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

[rederob]

No RA have to prove it.

LOL - Folau is initiating the action and therefore needs to PROVE his case, so it's not as you keep saying.
RA consider their grounds for termination were in fact lawful.
I think you are a bit confused here.

 

[moXJO]

LOL - Folau is initiating the action and therefore needs to PROVE his case, so it's not as you keep saying.

Read above

And here:

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 reasonsINCLUDING that unlawful reason.

 

[Dark Knight 2.0]

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

Yes, but with Infants, Kids and people in general in dire poverty using Gofundme to fund lifesaving surgery etc Folau's page is an abomination.

GoFundMe won't delete the page Sdajii, it's getting great publicity.

 

[Value Collector]

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

His income is derived by selling his image, if he tarnished his image, his personal brand is no longer worth what he is being paid.

It’s all about selling an image, to advertisers.

For example, Britney Spears was dumped by Pepsi because she was seen drinking a coke.

 

[Value Collector]

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

Wow, where did that come from!!!

Once again Tink you have lost me.

 

[Value Collector]

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..

No one is taking his right to free speech away.

 

[moXJO]

His income is derived by selling his image, if he tarnished his image, his personal brand is no longer worth what he is being paid.

It’s all about selling an image, to advertisers.

For example, Britney Spears was dumped by Pepsi because she was seen drinking a coke.

Muhammad Ali
Anthony Mundine
Dennis Rodman
Do you know how many controversial figures that said outrageous things there are. Its not about selling one particular image of yourself its about your skill set and ability to put bums on seats.

 

[Dark Knight 2.0]

Footy players and Athletes are still picked in a Team based on performance not image, unless they do something a lot worse than posting scripture on Instagram.
Yes, a good image like Folau's wholesome one will get you more money, but to say Athletes are picked based on image is wrong.


This feels like Groundhog day again lol.

 

[rederob]

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.

RA is not bringing the action, Folau is.
Folau is citing Section 772 of the Fair Work Act, and needs to show that his religion was among the reasons for his dismissal.
Given RA has not cited Folau's religion (that I am aware) as relevant to his dismissal, RA consider they have no case to answer in relation to Folau being discriminated against.
How do I make that clearer to you?

 

[SirRumpole]

For example, Britney Spears was dumped by Pepsi because she was seen drinking a coke.

So, she probably got a Coke sponsorship.

As I said before, the ARU is a monopoly employer, there is nowhere else for him to go, nationally at least.

 

[SirRumpole]

It’s all about selling an image, to advertisers.

Yes, but the advertisers react to the number of people watching the game and those people are a limited sector of society ie people who like Rugby Union and appreciate the skills of the game.

I doubt if the fans are particularly worried or threatened about what Folau said, they would just have a laugh and hope he scores points for Australia.

It's just the Lefty snowflakes who likely never watch the game who are "outraged".

 

[moXJO]

RA is not bringing the action, Folau is.
Folau is citing Section 772 of the Fair Work Act, and needs to show that his religion was among the reasons for his dismissal.
Given RA has not cited Folau's religion (that I am aware) as relevant to his dismissal, RA consider they have no case to answer in relation to Folau being discriminated against.
How do I make that clearer to you?

An employer must not terminate an employee’s employment for one or more of the following reasons, or for reasons including one or more of the following reasons:..(f)…religion.

Section 351 requires the employee to prove an employer was motivated to discriminate against him or her because of religion.

In contrast, under Section 772, Folau only has to show that his religion was merely among the reasons for the dismissal.

 

[rederob]

An employer must not terminate an employee’s employment for one or more of the following reasons, or for reasons including one or more of the following reasons:..(f)…religion.

OMG - Groundhog Day all over again!
Are you not reading what is happening?
Religion was not the basis for termination.
Folau needs to prove it was.

 

[wayneL]

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,

The product is scoring tries and winning games, not opinions.

 

[moXJO]

OMG - Groundhog Day all over again!
Are you not reading what is happening?
Religion was not the basis for termination.
Folau needs to prove it was.

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.

 

[moXJO]

An unlawful termination claim attracts a reverse onus of proof.

This means that once an employee (or an industrial association entitled to represent the employee) makes a claim that the employee was terminated for one or more unlawful reasons, the employer will have to show that the termination was not for one of these reasons.

From fwa

Do you dismiss my opinion because I'm black robbie

 

[Value Collector]

The product is scoring tries and winning games, not opinions.

Nope, it’s having an image you can sell to advertisers and fans.

 

[Value Collector]

Yes, but the advertisers react to the number of people watching the game and those people are a limited sector of society ie people who like Rugby Union and appreciate the skills of the game.

I doubt if the fans are particularly worried or threatened about what Folau said, they would just have a laugh and hope he scores points for Australia.

It's just the Lefty snowflakes who likely never watch the game who are "outraged".

Advertisers are always pulling out of campaigns when the celebrities involved mess up.

 

[Value Collector]

So, she probably got a Coke sponsorship.

As I said before, the ARU is a monopoly employer, there is nowhere else for him to go, nationally at least.

There is plenty of other places for him to be employed, where he could use his football skills, he could coach teams after school.

Hell heaps of guys switch between union and league even.

 

[wayneL]

Nope, it’s having an image you can sell to advertisers and fans.

Which in the game of Rugby, is being good at the game of rugby.

That's why people fill the stadiums, to watch a good game of rugby.

Dammit, those players have all sorts of vices I might not like. Don't care, play the game well and I'm a fan. I'm not looking to go to dinner parties or socialise with them ffs.