty), makes it ridiculous. It would seem to open up any reason dealing with the appeal of a person to another such as too ugly, too fat, too thin, etc. I listened to the video and it also claimed the doctor's wife feared an affair, which in my view is another unfair and ridiculous imposition on the ability of the assistant, besides which it doesn't take a model type to have a torrid affair. It's a travesty that the court could justify anything based on looks where looks are not the key behind profits...such as in modeling/advertising.
I know it's semantics, but it would have been better to frame the dismissal of the assistant as a case of de facto disruption to the point of being unable to run the office effectively.
Aside from all of the above it sounds like two people, the doctor and his wife are just idiots. She was "one of the best dental assistants he'd ever had" yet his reason for dismissal comes down to being so immature he thought he couldn't resist her, and his wife was fearful of the same. The assistant is far better off out of there because of the nonsense and immaturity she had to endure.
... id imagine if the wife didn't get involved she would probably still be working there and possably horizontal from time to time with the dentist.
if she would have complied with the 2 requests she might still have her job.
I think the reasons were contrived because a) anyone calling the woman "irresistible" is pointing out his own desire and fault, that he probably complicated the working atmosphere by trying to have sex with her; b) the reasons are just a cover for his own lust and stupidity; c) the wife obviously doesn't trust him any more than her and he needed to fake some reasons to get out of the problem.
The lab coat excuse seems especially fake. If she was a "dental assistant" a lab coat would be mandatory in the first place for sanitary purposes, and any doctor would be negligent to allow an assistant to ever work without one. She could never have been a great assistant as he claimed if she didn't wear one.
OSHA Guidelines for Dentists Require:
http://www.ehow.com/facts_7620428_osha-guidelines-dental-professionals.html#ixzz2Z2MWxCvp
Protective Equipment
All employees exposed to blood-borne pathogens and bodily fluids are required to wear protective gear. The dentist provides this protective gear to the dental assistants at no extra charge. This equipment includes lab coats, smocks, gloves, face shields and protective eyewear.
This is the way it is at my dentists office. The coat excuses must be fake or the doctor was running a legally unsafe practice.
I think the real reason he fired her is that he wanted to fuck her, his wife knew it, and the wife pressured him to fire her.
Bingo!!!
Merlot
