- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,823
- Reactions
- 13,871
No no no. Moving from a game Rugby League he grew up with and to a game he was never going to reach an elite level at meant he wouldn't reach elite pay levels in Aussie Rules.
Imagine if BP, Caltex etc sponsored R.A. No posting about Global warming if you played for R.A. @rederob
Except that these companies understand global warming and are actively doing their best to reduce their CO2 emissions.Imagine if BP, Caltex etc sponsored R.A. No posting about Global warming if you played for R.A.
You are continuously clutching at straws. There needs to be a context to what is and is not allowable, so making any old remark about what you can be dismissed for is meaningless.Making anti gambling social media comments in any sport these days could be grounds for dismissal.
You are continuously clutching at straws. There needs to be a context to what is and is not allowable, so making any old remark about what you can be dismissed for is meaningless.
Except that these companies understand global warming and are actively doing their best to reduce their CO2 emissions.
Completely untrue.What's to stop employers writing in any exclusions they like ? If they can sack Folau for making certain comments not related to his work, then they can do it for any comment that they believe can affect their business.
Completely untrue.
Folau was sacked for how he used social media.
Employers have every right to protect their brand, and take action against employees who damage it.
You still do not get it.
They do not have the right to go against workplace laws. And thats why its going to court.Completely untrue.
Folau was sacked for how he used social media.
Employers have every right to protect their brand, and take action against employees who damage it.
You still do not get it.
Can the comments be properly defined as homophobia?
Making an adverse comment about your employer has consequences.That is a catchall that effectively bans public comment that the management of the ARU considers to be detrimental to their interests. It's their opinion that it does , they don't have to show that it's actually detrimental, only likely (in their opinion).
He didn't make an adverse comment against his employer, unless it is a pre requisite that to be employed you must be LBGT, otherwise he just gave his opinion of those with that leaning.Making an adverse comment about your employer has consequences.
This is not rocket science.
Making an adverse comment about your employer has consequences.
This is not rocket science.
Folau wants to show his termination was based on his religion, and that is why he is going to the FWC.They do not have the right to go against workplace laws. And thats why its going to court.
He didn't make an adverse comment against his employer, unless it is a pre requisite that to be employed you must be LBGT, otherwise he just gave his opinion of those with that leaning.
It's a bit like someone saying all mechanical fitters are 'dicks' and should rot in hell, so the engineering firm you work for sacks you, because they employ some mechanical fitter's.
I think R.A are in more $hit than Ned Kelly.
Not a good assumption at all.I can see you are on the side of big power and group think against individual rights, so if that is the stand you want to take so be it, that's your call.
Tell me what was wrong with the worker saying what he did about mechanical fitters.It's a bit like someone saying all mechanical fitters are 'dicks' and should rot in hell, so the engineering firm you work for sacks you, because they employ some mechanical fitter's.
Absolutely nothing, same as what the rugby player said, it is just an opinion and it isn't against the law to have one. YetTell me what was wrong with the worker saying what he did about mechanical fitters.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?