Logique
Investor
- Joined
- 18 April 2007
- Posts
- 4,290
- Reactions
- 768
RA might first get their own house in order.
Rugby Australia Boss Raelene Castle Under Fire for Israel Folau Saga
https://www.news.com.au/sport/rugby...a/news-story/3811b49e5cf7e1d3806ea19482297693
...However, the wheels are reportedly close to falling off....
...In a World Cup year where less test matches are played on home soil, Rugby Australia is bracing for an $8 million financial deficit this year — which could total a loss of $12 million if Folau is paid out his contract in full.
A full $12 million hit would leave RA “on the precipice of insolvency,” according to The Daily Telegraph’s Pandaram...
What, you mean just like us in Small-business?If this thread sends one message it's this: the Conservative Right should never push the agenda for a return of Workchoices or any other form of de-regulated workplace reform.
Because under those polices - employees could be, and were, sacked for the sake of nothing
Actually from what I've read, as long as you sign a contract, there is plenty on here reckon you can be sacked for anything. Also they aren't the Conservative Right members.If this thread sends one message it's this: the Conservative Right should never push the agenda for a return of Workchoices or any other form of de-regulated workplace reform.
Because under those polices - employees could be, and were, sacked for the sake of nothing
Well considering Howard introduced it in 2006 and he was chucked out over it in 2007, I can't see any reason it would be resurected.Yeah but.... no one here wants workchoices back do they ? LOL
The irony is... it was only today the business community pushed to make it easier to fire workers.
Maybe Folau should've joined a real "union"
We have little else to offer; maybe that was the hell we're supposed to avoid by repenting
This is for the Victorians, South Australians and Western Australians - Rugby League is not the same game as Rugby Union.
What, they have two different types, of running head first into each other.This is for the Victorians, South Australians and Western Australians - Rugby League is not the same game as Rugby Union.
The price of getting a job
The terms of employment contracts — millions of them — are all remarkably similar. Although they are signed by individuals, there is nothing individual about them because signing an employment contract is the price of getting a job. Their terms heavily favour the interests of the employer.
It is now routine for employment contracts to require all employees abide by all workplace policies, company codes of conduct and company "values". The employee signs the contract without even having seen any of these documents or obligations, which are unilaterally promulgated by their employer.
The contracts require employees to adhere to similar values — typically couched in admirable language about integrity, decency, inclusiveness and respect. But they also seek to regulate employee behaviour, both at work and after hours. In this era of gig work and Instagram, we have become unwitting brand ambassadors for our employers on a 24/7 basis.
If we say or do something controversial after hours, and it's disseminated online, we can be fired.
Were noted controversialist Jesus Christ alive today, he would be unemployable.
While companies proudly trumpet their values, there's another standard clause in their contracts advising that while the policies, codes and values are binding on the employee, they do not bind the company. These provisions ensure there are no consequences for the company for breaching these obligations. The asymmetry is a stark expression of the employer's absolute power.
While the culture war over Folau raises difficult issues about how to reconcile freedom of religious expression with the rights of the LGBTI community to live free from harassment and homophobia, the court case will not resolve the debate.
Basically say's what we have been saying Rumpy, all employers have to do is write a broad far reaching code of conduct, then they can sack anyone for any misdemeanour at work or at home.A very good article.
Basically say's what we have been saying Rumpy, all employers have to do is write a broad far reaching code of conduct, then they can sack anyone for any misdemeanour at work or at home.
What I can't understand is people cheering it on, weird IMO, because it seems to be the ones cheering are the ones you would least expect to. You know those warm, fuzzy, holier than thou, do the right thing by people ones.
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?