I wonder how this will work out for him
Threadbanned Posters:
Hamsterchops
take everything
road_high
FixdePitchmark
gk5000
Remember the golden rule -
The Boss Might Not Be Always Right - But He's ALWAYS The Boss.
Strict adherence to this principal has served me very well over a long career in the CS.
And whether the boss was right or wrong, I always got paid at the end of the month.
My point was to draw out the clarity that any belief-based argument was doomed to failure even if it was admitted to argument.
They're fundamentalists,not for changing.
When did religion have any concern for anybody or anything that wasn't in line with their dogma?
A very naive post. The employer is perfectly entitled to set appropriate policies in the absence of any guidance from its overseeer, ie the Departmet of Education. It is unlikely to be permitted to set policies in conflict with the Department’s. It is clear also that Mr Burke was not being forced to do anything against his religious or other beliefs. It was clear that there was no need to interact with the child on a regular basis and, even if there were, an educated Christian would recognise that Grace and the tolerance of others are central aspects of such beliefs such that acting in a manner prejudicial to a vulnerable person (ie a child) requires him to act with discretion and caretaking, not like a bull in a china shop.
Why would anyone ever want to employ one of the Burke nut jobs?
Apart from their beliefs, the utter lack of respect for authority and the workplace norms they show regularly would put any employer off completely.
In the fullness of time,, guys named "Enoch" usually turn out,, to have been correct all along..
The thing is, even IF his rights were impinged, he had a process he could have followed.
The current case isn't about whether or not his rights were impinged. It's whether he acted correctly. And the fact is that whether or not his rights were impinged, he acted terribly and didn't follow correct process.
If he can convince a court that he received an order that impinged his rights in the first place then his subsequent actions might well be proved to be justifiable in protest.
You could have applied that view right from the beginning of this whole farce but the fact is he hasn't convinced a court of this. And the reason he hasn't is because his rights were never impinged upon.
Its like saying about a thief...if they can just convince the court they didnt steal anything then they will get off the hook. Great idea but the law is the law.
That's the thing. there were processes available for him to escalate his "concerns". But he went full Enoch.
There is no belief or characteristic that allows a person to act like an unhinged aggressive bullying lunatic in the workplace, particularly in a school.
Anyone trying to steer it to a debate of ones rights over another are not very subtle but above all else, wrong.
It's worth noting at the start of this Burke was too much of coward to state it was his own hate that was driving him, but he was trying to protect the rest of the pupils and their parents from forced transgenderism or whatever bollíx the loon was dribbling on about.
If he felt he was being discriminated against because of his religious beliefs there was a process open to him. He chose not to go down the route, just like he chooses to remain in prison.
Hopefully the Dept. and the Union are not able find anyone to volunteer for the next panel which means he spends years self imprisoned, filing injunction after injunction in the High Court.
So who resigned from the appeals board and why?
Enoch & Co. will drag the arse out of this as long as possible. They'll continue to object to appeal board members and generally put the brakes on this process.
It's a horrendous waste of valuable resources.
And legally no one can be forced to do anything against their beliefs
Yeah, try telling that to the huge numbers of teachers who are forced to teach a religion as fact every day even though that religion's teachings do not coincide with their own beliefs
If my employer informed me of such a scenario and I proceeded to harass them at a work event, I would be guaranteed to be out of a job. It's just not an acceptable way to address work issues.
Because he's made every effort to prevent the appeal from taking place. He's not coming out with his job at the end of this.
Believe what you want,but follow your employers policy presumably.
Most schools must have multi denominations at this stage with all the immigrants. Still we have 95% of schools with a Catholic ethos. "Opting out" means sitting in the same class and listening to whatever nonsense the religious teacher spews out.
This is something I think seems to get brushed aside but is important. What are the actual laws around catering for teachers beliefs, or the beliefs of any employee in the workplace?
Lets say my religious belief is that women should be left in the home and not out working as it used to be many moons ago, or it’s my belief that white people are superior to black people so they should be in the lower positions of the job. How is any employer supposed to deal with those beliefs? Surely “religious beliefs” have to be ignored at some stage and common decency has to win out
Disclaimer: These are not my beliefs and I’m just using extreme examples to make a point!
What belief? The child wasn't asserting their religious rights, they were transitioning.
Is there a legal obligation for schools to cater for pupils' beliefs?
School policy, don't like it,leave. If you were to cater for everyone's beliefs you'd never open the doors.
There is no legal obligation for any school to cater for teachers belief's.
It's a reasonable policy in the sense that the appeal is supposed to take a month or so, but once Burke injuncted his own appeal the Department should have tried all means to remove him from the payroll.
It's a substantial amount of public money which is paid over to a person who is going out of his way to disrupt the natural process. Whether it's going to the HC or anyone else is moot. He is still gaining from it. The Dept is double paying because they also have to pay for a replacement teacher.
Time now for the Dept. to grow a pair, because this could go on for years.
Even the amount of money that has been wasted in the HC over the past 3 years must be substantial. Not to mention what the school has had to fork out.
It's an absolute disgrace. Even this week with the HC allowing the injunction to go ahead against the remaining panel member when the panel has been disbanded. What is the actual point?
Is it any wonder we get reports like this.
Irish courts are the slowest in the EU at hearing and deciding cases, a new report has found.
The report, compiled by the Law Society of Ireland’s Centre for Justice and Law Reform, drew on national and international data to evaluate how the State’s justice institutions perform compared with other jurisdictions.
The Justice Indicators report, published on Wednesday, found that the average case disposal time of 541 days in 2020 was more than three times the European estimate of 168 days. But overall case disposition time here was cut by about 104 days between 2019 and 2024.
another way to look at it is by the end of the school year he’ll not have taught in 4 years……. The first years he had in 2021/2022 will be starting 6th year.
Its probably a reasonable policy in general. It couldn't have predicted the lengths Burke would go to in defying the law.
Because it's Department policy to continue to pay someone while an appeal is ongoing. The policy would have been agreed with the unions and signed off prior to any of this happening.
OK, taking all the comments above on board, we are, after a quick Google, just gone 3 years since he was fired, he's in jail, and rightly so, for breach of court, but he is still getting paid his wages. Docked I know now, but still on the books as his wages, so for so simple a case, how is this happening?
This is not a complex case - quote from Judge Cregan on January 22nd :
Delivering judgment for the High Court, Mr Justice Brian Cregan reiterated: “Mr Burke has been imprisoned for contempt of court — not for his religious beliefs. As I have always said, Mr Burke is free to proclaim his objections to transgenderism from the rooftops. He can claim how opposed he is to all sorts of transgender issues — outside the school grounds. But he is not allowed to trespass and he is not allowed to breach court orders. The laws of this country apply to him just as they apply to everyone else.”
He won't be allowed re-hash this over and over
Well no. He has absolutely no right to act like a deranged lunatic towards his boss. What law would that be?
If he felt his rights were being impinged there was a process there. But he has burned that bridge by further acting like a deranged lunatic.
This is a very complex case now
It really isn't.
He has been fired from his job for acting like an aggressive bully.
It's neither unique, new or anyway complex.
The disciplinary panel are not deciding on it either, as you well know.
He blew up any chance of taking the argument you want to the courts, and can never bring it again.
Yes, that was my original point. Its for the courts to decide really, not a disciplinary panel imo. If he can convince a court that he received an order that impinged his rights in the first place then his subsequent actions might well be proved to be justifiable in protest.
Basically the case has opened up a can of worms going forward as to inclusion of anyone rights legally in what they wish to be called or identify as and the rights of those that are opposed to them having to such rights.
This is a very complex case now and Burke is the jesus of the right wing on it. We are going to be listening to this debate now for a long time, regardless of the outcome of Burkes case. There's a nut job around every corner mad to step up to the plate for any of these cases going forward.
"Burke didn't have any issue at the time because his family were knee deep in Covid lunacy."
It musn't have been that important at the time, or maybe he didn't feel it was important enough to tell Mammy.
Just pointing out the legalities of the situation if it goes to court.
It's been in court for 3 years. He keeps injuncting the process because he has no interest in a final ruling.
His argument will almost certainly be that the directive him and other teachers received had no legal basis and he was entitled to stand up for his rights.
He was fired for Gross Misconduct.
He will have to argue in whatever court that it wasn't Gross Misconduct.
And legally no one can be forced to do anything against their beliefs, including his beliefs as regards sexual persuasion.
That's not true.
But again it's moot.
He wasn't fired for his beliefs.
And that situation will never, ever get to court due to him accosting his boss and getting sacked for doing that.
But that doesn't stop people who really, really, really want the problem to be anything other than Enochs behaviour towards his boss and following behaviour towards the courts from trying to drag it back in, probably 650+ times over the 650+ pages here.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
