Israel Folau - Breach of contract or right to free speech?

SirRumpole said:

Not when someones living depends on it and a contract has been signed, the breaking of which denies Folau the opportunity to earn an income.

Click to expand...

The way his GoFundMe page is going, he won't need a job.

rederob said:

That would need to be supported some contractual way, so exactly how do you propose it would apply?

Click to expand...

A large portion of employees in any industry are under employment conditions which contain words to the effect that "under no circumstances may an employee engage with the media in any manner in relation to the business or its activities unless specifically authorised to do so. Any media enquiries must immediately be referred to the appropriate section or person" or words to that effect.

Any substantial business will also have a policy which clarifies that "media" includes all radio, TV, newspapers and anything publicly accessible online. That is, any recorded or written communication which is not of a purely private nature. Communication with the media means any form - so you can't speak on the radio but you also can't send the radio station an email or have a chat with them off air about your employer. Etc.

ASF falls under that definition of media as does Facebook, Twitter and so on.

That's a pretty common arrangement in both white and blue collar roles in private enterprise and also in government and typically applies to the entire workforce apart from the most senior management and anyone else specifically authorised.

Less common but there's a few who will permit employees to comment on the business so long as they're expressing it as a personal view and not as official corporate policy. That's far less common though but it does exist.

Where the issue arises however is that such "don't speak to the media" requirements relate to the business and its activities and may extend to something about also not commenting on direct competitors.

What they don't normally do is place restrictions on anything else. So someone who works for a large building company can't talk about that building company, its employees (including management) or any of its projects and may also be prevented from discussing directly competing companies but there's nothing to say that they can't spend their private time preaching religion or complaining about the tax system or saying they don't like Donald Trump or whatever.

If Rugby Australia were in the business of preaching any religion (including atheism) then their stance would seem entirely reasonable in that Folau's comments would be a direct undermining of the business. In practice however they're not in the business of preaching religion and that's where their stance becomes harder to see as being reasonable.

For the record I'm atheist and don't agree with Folau's comments but that's not the point

Value Collector said:

I don’t think so.

I think the people that want Israel to have the right to say what he likes in the name of his Christian beliefs, but wouldn’t support a Muslim saying the same thing in the name of their Islamic beliefs are most certainly Being hypocrites.

In my opinion he can say what he likes, whether he was Christian or Muslim I don’t care, but people do have the right to disassociate them selves from him also.

Click to expand...

There are homophobes, pacific islanders, religious people of all faiths, those against authoritarianism, fans, friends, families, anti-media, anti pc, anti left, etc.

Can't really group them all into that mindset.

moXJO said:

There are homophobes, pacific islanders, religious people of all faiths, those against authoritarianism, fans, friends, families, anti-media, anti pc, anti left, etc.

Can't really group them all into that mindset.

Click to expand...

Yes, even saw $10 donated by "Homosexuals Against Christophobia" LOL.

moXJO said:

There are homophobes, pacific islanders, religious people of all faiths, those against authoritarianism, fans, friends, families, anti-media, anti pc, anti left, etc.

Can't really group them all into that mindset.

Click to expand...

Regardless of which type of nut job they are, if they would still be hypocritical if they want him to be able to spout Christian nonsense but would not want a Muslim to say they same stuff.

SirRumpole said:

It's not actually about footy though is it ?

It's about individual rights vs employer control and could happen in any sector of the economy.

Click to expand...

It’s about an organization not wanting to keep him on the products list, after he causes himself to become damaged goods.

Think of him as a faulty product that just got recalled.

As I said he is not an employee paid to produce a product, he is the product, that gets sold to advertisers,

Value Collector said:

As I said he is not an employee paid to produce a product, he is the product, that gets sold to advertisers,

Click to expand...

That's a quaint way of looking at it.

Products aren't usually paid an income and selling people is called slavery.

We'll see what the court says.

So, VC, are you advocating for puberty blockers, cross sex hormones & irreversible surgery for children?

moXJO said:

Donations up to $583k
Message from one of the people who donated:

$10
Mainstream Media stop dictating who people can support! Left wing authoritarian intolerant hypocrite

Click to expand...

I find the level of support for him just wierd and disturbing. There are actual important issues in this world. We spend our time being distracted by irrelevances. What does it say about our society?.

Reported he owns $7 mil of property just sold car worth $1/2 mil the Gofundme is a rort IMHO.

Its not like he didn't know what the gig was he had been warned already.

Work places and contracts are very different to even 10 years ago simple conversations will see you in front of HR with a warning keep it up and you will be fired Folau is no different (thank the conservatives for that one).

Folau freedom of speech hasn't been affected as the government haven't stooped him, his employer has fired him under the terms of his contract he signed and agreed to he is still free to say what ever he wants to.

He is completely free to keep saying what ever he wants and his employer is completely free to fire him end of story.

Free speech is a seriously important point in our society, as are its building blocks, and yes christian religion for us in the west, whether you are a Christian or not
So much more important than fake news about Iran or climate change.
My view..

IFocus said:

Reported he owns $7 mil of property just sold car worth $1/2 mil the Gofundme is a rort IMHO.

Its not like he didn't know what the gig was he had been warned already.

Work places and contracts are very different to even 10 years ago simple conversations will see you in front of HR with a warning keep it up and you will be fired Folau is no different (thank the conservatives for that one).

Click to expand...

Folau would've been on around $500,000 a season average for the last 10 years imo, with the last few years peaking at $1,000,000. Endorsements separate or included?
He ain't poor unless he's given away a lot, which a lot of Christians do. Still 7 million dollar property.

Wait, are his ARU and Waratahs contracts separate? If so add a lot more to that.

I believe Folau was unfairly sacked but if those figures above are correct the GoFundme page is a disgrace and whose ever idea it was is also a disgrace.

Smurf1976 said:

... "under no circumstances may an employee engage with the media in any manner in relation to the business or its activities unless specifically authorised to do so. Any media enquiries must immediately be referred to the appropriate section or person" or words to that effect.

Click to expand...

Using social media is completely different to engaging with the media.

Smurf1976 said:

If Rugby Australia were in the business of preaching any religion (including atheism) then their stance would seem entirely reasonable in that Folau's comments would be a direct undermining of the business. In practice however they're not in the business of preaching religion and that's where their stance becomes harder to see as being reasonable.

Click to expand...

Again, this is about a player disrespecting colleagues and damaging the brand.
Up to 4 clauses of RA's Code of Conduct were breached, and RA probably will use the one about "social media" to defend Folau's court action against them as the others were consequential. RA would only need to determine the material posted was prejudicial, as such material has potentially many and varied sources (eg, an inappropriate photo could have had equally adverse consequences).

The argument is: was he fired because of his religious comments. If he was its unlawful. He has a right to the law being upheld regardless of the circumstances.
It is something that affects everyone and the outcome will reflect that.

Lets flip it.
I've seen a level of racism on certain segments of social media. Its all white people attacking him in the media. The lynch mob is predominantly white. A religious black man being pillared for a bible quote and fighting for his right to religious freedom. Gee thats never happened before.
"Quiet blackie just dance for our entertainment, No rights for you n/gger"
"And God forbid you ask for help"

Hows that strawman

rederob said:

Using social media is completely different to engaging with the media.
Again, this is about a player disrespecting colleagues and damaging the brand.
Up to 4 clauses of RA's Code of Conduct were breached, and RA probably will use the one about "social media" to defend Folau's court action against them as the others were consequential. RA would only need to determine the material posted was prejudicial, as such material has potentially many and varied sources (eg, an inappropriate photo could have had equally adverse consequences).

Click to expand...

Thats AR argument and they have to prove it wasn't the religious comments. That isn't the law.

Value Collector said:

Regardless of which type of nut job they are, if they would still be hypocritical if they want him to be able to spout Christian nonsense but would not want a Muslim to say they same stuff.

Click to expand...

Thats exactly true and they might now think twice about it. But I don't agree that they are cut from the same cloth

moXJO said:

Thats AR argument and they have to prove it wasn't the religious comments. That isn't the law.

Click to expand...

False.
Folau needs to prove the provisions of the Fair Work Act about religious expression etc. was the basis for termination, as RA has repeatedly said it was not.

rederob said:

False.
Folau needs to prove the provisions of the Fair Work Act about religious expression etc. was the basis for termination, as RA has repeatedly said it was not.

Click to expand...

No RA have to prove it.

Dark Knight 2.0 said:

...the GoFundme page is a disgrace and whose ever idea it was is also a disgrace.

Click to expand...

GoFundMe can exercise its rights and not support;
27. any other activity that GoFundMe may deem in its sole discretion to be unacceptable.

Folau has to prove he has a case at the hearing first I thought?

The court case:
Remember, we're dealing with "unlawful" termination, not a guillotining which is merely unfair or harsh. Once unlawful termination is alleged, it's up to RA to prove the termination wasn't anything to do with any unlawful reason, or for reasons INCLUDING that unlawful reason.

And if RA can't prove the termination had nothing at all to do with religion, then the Federal Court has the full jurisdiction to order that RA reinstate Folau; pay him full compensation; pay his (no doubtsignificant) legal bills; and pay a civil penalty of $A50,000 or more.