I think you misunderstood my comment. From my understanding of the law, which is limited I might add, this company has every right to fire her if she no longer fulfills her job requirements to the company's standards. She was at this conference representing her company. She is expected by her company to act with a certain level of professionalism. The public humiliation I spoke of took place during a time in which she was on the clock so to speak. This is where she went wrong. She represented her company in a very negative way by humiliating these men, quite tactlessly, in public. In this sense she was being quite hypocritical. She was acting just as unprofessional if not worse than the men making the jokes. I do believe that this is proper justification for firing an employee (as was observed when the man who made the joke was fired by his company.) The public humiliation I spoke of was not legal justification for her termination. It was the fact that she represented her company in an unprofessional manner that led to her being fired.
If she would have been mature and confronted these men, as grown ups should, this all could have been avoided. The only reason I say she was the aggressor is the simple fact that these men didn't even know they were offending her. They were in the wrong, most definitely, but that does not make it right for her to act unprofessionally as well.
As far as I can tell, this company's choice was legal and in their best interest.
If she would have been mature and confronted these men, as grown ups should, this all could have been avoided. The only reason I say she was the aggressor is the simple fact that these men didn't even know they were offending her. They were in the wrong, most definitely, but that does not make it right for her to act unprofessionally as well.
As far as I can tell, this company's choice was legal and in their best interest.