The Richard Keys defence results in €17.5 payout

blinding · 22-10-2019 03:03PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

The problem here was the company's stupid zero tolerance policy. HR like these policies because it means they don't have to engage their brains or use their judgment. A verbal warning would've been sufficient.

HR could just have kissed and made up with the Guy . Probably fine if they were all guys .

is_that_so · 22-10-2019 03:04PM

Stevieluvsye wrote: »

Hmmm i'll reserve some judgement here as i think comes comes down to the content of their working "relationship" he could well be an absolute sleazy k!nt and the job had had enough and bypassed normal protocal

All we have is the article in the OP to go on and it does highlight the disproportionate response of the company. As it also states and as mentioned on this thread there are less severe means of dealing with it.

jam_mac_jam · 22-10-2019 03:04PM

Ficheall wrote: »

Or other social situation, according to the definition you quoted, right?

No just work. I don't think that is a crazy idea that you should be able to go to your job without getting creeped on. Maybe it is.

Yer Da sells Avon · 22-10-2019 03:05PM

blinding wrote: »

So women are too fragile for a bit of banter and are not able to cope with a bit of banter .

Maybe they just want a safe space back at home !

When they said they wanted equality was it too much to expect they could handle a bit of banter .

Women up . They just discredit genuine cases .

What a thick post, on so many levels. I know your intention is to bash women, but you unwittingly do men a disservice. Most of us have a bit of cop on and know who we can and can't engage in 'banter' with. He was in the job four days.

Stevieluvsye · 22-10-2019 03:06PM

is_that_so wrote: »

All we have is the article in the OP to go on and it does highlight the disproportionate response of the company.

I have a feeling this story has a lot more to the background than what we know of

jam_mac_jam · 22-10-2019 03:06PM

blinding wrote: »

So women are too fragile for a bit of banter and are not able to cope with a bit of banter .

Maybe they just want a safe space back at home !

When they said they wanted equality was it too much to expect they could handle a bit of banter .

Women up . They just discredit genuine cases .

Maybe just don't ask for kisses in work. What you consider "banter" may not be considered by others. So just don't. You are fragile if you don't want creeps trying it on with you. I see.

is_that_so · 22-10-2019 03:09PM

Stevieluvsye wrote: »

I have a feeling this story has a lot more to the background than what we know of

Well WRC has deemed it unfair dismissal and they didn't follow any form of procedure. Procedures are there for everyone including addressing how people behave as well as varying levels of sanctions.

Stevieluvsye · 22-10-2019 03:12PM

is_that_so wrote: »

Well WRC has deemed it unfair dismissal and they didn't follow any form of procedure. Procedures are there for everyone including addressing how people behave as are the varying levels of sanctions.

I agree, they (Company) dealt with it incorrectly and the judgement was correct

Diceicle · 22-10-2019 03:15PM

Its certainly possible that the complailant was dressed in a workplace-inappropriate or sexually suggestive clothing - which may have given off the wrong message. Leave the high-heels, low-cut blouses and make-up at home, ladies.

namloc1980 · 22-10-2019 03:16PM

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

What a thick post, on so many levels. I know your intention is to bash women, but you unwittingly do men a disservice. Most of us have a bit of cop on and know who we can and can't engage in 'banter' with. He was in the job four days.

Three years according to the article, but had been working with the complainant for just 4 days.

Stevieluvsye · 22-10-2019 03:17PM

Diceicle wrote: »

Its certainly possible that the complailant was dressed in a workplace-inappropriate or sexually suggestive clothing - which may have given off the wrong message. Leave the high-heels, low-cut blouses and make-up at home, ladies.

Speculation

It's certainly possible she was dressed in a wooly jumper, jeans and wellies

jam_mac_jam · 22-10-2019 03:18PM

Diceicle wrote: »

Its certainly possible that the complailant was dressed in a workplace-inappropriate or sexually suggestive clothing - which may have given off the wrong message. Leave the high-heels, low-cut blouses and make-up at home, ladies.

Jesus Christ.

Yer Da sells Avon · 22-10-2019 03:20PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

Three years according to the article, but had been working with the complainant for just 4 days.

They'd worked together for just four days. In that situation, I think most of us wouldn't dream of behaving like that.

blinding · 22-10-2019 03:20PM

The ladies can’t cut it in the work place . Time off for periods , time off for the menopause , can’t handle a bit of banter , when the going gets tough / heavy , let the men do it . Long hours ; let the men do it . Work far from home ; let the men do it .

Women have found the work place much harder than they thought it was and find every and any exuse to do a runner to their safe place at home watching Good Morning TV and the Like .

Give it up Ladies most of ye would be much happier at home with yer’e feet up .

blinding · 22-10-2019 03:21PM

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

They'd worked together for just four days. In that situation, I think most of us wouldn't dream of behaving like that.

For all we know she may have been pouting at him for 4 days .

Yer Da sells Avon · 22-10-2019 03:22PM

Diceicle wrote: »

Its certainly possible that the complailant was dressed in a workplace-inappropriate or sexually suggestive clothing - which may have given off the wrong message. Leave the high-heels, low-cut blouses and make-up at home, ladies.

blinding wrote: »

The ladies can’t cut it in the work place . Time off for periods , time off for the menopause , can’t handle a bit of banter , when the going gets tough / heavy , let the men do it . Long hours ; let the men do it . Work far from home ; let the men do it .

Women have found the work place much harder than they thought it was and find every and very exude to do a runner to their safe place at home watching Good Morning TV and the Like .

Give it up Ladies most of ye would be much happier at home with yer’e feet up .

It's like you're trying to compete with each other for who can make the thickest post.

It's a draw.

jam_mac_jam · 22-10-2019 03:24PM

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

It's like you're trying to compete with each other for who can make the thickest post.

It's a draw.

Yep. I'm out, what is even the point.

namloc1980 · 22-10-2019 03:24PM

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

They'd worked together for just four days. In that situation, I think most of us wouldn't dream of behaving like that.

Absolutely, doesn't change the fact the company lost the unfair dismissal hearing.

Peatys · 22-10-2019 03:25PM

D3V!L wrote: »

I believe my track record here will further re-enforce my previous statement your honour.

Overruled.

Brock Turnpike · 22-10-2019 04:01PM

To be perfectly honest, he sounds like the worst type of Dublin fan. Why does he think that him going out to celebrate Dublin winning 4-in-a-row deserves a kiss?

Ficheall · 22-10-2019 04:05PM

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Ficheall wrote: »

Or other social situation, according to the definition you quoted, right?

No just work. I don't think that is a crazy idea that you should be able to go to your job without getting creeped on. Maybe it is.

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Definition -
behaviour characterized by the making of unwelcome and inappropriate sexual remarks or physical advances in a workplace or other professional or social situation.

Doesn't sound like just work to me, tbh.

Diceicle · 22-10-2019 04:11PM

blinding wrote: »

The ladies can’t cut it in the work place . Time off for periods , time off for the menopause , can’t handle a bit of banter , when the going gets tough / heavy , let the men do it . Long hours ; let the men do it . Work far from home ; let the men do it .

Women have found the work place much harder than they thought it was and find every and any exuse to do a runner to their safe place at home watching Good Morning TV and the Like .

Give it up Ladies most of ye would be much happier at home with yer’e feet up .

But you can bet your life they'll want the same pay but not the same hours. Total bourgeois feminism.
This kind of action does the ladies no favours in the workplace.
More Wo-moaning from the anti-banter brigade.

Stevieluvsye · 22-10-2019 04:13PM

Diceicle wrote: »

But you can bet your life they'll want the same pay but not the same hours. Total bourgeois feminism.

You must be on the wind up?

jam_mac_jam · 22-10-2019 04:22PM

Ficheall wrote: »

Doesn't sound like just work to me, tbh.

Write to google and ask them to change it so.
You asked I clarified. I am talking about work. That's what the thread is about. If you have to pick apart people's argument word by word then maybe your point is invalid.

Typing really slowly here... I.. am.... talking... about... work..

blinding · 22-10-2019 04:32PM

Women have found the work place much more difficult that they realised . They do everything and anything to be away home with their feet up . Yer man said that , yer man did this .

Sure look at Meghan Markle . One of the most cosseted people in the world but because herself and Harry are feminists they can whinge and moan ad nauseum . Women and Feminism in the work place will not end well .

Ficheall · 22-10-2019 04:43PM

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Write to google and ask them to change it so.
You asked I clarified. I am talking about work. That's what the thread is about. If you have to pick apart people's argument word by word then maybe your point is invalid.

Typing really slowly here... I.. am.... talking... about... work..

Instead of typing your response slowly, you could perhaps spend the time thinking before writing it.

The definition you provided to back up your point would class the same action in a social situation as harassment - your posts suggests that you would disagree that it would be (I think?).

So when someone asks for a kiss in a social situation and is accused of harassment, citing your definition, would you agree that it was harassment?
Or would you say that the definition was imperfect at best? In which case, perhaps you would like find a definition of harassment to cite that actually agrees with the intricacies of your own personal view?

Yer Da sells Avon · 22-10-2019 04:51PM

Ficheall wrote: »

So when someone asks for a kiss in a social situation and is accused of harassment, citing your definition, would you agree that it was harassment?

He had already asked her to go to the cinema with him and she declined. In light of that, subsequently asking her for a kiss was harassment. On the lower end of the scale, certainly, and the company handled it wrongly, but it was still harassment.

jam_mac_jam · 22-10-2019 04:52PM

Ficheall wrote: »

Instead of typing your response slowly, you could perhaps spend the time thinking before writing it.

The definition you provided to back up your point would class the same action in a social situation as harassment - your posts suggests that you would disagree that it would be (I think?).

So when someone asks for a kiss in a social situation and is accused of harassment, citing your definition, would you agree that it was harassment?
Or would you say that the definition was imperfect at best? In which case, perhaps you would like find a definition of harassment to cite that actually agrees with the intricacies of your own personal view?

Going around in circles here. I have explained twice already that I am discussing a work situation, if you don't understand that point or you wish to continue going off on tangents that's fine.

Ficheall · 22-10-2019 04:58PM

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Going around in circles here. I have explained twice already that I am discussing a work situation, if you don't understand that point or you wish to continue going off on tangents that's fine.

Just one circle, and just one tangent - ergo one point

(maths joke, forgive me):

Do you agree with the definition you provided, or don't you?

mcmoustache · 22-10-2019 05:28PM

is_that_so wrote: »

Well WRC has deemed it unfair dismissal and they didn't follow any form of procedure. Procedures are there for everyone including addressing how people behave as well as varying levels of sanctions.

In unfair dismissal cases, this part is key. There were so many ways for the company to avoid this.

The Richard Keys defence results in €17.5 payout

Comments