Dublin Bus ordered to pay passenger €7,500 over alleged homophobic slurs...

ohnonotgmail · 22-01-2021 3:38pm

Skyfloater wrote: »

What were Dublin Bus or Starbucks for that matter, supposed to do here though? The implication is that every front line employee should be literally shadowed by a supervisor whose sole task is to make sure that the FLE doesn't offend anyone. Is that what you are implying Peruginus(sic)?

They are responsible for the actions of their staff.

nullzero · 22-01-2021 3:41pm

Hurrache wrote: »

Well you certainly can't deny accusations made against you if you don't turn up to do so, something any right minded individual would do if falsely accused of anything.

You actually think they haven't been given training already in this? Jesus, when I worked one of this jobs 25 years ago, and I wouldn't have called it 'frontline', I even knew not to do something as stupid as in either of these cases, and there was customer service training then.

If you get food poisoning in a restaurant, or buy gone off food in a store, responsibility to the customer doesn't fall on the shoulders of the person that served you the food, or that left the food on the shelf when they shouldn't have, it's lays on the business.

In this case the accusations were denied, but the incidents obviously weren't recorded correctly.

The case involving Starbucks included an accusation of racist remarks made by the plaintiffs boyfriend that weren't recorded correctly.
When you worked in a similar role 25 years ago, how many court cases did you end up involved in?

This route of compensation via the WRC is looking likely to become a playground for all sorts of chances going forward.

Do you think the WRC paying out thousands of Euros to an endless line of plaintiffs is something that can sustained?

nullzero · 22-01-2021 3:43pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

The bus driver didnt turn up to give evidence. If evidence is only presented from one side what is the WRC to do?

He didn't turn up because it was his word against a carefully drafted statement crafted by a legal team.

He would have been crucified under cross examination.

The whole thing seems ripe for exploitation right now.

Hurrache · 22-01-2021 3:45pm

nullzero wrote: »

In this case the accusations were denied, but the incidents obviously weren't recorded correctly.

The case involving Starbucks included an accusation of racist remarks made by the plaintiffs boyfriend that weren't recorded correctly.
When you worked in a similar role 25 years ago, how many court cases did you end up involved in?

This route of compensation via the WRC is looking likely to become a playground for all sorts of chances going forward.

Do you think the WRC paying out thousands of Euros to an endless line of plaintiffs is something that can sustained?

Very little, not so much these days I suppose, gets recorded prior to going before a normal court of law, that's why you have courts to make decisions as to what actually happened based on testimony and witness statements.

I was involved as a witness in one case that ended up heading towards the labour court before being dropped by the employee. Everything that happens in a place of employment doesn't get recorded unless there's an obvious issue. You think the bus driver was going to record himself abusing a passenger, or the Starbucks employee going to make an incident report that he drew a slanty eyed figure as a way to identify a customer?

The business pays out, not the state.

nullzero wrote: »

He didn't turn up because it was his word against a carefully drafted statement crafted by a legal team.

He would have been crucified under cross examination.

The whole thing seems ripe for exploitation right now.

It's pretty much impossible to fire a Dublin Bus employee, they'll always have a union rep who've been through such situations numerous occasions and there's always an excuse or well worn path how to handle such cases.

Nothing in this process has changed, things are no more ripe now than they have for the last few decades. You abuse a customer while representing your employer, the repercussions have always been there.

ohnonotgmail · 22-01-2021 3:48pm

nullzero wrote: »

He didn't turn up because it was his word against a carefully drafted statement crafted by a legal team.

He would have been crucified under cross examination.

The whole thing seems ripe for exploitation right now.

If you turn up and appear honest then weight will be given to what you say. If you don't turn up at all then no weight can be given to anything you say. That means the claims made by the other side will be accepted as fact.

weldoninhio · 22-01-2021 3:52pm

fantaiscool wrote: »

If you are having a dispute with someone who is gay, you make your points as well as you can and explain your position. If you think he is actively paying the wrong fare, you have the ability to ensure that he pays the correct fare before you drive the bus. You do not resort to homophobic slurs. Once you resort to that, all gloves are off and I'm happy to hear that the gay individual was able to stand up for himself and get a result.

Mods, could you please ban fantaiscool due to calling me numerous homophobic names. I’ve no evidence, only my word, but s/he seems perfectly happy that this is enough evidence to blame someone and indeed get compensation.

Is that how this works??

nullzero · 22-01-2021 3:53pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

If you turn up and appear honest then weight will be given to what you say. If you don't turn up at all then no weight can be given to anything you say. That means the claims made by the other side will be accepted as fact.

I would go out on a limb and say that the company resigned themselves to writing of the money. Taking a driver off duty to go and fight a losing battle didn't make any sense.

ohnonotgmail · 22-01-2021 3:57pm

nullzero wrote: »

I would go out on a limb and say that the company resigned themselves to writing of the money. Taking a driver off duty to go and fight a losing battle didn't make any sense.

if by going out on a limb you mean just make something up then that is a possibility. One of many possibilities for why the driver didn't turn up.

ohnonotgmail · 22-01-2021 3:59pm

weldoninhio wrote: »

Mods, could you please ban fantaiscool due to calling me numerous homophobic names. I’ve no evidence, only my word, but s/he seems perfectly happy that this is enough evidence to blame someone and indeed get compensation.

Is that how this works??

It isn't. Fantaiscool would give his own evidence that he has not done what you say and whoever is is judging things would decide who is telling the truth.

Gatling · 22-01-2021 4:01pm

The world is really going mad ,

Repeatedly doesn't pay his fair and gets a reward for their efforts .

It's like the place is turning into a giant feedback thread,

Someone stop the bus

nullzero · 22-01-2021 4:03pm

Hurrache wrote: »

Very little, not so much these days I suppose, gets recorded prior to going before a normal court of law, that's why you have courts to make decisions as to what actually happened based on testimony and witness statements.

I was involved as a witness in one case that ended up heading towards the labour court before being dropped by the employee. Everything that happens in a place of employment doesn't get recorded unless there's an obvious issue. You think the bus driver was going to record himself abusing a passenger, or the Starbucks employee going to make an incident report that he drew a slanty eyed figure as a way to identify a customer?

The business pays out, not the state.

It's pretty much impossible to fire a Dublin Bus employee, they'll always have a union rep who've been through such situations numerous occasions and there's always an excuse or well worn path how to handle such cases.

Nothing in this process has changed, things are no more ripe now than they have for the last few decades. You abuse a customer while representing your employer, the repercussions have always been there.

I have been in court where claims have been taken and seen plaintiffs torn apart by defendants who had their affairs in order.

Any time an incident which could potentially end up in court occurs detailed reports should be taken by all parties involved. When you get to court this pays dividends.

You drew poor comparisons above (you assumed the driver was abusive to the passenger and then wondered why the driver would record himself being abusive instead of understanding that the driver should have ensured he could not be accused incorrectly by recording the incident correctly)

As for the Starbucks case, there was an accusation that the plaintiffs boyfriend used racial slurs against the black Brazilian woman who drew the "slanty eyes" which was not properly recorded by her supervisor.

In the Starbucks case we had a plaintiff who didn't want to go to court but the case was pursued by her boyfriends family. In that case the staff member did something stupid and should have been reprimanded but we ended up with a 12 k payout for a stupid but minor incident where there is a good chance her boyfriend ended up being the most racist person involved in the incident.

The Dublin bus incident was one person's word against another's. Lack of preparedness for this type of eventuality lead to the payout without question.

nullzero · 22-01-2021 4:06pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

if by going out on a limb you mean just make something up then that is a possibility. One of many possibilities for why the driver didn't turn up.

Neither of us know for sure but you feel free to take the moral high ground by all means.

LillySV · 22-01-2021 4:08pm

nullzero wrote: »

I would go out on a limb and say that the company resigned themselves to writing of the money. Taking a driver off duty to go and fight a losing battle didn't make any sense.

Friend working with bus eireann told me before that they pay out for everything , they never fight accusations or claims, something that sickens him as he has seen many made up accidents and cases where the other driver was wrong , they had evidence to prove so, yet still paid out! I think the prob is that in many cases it cheaper to pay out than pay for legal fight

Hurrache · 22-01-2021 4:13pm

weldoninhio wrote: »

Mods, could you please ban fantaiscool due to calling me numerous homophobic names. I’ve no evidence, only my word, but s/he seems perfectly happy that this is enough evidence to blame someone and indeed get compensation.

Is that how this works??

Gatling wrote: »

Repeatedly doesn't pay his fair and gets a reward for their efforts .

You've a basic misunderstanding of what's a very simple concept. You think you'd even google it before looking foolish.

ebbsy · 22-01-2021 4:17pm

JasonStatham wrote: »

They should make the bus touch on touch off. Card only.

Good point. I was in Norway, they do not accept cash on public transport.

Problem is would some of the gob****es in this country be able to grasp this concept.

Gatling · 22-01-2021 4:22pm

Hurrache wrote: »

You think you'd even google it before .

Maybe read it first .

The problem was a clash over the complainant repeatedly not paying their fare..

Imagine that don't pay your far but as long as you claim you have been called a slur you get a big reward ,

Strange but true

ohnonotgmail · 22-01-2021 4:25pm

Gatling wrote: »

Maybe read it first .

The problem was a clash over the complainant repeatedly not paying their fare..

Imagine that don't pay your far but as long as you claim you have been called a slur you get a big reward ,

Strange but true

No the problem was the driver allegedly user homophobic slurs. No evidence was offered that he didn't so the WRC found in favour of the passenger.

Gatling · 22-01-2021 4:28pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

No the problem was the driver allegedly user homophobic slurs. No evidence was offered that he didn't

Exactly .

Gatling · 22-01-2021 4:34pm

Now this sheds some interesting light on the story.

How would the driver know he was gay in the first place and why they didn't wait on the outcomes of the criminal complaint made by the driver before ordering a payout

Dublin Bus denied that those terms were used and told the hearing that the bus driver has made a formal complaint to gardaí concerning the passenger’s behaviour and is awaiting the outcome of that complaint.

Dublin Bus said the passenger has 75,000 followers on his Instagram account and one of the videos posted online was of the driver finishing his shift at Talbot Street while the passenger stands on the pavement, shouts commentary about the driver to passers-by and intending passengers.

Dublin Bus said the driver felt threatened by the passenger videoing of him and went on sick leave for three months.

https://www.independent.ie/news/dublin-bus-ordered-to-pay-gay-passenger-7500-after-driver-alleged-to-have-made-homophobic-slurs-39996072.html

Stephen Gawking · 22-01-2021 4:36pm

I note the driver had been out on sick leave due to being filmed & repeatedly harassment by the 'victim,' the complainant obviously couldn't wait to upload it to instagram to demonstrate how wounded he was. Perhaps as a result the driver didn't want to attend the WRC? Not saying it didn't happen as i wasn't there but this is simply ludicrous. Lots of companies simply pay out as its cheaper than retaining counsel & fighting the claim in court.

degsie · 22-01-2021 4:38pm

Obviously two dickheads involved in this story.

Hurrache · 22-01-2021 4:40pm

Gatling wrote: »

Maybe read it first .

The problem was a clash over the complainant repeatedly not paying their fare..

Imagine that don't pay your far but as long as you claim you have been called a slur you get a big reward ,

Strange but true

Doesn't matter what the clash was about.

The thing that triggered the case and the pay out was what the driver, who didn't turn up to deny it, called the passenger.

Gatling · 22-01-2021 4:47pm

Hurrache wrote: »

Doesn't matter what the clash was about.

The thing that triggered the case and the pay out was what the driver

And the so called victim is blameless ,that's wrong

ohnonotgmail · 22-01-2021 4:50pm

Gatling wrote: »

Now this sheds some interesting light on the story.

How would the driver know he was gay in the first place and why they didn't wait on the outcomes of the criminal complaint made by the driver before ordering a payout

Dublin Bus denied that those terms were used and told the hearing that the bus driver has made a formal complaint to gardaí concerning the passenger’s behaviour and is awaiting the outcome of that complaint.

Dublin Bus said the passenger has 75,000 followers on his Instagram account and one of the videos posted online was of the driver finishing his shift at Talbot Street while the passenger stands on the pavement, shouts commentary about the driver to passers-by and intending passengers.

Dublin Bus said the driver felt threatened by the passenger videoing of him and went on sick leave for three months.

https://www.independent.ie/news/dublin-bus-ordered-to-pay-gay-passenger-7500-after-driver-alleged-to-have-made-homophobic-slurs-39996072.html

That is all in the OP.

WrenBoy · 22-01-2021 4:57pm

ebbsy wrote: »

Good point. I was in Norway, they do not accept cash on public transport.

Problem is would some of the gob****es in this country be able to grasp this concept.

Problem is some people go to Dublin for a day or a weekend and wouldn't have the cards (leap cards Im assuming) People leave the car at the hotel and get the bus in and out. Not many places have bus services outside the cities and major towns.

Hurrache · 22-01-2021 4:58pm

Gatling wrote: »

And the so called victim is blameless ,that's wrong

Isn't there still something pending, so not necessarily so.

Either way, it's irrelevant to how the driver acted. Allegedly there's 2 adults involved here, but both seemed to have acted like kids and the results are obvious for all to see. It's a poor reflection on anyone that reacts in a homophobic way, particularly when the issue is around bus fares. The driver has a radio, have an inspector meet you and let them deal with it, it's their job afterall.

SineadSpears · 22-01-2021 5:07pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

No the problem was the driver allegedly user homophobic slurs. No evidence was offered that he didn't so the WRC found in favour of the passenger.

Was there evidence of the passanger being called any of those names?

Normal One · 22-01-2021 5:18pm

Seems to me that a lot of people think the WRC is a court, it's not.

Gatling · 22-01-2021 5:23pm

SineadSpears wrote: »

Was there evidence of the passanger being called any of those names?

None apparently not even on their social media accounts , seems you can rant and rave about what someone said about you on social media and have zero evidence and the real victim gets abused in return.
Imagine that only doing your job

ohnonotgmail · 22-01-2021 5:29pm

SineadSpears wrote: »

Was there evidence of the passanger being called any of those names?

yes, from the passengers testimony.

Dublin Bus ordered to pay passenger €7,500 over alleged homophobic slurs...

Comments