Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Personal behaviour vs employment

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 15, 16, 17 ... 19, 20, 21  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Morrigu Capricorn



Joined: 11 Aug 2001


PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2019 6:43 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^Couldn't we just do away with them all? Wink Razz

This blokes makes pretty good sense - more or less arguing the same as you David - but as has already been said by someone (can't remember who) - can we put the genie back in the bottle?

Mr Bornstein said social media clauses in employment contracts deprived employees of their freedom outside of work.

‘They are cast in very broad language which basically requires an employee to be on their best behaviour at all times on a 24-7 basis,’ he said.,

‘If you are caught swearing on a tram or being unreasonable in an argument with someone and that’s captured on iPhone, then technically you could be breaching your employment contract.’

In the wake of the Folau saga, Mr Bornstein called for the federal government to amend the Fair Work Act so no one could be sacked over social media posts that were unrelated to their job and didn’t advocate illegal activity or violence.


https://expressdigest.com/employment-lawyer-josh-bornstein-expects-more-sackings-like-israel-folaus-for-social-media-posts/
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:35 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

'... Folau claimed that RA offered him money to remove the offending Instagram post ...

RA refuted the claim, saying in a statement, “... any suggestion that Rugby Australia offered Israel Folau money to remove a post made on April 10, 2019, is completely untrue”.
...

Davis's comments came as RA chief executive Raelene Castle maintained the sport's governing body had "acted with complete professionalism and integrity at all times through the process" by which Folau's contract was terminated.

"This is an employment matter and does not concern his religious beliefs or his ability to express them freely," Castle said in email circulated to RA's database.

"If some of you follow Israel’s social accounts, you will have noticed he has posted religious material freely and openly over the last few years. The media attention it has garnered is obviously distracting as it means that we aren’t talking about, and celebrating, all the great things going on in our game." '


https://www.theage.com.au/sport/rugby-union/nsw-rugby-chair-calls-for-settlement-on-folau-saga-20190627-p521yw.html
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:51 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Morrigu wrote:
^Couldn't we just do away with them all? Wink Razz

This blokes makes pretty good sense - more or less arguing the same as you David - but as has already been said by someone (can't remember who) - can we put the genie back in the bottle?

Mr Bornstein said social media clauses in employment contracts deprived employees of their freedom outside of work.

‘They are cast in very broad language which basically requires an employee to be on their best behaviour at all times on a 24-7 basis,’ he said.,

‘If you are caught swearing on a tram or being unreasonable in an argument with someone and that’s captured on iPhone, then technically you could be breaching your employment contract.’

In the wake of the Folau saga, Mr Bornstein called for the federal government to amend the Fair Work Act so no one could be sacked over social media posts that were unrelated to their job and didn’t advocate illegal activity or violence.


https://expressdigest.com/employment-lawyer-josh-bornstein-expects-more-sackings-like-israel-folaus-for-social-media-posts/


Thanks for posting this, Morrigu – need more voices like this. And I hope people will take note that all of the high-profile cases in this area he’s worked with have been leftists.

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:07 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^

maybe he couldn't find any suitably high profile cases with right wing issues before.

In this line:
Quote:
no one could be sacked over social media posts that were unrelated to their job
the tricky part is clarifying what is unrelated to your job.

To be fair, that already applies. It's when the poster is clearly identifiable as an employee of a particular organisation and they post something either detrimental or derogatory about that organisation/it's partners/sponsors or something that conflicts with their values or is likely to cause reputational or brand damage that it's an issue.

Folau is a high profile sportsperson, using that profile to push his own beliefs. You cannot untangle his personal behaviour from his employer, they're intertwined. That isn't the situation in most cases

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 2:36 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

And in a side note regarding fund raising, Swanny (in conjunction with Sports bet Mad ) is putting up a Go Fundme page hoping to raise $3m for a massive piss up in Vegas.

https://www.triplem.com.au/story/dane-swan-has-started-a-gofundme-to-raise-3-million-for-a-massive-piss-up-in-vegas-141667?fbclid=IwAR1TKs5kg0fX-rdVaSOpZK0EQ1MqSJl0WP6IYynjak7yvsDwYVJD7StQV7Q

Laughing

Nice video.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 3:09 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not intentionally spamming this thread, I just keep bumping into things that are relevant. Embarassed

Anyway, this is an interesting article that sides with David's view, while coming from a slightly different direction.

https://www.abc.net.au/religion/the-israel-folau-case-has-been-mishandled-from-the-start/11253210

The dude who wrote it is a professor of law and a Christian.

This part in particular I find interesting.

Quote:
How Rugby Australia should have responded
That said, the saga that has enveloped Folau raises a number of profound social and legal issues that should concern us all. The entire débâcle, I believe, could have been avoided with a little more wisdom from Rugby Australia. To describe Folau’s views ― which addressed a range of forms of conduct he regards as sinful ― as “homophobic” was a massive distortion of the whole thrust of his Instagram post. It ignored the fact that he listed a range of categories of sinners or unbelievers.

Asking Folau to choose between his career and his faith was also utterly unreasonable ― and may yet prove to have been unlawful under s.772 of the Fair Work Act 2009 as discrimination on the basis of his religious beliefs. His faith includes a desire to help others to experience a relationship with God, in this life and the next.

All that Rugby Australia needed to do in response to Folau’s Instagram posts was to reaffirm its strong commitment to diversity, which includes acceptance of the range of religious and non-religious beliefs in a multicultural society. Rugby Australia could also have explained that it does not endorse Folau’s religious views and that rugby is a sport open to all. It could have pointed out that these were Folau’s own views expressed on a personal Instagram account which had no connection to Rugby Australia or his teams. It could have emphasised its commitment not only to diversity but to freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

It could have stressed that it has no right, as an employer, to control what its players say when they are not representing Rugby Australia. While Folau could not be allowed to express religious views while giving a television interview after a rugby match, he is not employed 24/7 by Rugby Australia. He is entitled to a sphere of life that is not under the control of his secular employer. If he chooses to preach on a Sunday morning, for example, Rugby Australia has no right to censor the content of his sermons.

By affirming its commitment to diversity, and its acceptance of the fundamental rights and freedoms of all Australians to hold and express their own religious, political or other views, Rugby Australia could have signalled its virtue and its principles.


Lets unpack that for a second.

Lets firstly consider that RA didn't want to sack Folau, they felt they had to. They were paying him more than $1M per year to play rugby and also marketed him as the face of the game. They rely on gate receipts, TV rights and sponsorship to make enough money to stay in business. The sponsorships in particular are very "Brand" based, with companies wanting to associate their name with yours. (Folau has lost personal sponsors because of this, companies that no longer want to be associated with his "brand".

So, the question is, if RA had responded in the way the article suggests, would it have worked?

My thoughts are maybe. The shriekers on social media would have eventually calmed down and moved on to the next target. gate receipts would be unlikely to be effected much, but they don't contribute much either.

Could they have continued to promote Folau as the face of the code? Unlikely I think, they would have needed to push him into a more background role. What impact would that have on TV rights? Unknown.

The final consideration is sponsors. Qantas would have likely left, and they're the major sponsor. Would they be able to find another? Maybe. Some Saudi airlines wouldn't be bothered, but is that a good fit for Australia's national team?

So my take is that RA felt between a rock and a hard place. Folau refused to take the post down and they could not get a guarantee he wouldn't post similar in the future, so they made a financial decision that while sacking him would be costly, they couldn't afford to keep him.

And to my mind, that's the nub of the argument that his actions were employment related. If you, by your actions as a private individual, cost your employer millions of dollars in income, how can that not be employment related?

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 4:18 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Totally agree

And it wasn’t his first strike


AFL should think on that before Hird gets the green light to coach again

_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Morrigu Capricorn



Joined: 11 Aug 2001


PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:16 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
And I hope people will take note that all of the high-profile cases in this area he’s worked with have been leftists.


Um in all honesty my only interest in politics etc these days is in improving animal welfare so I do realise I'm going to sound like a Grade A dummy but what does that mean? Embarassed
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:47 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

My point is that most people bagging Folau are progressives, who don’t seem to realise that this can hurt left-wing people as much as it does conservatives (or else, who only get selectively outraged when it happens to someone they agree with). Conservatives are similarly selective in their outrage, and only care if it’s one of their own getting the wrong end of the stick – so there’s very little consistent, in-principle opposition to the phenomenon of employees being sanctioned for exercising their right to free speech.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
Morrigu Capricorn



Joined: 11 Aug 2001


PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:24 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^ thanks David and well um maybe this thread isn't the place but I genuinely don't know what all these labels mean - progressives, conservatives, leftists, rightists - sorry as I said Grade A dummy Embarassed

I'm a stickler for rules ( 45 odd years driving and never had a ticket of any sort Laughing) and if the rules are the rules then you adhere by them which is not to suggest that they shouldn't be challenged but whilst they are the rules well then..... So many problems and adverse patient outcomes because increasingly people " don't agree with the rules, policies, procedures etc. this is my problem with Folau!

Think I'll just stick to animal welfare and butt out of everything else cause I just don't get it Confused
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:39 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^

Put it this way, the people who are passionate (or want to be seen to be passionate) about gay rights are the ones who've slammed folau over his posts, calling it homophobic. They're generally considered the progressives, the ones who want to re-make society.

David's point is (as I understand it) that this stuff happens to people of all political beliefs, and people tend to defend/attack people on "party lines" so it should be a non- partisan thing.

I don't necessarily agree. Not that it shouldn't be a non-partisan thing, just other things as I've expressed before

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 9:08 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
My point is that most people bagging Folau are progressives, who don’t seem to realise that this can hurt left-wing people as much as it does conservatives ... there’s very little consistent, in-principle opposition to the phenomenon of employees being sanctioned for exercising their right to free speech.

Something similar: people are obsessed by Folau reportedly being a multimillionaire. His financial situation is not relevant to the case, and anyway his enemies in RA are also multimillionaires (totally undeservedly IMO). But the people obsessing about Folau's money don't seem to care that it's those with no money who are most in danger (in any legal matter), because they don't have proper access to the legal system.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 9:30 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^
That's a sweeping and incorrect statement.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:50 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

K wrote:
David wrote:
My point is that most people bagging Folau are progressives, who don’t seem to realise that this can hurt left-wing people as much as it does conservatives ... there’s very little consistent, in-principle opposition to the phenomenon of employees being sanctioned for exercising their right to free speech.

Something similar: people are obsessed by Folau reportedly being a multimillionaire. His financial situation is not relevant to the case, and anyway his enemies in RA are also multimillionaires (totally undeservedly IMO). But the people obsessing about Folau's money don't seem to care that it's those with no money who are most in danger (in any legal matter), because they don't have proper access to the legal system.



im not obsessing about his money, i just think since he screwed up, and he wants to fight it, and he can afford it, he should pay for it.

stu said it perfectly, like it or not hes a role model for future rugby dicks, oops sorry, players, and hes a bad one, he will cost bums on seats, think of all the people that stupid tweet insulted. bye bye future players and supporters.

and it wasnt his first shot, he overestimated his star power. took a lot of guts, i wish the AFL had that much guts.

_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Sat Jun 29, 2019 12:26 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

think positive wrote:
...
im not obsessing about his money. ...

I didn't mean that all people against Folau in this case were obsessing about his money.

Nor are all the crazy arguments about law held by everyone against him.

But there's been constant media talk about him being a "millionaire" and claims he is "greedy". Even if true, that would be irrelevant. And if it were relevant, we'd need to compare it to Castle's and RA's wealth and greed to see who has more. Well, obviously collectively the RA people have more, but they may also have more individually.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 15, 16, 17 ... 19, 20, 21  Next
Page 16 of 21   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group