Personal behaviour vs employment

[Morrigu]

[stui magpie]

Fair to say David and I are still on opposite ends of the employers right to terminate employment in these circumstances.

I heard Follau speak about his post, boiled down, according to the Bible Homosexuals are sinners, the same as all the other categories he mentioned and he was asking the sinners to repent their sins and turn to Jesus who will save them.

While technically correct if you take bible passages literally, it also implies strongly that homosexuality is a choice. Garry Ablett jr has been flagged for "liking" the post.

I understand he was previously warned about airing beliefs on social media like this and as Morrigu said, if he doesn't have anything explicit in his contract he still has a binding code of conduct to deal with.

For an Organisation trying to promote their sport widely, who are struggling for revenue other than from sponsors and their major sponsor has a Gay CEO, they had to act.

I don't think it constitutes Hate Speech, but it doesn't have to , It would have been very interesting to see the reaction if a Muslim footballer posted something similar as Islam also considers homosexuality a sin.

[thesoretoothsayer]

If Folau argues that his utterance was an exercise in religious freedom as enshrined (to what extent?) in the constitution then the question becomes: can an employment contract override a constitutional right?

[K]

[David]

And that’s probably why professional sportspeople need a better union.

[K]

Possibly, but first is his claim correct? And if it is, maybe his union and profession have too much power. That poster was shockingly angry at our club over something that was so minor (even if you don't agree with it). Good thing JdG doesn't hold grudges like some of the fans.


It's always about money and in sport that means sponsors. It's just business.

[stui magpie]

^

David, You can't really believe that.

Doctors only go to the AMA when they don't feel like lawyering up. A Doctor being sprung drink driving would have no more effect on their employment than it would if it happened to me, unless there were specific circumstances.

K's example is out of context and totally irrelevant. Very similar to unions in general

[David]

But that’s because you both work in professions that have, at least in the past, been strongly unionised. In many cases, you don’t have to be in a union to benefit from the rights that they have won, and to be protected from the codes of conduct that might be implemented if there were no threat of organised pushback.

On the other hand, we know well by now that a professional footballer who drink-drives is at serious risk of employee sanctions. The AFLPA exists of course (and I presume there’s an equivalent Rugby player union), but I’ve always gotten the impression that they’re pretty toothless and localised. For any meaningful resistance, you’d probably need a cross-code body at the very least.

[K]

http://www.rupa.com.au/

https://twitter.com/RugbyPlayersAus/

(Silence.)

[David]

Sometimes these negotiations happen behind the scenes, and that’s okay. But unfortunately I do very much doubt that’s happening here.

[K]

Some of the commentators, ex-players, etc. would make very bad lawyers...

Of course, it'd help if the press actually published what a written "standard contract" says.

[stui magpie]

[think positive]

Totally agree Stu,

I guess we all need to realize some of these guys just aren’t that smart!

[K]

[Wokko]

Why do all these atheists give a toss about being told they're going to hell?