Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I disagree that calling someone a name is worthy

> of taking someone's job away from them. I think

> that everyone deserves a chance to express regret

> and to make amends, and be punished accordingly,

> like being put on warning, or losing a portion of

> one's wages, writing to express regret, making a

> donation to a charity, etc. (I can "tick a fair

> few boxes" and would not like it at all if a

> person who called me a derogatory name in the

> street had his or her job taken away for a one-off

> offence.) I would want him or her to apologise in

> writing to me and for the employer to assure me

> that punishment was given. The witch hunt aspect

> of the current discourse (going from 0 - 80) is

> evident when people demand the ultimate penalty

> available for a first offence.


I'm sorry in employment law this would be classed as gross misconduct, so it would indeed be a dismissible offence. It is not just calling someone a name it is discrimination and this can't be tolerated in any organisation, let alone in society. It is not a slap on the wrist issue. I am sure that any apology to the victims coming from this gentleman would be anything but sincere!

Can guarantee it wasn't the first time, people who feel confident in front of work colleagues and in uniform to abuse members of the public obviously feel emboldened and/or enabled by a lack of policing or negative reaction.


As someone who has been o the receiving end of this type of shit too, I'd be disappointed at a 'slap on the wrist' or an opportunity to make amends from the offender.



alice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just looking at ACAS information. Doesn?t look

> like it?s always instantly sackable.

You cannot guarantee anything without proof. I hope you never find yourself on a jury! The verbal attack was wrong and deserves punishment because it was seriously damaging to the victims' wellbeing and against society's basic principles. That does not mean that conjecture and projections instantly become true! Anyone who is interested in knowing what comes of it can ask the OP via PM, otherwise it is just fantasy. I hope they both recover and that the perpetrator is punished, which I suspect will happen.

The the original poster, I'm so sorry this happened to you. It's unacceptable ANYWHERE but is somehow worse in your own neighbourhood, where you should feel welcomed and safe.


I hope the man in question is identified and re-educated.


I also hope this doesn't stop you from behaving just as you were.


(I'm always so happy when I see people holding hands... it just makes me feel optimistic for the human race!)

How can such an overtly homophobic hate crime not be gross misconduct? There is no doubt as to what this man intended here and while in work uniform.


Galop is a very helpful charity. Their website discusses what constitutes hate crime with regards to the LGBT+ population.

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You cannot guarantee anything without proof. I hope you never find yourself on a jury!


hmmm a bit divergent from the thread but a person like siousxiesue's gut feeling is all the law has available to decide what reasonable doubt is if there are no instructions from the judge. Many convictions have some form of doubt.

I was on my bicycle on an empty street when a Veolia lorry driver tried to run me off the road full speed as a joke. Just take the scenario as true without discussion. I took the reg, wrote to Veolia and they took it seriously and followed through. Complain. I don?t want anyone fired. I want retraining and censure.

A Royal Mail driver was on his (hands on) phone at the rear of my work building a couple of years ago. I lost it, told him he should be sacked, before formally complaining. On calming down I didn't really want him sacked, and I was just as grumpy that the Royal Mail may not already be doing stuff to ensure that drivers don't do this.


Separately it is bizarre that professional drivers in logo'd vehicles misbehave themselves

malumbu Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Separately it is bizarre that professional drivers

> in logo'd vehicles misbehave themselves



This would imply they haven't been given training. SO obviously the first point, us office workers have this as a matter of course.


Are drivers possibly self employed ?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • In what way? Maybe it just felt more intelligent and considered coming directly after Question Time, which was a barely watchable bun fight.
    • Yes, all this. Totally Sephiroth. The electorate wants to see transformation overnight. That's not possible. But what is possible is leading with the right comms strategy, which isn't cutting through. As I've said before, messaging matters more now than policy, that's the only way to bring the electorate with you. And I worry that that's how Reform's going to get into power.  And the media LOVES Reform. 
    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...