Rumours and Stuff

[Gary Gutful]

Please refer to Law.com about how your boss can sack you for breaching the code of conduct on social media.

-----8<------


Depending on the nature of the comment, it is possible for an employer to fire an employee for comments made on social media. This includes Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, blogs, online forums and email. Whether or not an employer is entitled to fire you for comments on social media depends on a variety of circumstances including:

• the nature of the comments made;
• the intention behind publishing the comments;
• when the comments were made;
• who had access to view the comments;
• the extent to which an individual or company is identified in the comment;
• the provisions of any company code of conduct;
• the provisions of any contract of employment; and
• any company guidelines.

What sort of comments can get me fired?

Whilst Australian law recognises the freedom of information, opinion and expression, the Australian Constitution, unlike the American Constitution does not provide an unfettered right to freedom of speech. For example, pursuant to the Racial Discrimination Act 1975, it is unlawful to do an act that is likely to offend or insult a person or group because of their race or ethnicity. Accordingly, racist or sexist comments, or comments intended to incite violence or fear, may be considered unlawful and give rise to dismissal.

Nowadays, as social media becomes a significant and valuable instrument for businesses, most companies will often include social media clauses or guidelines in their contract of employment or code of conduct. Comments on social media that contravene any of these provisions may entitle an employer to fire an employee. These provisions are often paramount in considering whether an employer is entitled to fire an employee.

Whether or not a comment breaches company policies however will depend on the facts of the situation.

Examples of comments that have resulted in lawful dismissal include commentary that:

• mocked or criticised company policies;
• expressed strong political views;
• failed to uphold the integrity or reputation of the company;
• concerned an employer or employee of the company; or
• insulted or threatened another employee.

The mere failure to remove commentary at the request of a company may provide sufficient grounds for dismissal.

Nonetheless, it appears that in order to terminate someone’s employment on the basis of social media comments, the comments must identify either the company or specific staff members. Comments that are vague or non-descript have been held to be insufficient grounds for dismissal.

What if I didn’t make the comments whilst at work?

Given the nature of the internet and the reliance that business places on social media, it is possible to be fired for comments made outside of work hours, or outside of the workplace. Social media obligations often fall within the scope of obligations that a company may place on its employees outside of working hours.

What if I only post my comments on private pages?

Firstly, there is no recognised right to privacy in Australian law. Accordingly, a Facebook page or Twitter feed only accessible by approved friends, or set to the maximum privacy settings, may be insufficient to prevent termination. Even anonymous blog posts have been the subject of lawful dismissals.



Qantas Wallabies bro

View attachment 19025

He won’t read all of that.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Sorry Pou more bs. If you had a different idea in 1300s Spain you'd face the inquisition who'd change your mind or kill you. If you thought the world revolved around the sun, rather than other way around, you'd be counselled into the error of your ways in 1600s Italy. Tolerance to different ideas from what was written or contrary to the church meant punishment or even death until you conformed. Tolerance to different ideas was dangerous a long time ago.

And then the Christian world produced the Enlightenment where Church and State were separated. Since then secular laws and religious laws have diverged. It's why saying somebody is going to hell (e.g. eaters of crustaceans) doesn't cause them any harm.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You forgot that he is employed by the Qantas Wallabies and has an obligation as a brand ambassador.

If both the ARU and Qantas have a position on homosexuality which differs to his own, his choice is to find another job or STFU and tolerate it.

Do Qantas or the Wallabies even have a position on hell? As far as I know they are secular organisations with no religious values or opinions.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

he's employed by the ARU

if he had some separate deal with Qantas they would have dumped him by now just like LG did with Warner

what would peoples thoughts be if Cricket Australia forced Khawaja to wear alcohol sponsorship?

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricke...tance-on-alcohol-sponsors-20131021-2vx6f.html

Khawaja should just f**ken suck it up or find another job FFS!

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Khawaja is not going onto social media and saying that alcohol is bad and that consumers should get 80 lashes or get their hands cut off (which is what happens in some dry Islamic countries).

But he has quite clearly taken a public moral position against alcohol. Who the f**k does he think he is to claim that I'm doing the wrong thing by having a drink?

 

[Gary Gutful]

I wouldn’t play unless I could wear alcohol sponsorship.

 

[Gronk]

Do Qantas or the Wallabies even have a position on hell? As far as I know they are secular organisations with no religious values or opinions.

Not specifically hell, but they probably would have an overall policy of inclusion & well being for all law abiding supporters / patrons / customers, rather than what Izzy's post suggested would be the end game.

The Judgment: Rosa Morrison Lowe

 

[Bazal]

I generally find rugger types think hell is anything west of the SFS....

 

[hindy111]

Maybe you're the only err...straight guy in that bar Hindy?

But I have a thing for women with shaved heads

 

[Gronk]

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Khawaja is not going onto social media and saying that alcohol is bad and that consumers should get 80 lashes or get their hands cut off (which is what happens in some dry Islamic countries).

The direct parallel with Khawaja would be if he was asked on social media: 'What does the Koran say we should do to people who do X', and he replied 'The Koran says Y, unless Z'.


Also, in some countries they don't have advertising to annoy them. They actually think that their tastebuds are on the bottom of their tongues.

 

[hindy111]

You forgot that he is employed by the Qantas Wallabies and has an obligation as a brand ambassador.

If both the ARU and Qantas have a position on homosexuality which differs to his own, his choice is to find another job or STFU and tolerate it.

He has 120,000 followers on twitter and it was irresponsible to do what he did. This is not a free speech issue it is about damage to a brand and ultimately conduct under his employment contract.

You might want to look into who else quantas has deals with before shooting off. I am sure its with some muslim based companies. And I reckon Muslims would have a simmialr view as Izzy

 

[hindy111]

Khawaja is not going onto social media and saying that alcohol is bad and that consumers should get 80 lashes or get their hands cut off (which is what happens in some dry Islamic countries).

Gary would be f**ked

 

[Gronk]

You might want to look into who else quantas has deals with before shooting off. I am sure its with some muslim based companies. And I reckon Muslims would have a simmialr view as Izzy

Qantas is an acronym.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

From what you just said, you're the one needing nappies. We are discussing intolerance to gays.

Who's not tolerating homosexuals? Israel Folau? He only said they are going to hell. He didn't refuse to play rugby with them FFS.

By suggesting that they will go to hell, it is a position by default that they are evil, sinful, vile and disgusting individuals in the eyes of the great Creator, therefore lessor beings and open to ridicule, taunts and even physical abuse by righteous amongst us.

Ridicule and taunts are being directed at Folau and many other religious people who never said a peep about homosexuality. Words certainly won't break anyone's bones or stop them feeding their kids.

Physical abuse is a crime and all human beings are protected from violence under Western laws.

No one has given a pass to the Communists and Islamist's for f**k sake.

Plenty do. Though I dare say there are Communists and Islamists losing jobs for their views as well. They certainly aren't getting kicked out of university though.

They are another topic. But what the hell, lets throw in the kitchen sink so we can win an argument Pou.

This is a simple example of passive intolerance. Not a hanging crime ffs. But it does shine a poor light on Folau. But like I said, I'm glade he did it. I think it is good that we know and that many members of the public show their displeasure of such bigotry from a public figure.

Displeasure is fine. Pressuring his employer and sponsors to drop him is a totalitarian silencing tactic.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

The direct parallel with Khawaja would be if he was asked on social media: 'What does the Koran say we should do to people who do X', and he replied 'The Koran says Y, unless Z'.

It's a false corrolary there though, because it isn't about what 'we' should do to 'them', but rather what God will do to them. At least in the West, the State (or the Church for that matter) hasn't been responsible for meting out religious punishment for a very long time. It's not 'our' responsibility. Christians are called to love their fellow sinners.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Qantas is an acronym.

Queer As Northern Territory Arse Slammers

 

[Soren Lorenson]

FFS. I just wanted to know if youse all thought he would be a good signing.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

It's a false corrolary there though, because it isn't about what 'we' should do to 'them', but rather what God will do to them. At least in the West, the State (or the Church for that matter) hasn't been responsible for meting out religious punishment for a very long time. It's not 'our' responsibility. Christians are called to love their fellow sinners.

That's true, I was trying to base my response to Gronk's quote.

It should be 'What does God say will happen to people who do X?'.

 

[hineyrulz]

I wouldn’t play unless I could wear alcohol sponsorship.

The Ballistic Brewery Aussie cricket team.