Originally Posted by acer rose (Post 11647723)

Media reports say the guy was an engineer. If he has professional accreditation his loss of his most recent employment may only be the start of his problems.

This was not so much trail by media as awareness through media. Those condoning the Arsenal fan's outrageous behaviour should be aware that, had this incident been reported other than through the media, he may still have been facing pretty severe consequences. Take a look at the publicly available results of disciplinary hearings by professional bodies and you'll find examples of inappropriate behaviour that never made the media.

Originally Posted by magnumpi (Post 11647739)

1. No one that I know of have condoned his behaviour, unless u can paste one in for all to see ?

2. The people who you quote who were dismissed without a media wide frenzy, can go get another job once the incident cools down, this guy is now a life long unemployed "foul mouthed" chap. As any employee would most likely just need to refer to Google for an up to date resume.

Originally Posted by sharkus (Post 11647698)

I'm sure this has been asked earlier, but if it had been a boozed up ladette throwing offensive insults to a male reporter, then would have there have been such an uproar? Would it be a case of the man not being manly enough to take an insult, and thus it not being seen as a problem?

I'm NOT trying to condone the idiot for his offensive comment, before anyone tries to accuse me of being sexist.

Originally Posted by magnumpi (Post 11647739)

2. The people who you quote who were dismissed without a media wide frenzy, can go get another job once the incident cools down, this guy is now a life long unemployed "foul mouthed" chap. As any employee would most likely just need to refer to Google for an up to date resume.

Originally Posted by Gozit (Post 11647798)

Exactly!! Society bothers me sometimes... This guys actions were in no way correct, but was the punishment really fitting to the crime?

You people who say it was right for him to lose his job (and probably won't be able to get another one in his field) , have fun paying for his welfare / benefit cheques through your taxes! He was a hard working employee earning his keep and his stupid action outside of work should have had nothing to do with his day job.

Originally Posted by sharkus (Post 11647698)

I'm sure this has been asked earlier, but if it had been a boozed up ladette throwing offensive insults to a male reporter, then would have there have been such an uproar? Would it be a case of the man not being manly enough to take an insult, and thus it not being seen as a problem?

I'm NOT trying to condone the idiot for his offensive comment, before anyone tries to accuse me of being sexist.

Originally Posted by bats (Post 11647897)

I think that many are not seeing this as a violent action and they should. It was a rape threat.

Originally Posted by Gozit (Post 11647796)

+1.

For those going oh blah blah blah if he loses his license to practise etc. My question is WHY would hypothetical "he" lose his license to practise if the action had nothing to do with his job

Originally Posted by magnumpi (Post 11647904)

Seriously!

You seriously think the guy was about to rape her. Really !!!

Originally Posted by JamesM (Post 11647919)

Whilst the vocabulary was suggestive and highly inappropriate I think to call it "rape threat" is going a bit far now.

Originally Posted by magnumpi (Post 11647926)

Before this gets out of hand, and I know you are looking at this from an obvious female perspective Bats, but ! The police are not even interested so the threat of rape'is a mute point now. Anyhow he wasn't even the one who shouted that, he was the one who just stood and said it was funny, and his mum would laugh, eventually.

Isn't supporting TFC and paying for season tickets (yes I know he is a season ticket holder in area 115) punishment enough ?

Originally Posted by JamesM (Post 11647920)

Unfortunately the laws of the land and behaving yourself are meant to apply to a person 24 hours per day.

I don't get this separation between work and play malarky.

If you commit a crime at work and are sent to jail for it will you argue that it was while you were at work and you shouldn't be in jail during your free time?

Originally Posted by Gozit (Post 11647969)

Yes the law applies to a person 24 hours a day. Company policy or company code of conduct doesn't. Or shouldn't, rather.

That is a completely different scenario. If you commit a crime and are sent to jail it is the police and the judge/jury charging and sentencing you. That is their job. It is not the company/workplace's job to charge and sentence you for violating "company policy" or "company ethics" (whether directly stated or implied) while not on company payroll or company property.

As someone else said, the police don't even care.

Originally Posted by JonboyE (Post 11647987)

You are completely missing the point. It is not the case that because he was an offensive arsehole he should lose his job. It is that his employer has the absolute right to choose who it wants to employ. And, if it doesn't want to employ offensive arseholes, it is see ya later.

The only question is whether or not the offensive arsehole is due to any severance.

Originally Posted by Gozit (Post 11647969)

Yes the law applies to a person 24 hours a day. Company policy or company code of conduct doesn't. Or shouldn't, rather.

That is a completely different scenario. If you commit a crime and are sent to jail it is the police and the judge/jury charging and sentencing you. That is their job. It is not the company/workplace's job to charge and sentence you for violating "company policy" or "company ethics" (whether directly stated or implied) while not on company payroll or company property.

As someone else said, the police don't even care.

Originally Posted by JonboyE (Post 11647987)

You are completely missing the point. It is not the case that because he was an offensive arsehole he should lose his job. It is that his employer has the absolute right to choose who it wants to employ. And, if it doesn't want to employ offensive arseholes, it is see ya later.

The only question is whether or not the offensive arsehole is due to any severance.

Originally Posted by SchnookoLoly (Post 11650314)

Yep, bang on. There's a reason that companies can choose to sack employees who just show poor judgement, even if it's outside of work, like the woman who tweeted about catching AIDS in South Africa and was sacked by the time she got off the plane... the company can choose if they want to employ people who show such poor judgement, who cannot demonstrate that they have respect for others, and who don't conduct themselves in a reasonable manner both inside and outside of work.

Originally Posted by Shard (Post 11650323)

It's a good way restrict and reduce personal freedoms, agreed. Slippery slope.

Originally Posted by magnumpi (Post 11651325)

Transcontinental employee suspended after heckling female comic at awards show - The Globe and Mail

For anyone moving here, if u think its like the free speaking UK then think again, keep your mouth shut and just watch how much u drink as anything silly or sexist or God forbid racist, said while drunk is reason for losing your day job.

Originally Posted by magnumpi (Post 11651325)

For anyone moving here, if u think its like the free speaking UK then think again, keep your mouth shut and just watch how much u drink as anything silly or sexist or God forbid racist, said while drunk is reason for losing your day job.

Originally Posted by magnumpi (Post 11651352)

No I do not, but I know it happens I have seen it regularly in down town Blackpool. They get arrested or thrown out of clubs. Like they should. But lose your job? Just saying make sure u don't say nowt out of line when u have a few beers and become the cheeky chatty English person. :@) who is to say what is or is not sexist? Maybe u say some thing that is taken out of contex? Like...."can I bum a fag pal"

Originally Posted by Dorothy (Post 11651344)

So you think it's ok to make sexist or racist comments and blame it on alcohol?

Originally Posted by Shard (Post 11650323)

It's a good way restrict and reduce personal freedoms, agreed. Slippery slope.

Originally Posted by Tirytory (Post 11651960)

Nobody has limited his personal freedom, he is still able to go about and say what he wants. All the employer has done is make clear what they find unacceptable behaviour. That is entirely within their right. You seem to be a lone voice defending the indefensible. Devils advocate?

Originally Posted by Shard (Post 11652096)

No, more like a student idealist :). I simply don't think giving tacit power to employers over what individuals do/think in their private time is a good path. Threat of joblessness can be a de facto limit on personal freedom.

Originally Posted by BristolUK (Post 11652325)

Moving off slightly and speaking generally, I'm always surprised when people say employers are free to hire and fire who they like and operate whatever practices they see fit.

Isn't this why we have laws that protect employees and potential employees from discriminatory practices?

Originally Posted by Gozit (Post 11652349)

+1.



Same here, agreed. The employer cannot impose censorship (yes, that's what it is) on your actions outside of work. I personally hope the guy in the OP takes it to court. He wasn't actually charged by the police it seems, so technically he didn't break any laws. They have absolutely no solid grounds to have terminated him.

I think it was dbd who posted about being anti-military being negative in terms of employment, which brings up another thing - all the people fired for what they post on their personal social media accounts, outside of work. I don't even understand why employers feel the need to intrude and snoop on you like that. I am "anti-military" in that I do not support the military action in Afghanistan, and oppose the actions of Israel with regards to Occupied Palestine, and i'm somewhat of what they call a "voluntaryist", which means I oppose certain laws and government action. I'm sure if a potential employer saw any of that i'd be in the can. So i've had to be careful in locking down everything privacy wise, and when I start in the rat-race world, I won't "friend" anyone to do with work, or use my personal electronics (mobile, laptop) for anything work related.

Originally Posted by ExKiwilass (Post 11652371)

are there any women on this thread defending these idiots? so far it only seems to be men.


speaks volumes.

I just think it's hilarious how the whole thing has become about HIS job and HIs career and blah blah blah. I guess it's okay to slag off a woman without penalties doing HER job and trying to have HER career if a guy's career is then at risk. OH NOES. HE LOST HIS JOB. BUT HE WAS DRUNK. HE COULDN'T HELP IT. HIS FREEDOM OF SPEECH. POLICE STATE. OH NOES. GUYS DO THAT STUFF. IT'S OKAY. FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

Freedom to make women feel unsafe at work is A_OK for some I guess.

Maybe it's time to take this out to the wider issue of violence against women, and how this action was part of that, and how such actions serve to keep women quiet and out of certain male-dominated areas.