And for the guys on $60k or less with little choice?
16-18yo with little experience?
Business should not be able to solely write, or trump workplace laws.
And for the guys on $60k or less with little choice?I think you should be able to put almost anything into the contract, and then it’s up to the person to decide whether the millions offered are worth it or not.
How can that be a question?The question though is whether or not I have the right to sack the chef for expressing political or religious views or circulating propaganda in a private capacity, in their own time and in no way involving my restaurant?
How can that be a question?
You need to rely on applicable laws and none are evident.
The law is the law is the law. Governments can and do change them.Question is fairness. What should the Laws, the FW act protect, in the name of fairness.
Rob, if it were a Muslim quoting the Quran would you be so adamant?
Same for saying things which are respectful, and even more certainly things which others will find offensive.
If I owned a restaurant then no way would I be promoting any political or religious cause. Doing so is a “can’t win” approach - it’ll attract few if any new customers but will lose at least some of those on the other side.
The question though is whether or not I have the right to sack the chef for expressing political or religious views or circulating propaganda in a private capacity, in their own time and in no way involving my restaurant?
People can be offended by anything they want to be offended by, even the truth.
A lot of religious people might be offended by pornography or brothels, but they continue to exist.
Would you consider blashphemy should be a crime ? People could be offended by it.
Most companies would jump at that option, a clause that says we can terminate employment, when we see fit.
And for the guys on $60k or less with little choice?
16-18yo with little experience?
Business should not be able to solely write, or trump workplace laws.
I agree, but the more extraordinary your income becomes, the more you should expect to have a lot of unusual terms and conditions that are designed to protect the person taking the punt and paying you those millions, and the more you can expect the “job” to encroach on some of your personal life.
Pretty much anything that anyone ever stood up against was not illegal at the time.How can that be a question?
You need to rely on applicable laws and none are evident.
But if a church group signed a contract with the local sizzler for meals every Sunday after church, and then the sizzler rebranded as a strip joint / brothel, the church group would be within its rights to say “that’s not what we signed up for” and end the contract.
I have no idea what that response addressedPretty much anything that anyone ever stood up against was not illegal at the time.
Good to see you boys are not letting go...........
If people breach the conditions of their employment there are consequences.
What is so hard?
In the context of social issues the primary instigator of change is those who are not part of government and who challenge accepted wisdom and current laws.The law is the law is the law. Governments can and do change them.
This is a case where a contracted employee was warned about the type of behaviour that was not not appropriate BEFORE entering into into a fresh 4 year term.In the context of social issues the primary instigator of change is those who are not part of government and who challenge accepted wisdom and current laws.
You may be spot on with your take on it Rob, IMO all that is in question is the severity of the punishment, relative to the indiscretion.This is a case where a contracted employee was warned about the type of behaviour that was not not appropriate BEFORE entering into into a fresh 4 year term.
This is a case where the employee had an opportunity to not sign, knowing full well the damage he did with respect to a similar instance over a year ago.
This is a person who has no respect for so many in the community and now thinks he deserves an apology.
The sporting community will be the better off without him.
This is a case where a contracted employee was warned about the type of behaviour that was not not appropriate BEFORE entering into into a fresh 4 year term.
This is a case where the employee had an opportunity to not sign, knowing full well the damage he did with respect to a similar instance over a year ago.
This is a person who has no respect for so many in the community and now thinks he deserves an apology.
The sporting community will be the better off without him.
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?