broncsgoat
International Rep
Contributor
- Oct 28, 2013
- 12,104
- 12,956
C'mon mate. It's not that hard to do the right thing and abide by some pretty simple laws.
Sure it is, it’s the holier than thou fucking attitude that’s making me angry.
C'mon mate. It's not that hard to do the right thing and abide by some pretty simple laws.
Because it didn’t involve the registered player? When it comes to personal issues such as family matters the workplace should have some understanding. I’m sure you wouldn’t want to go into work telling everyone about family dramas ect, what consequence has it had on the NRL by him not cooperating in the investigation? None.
Sure it is, it’s the holier than thou fucking attitude that’s making me angry.
It's only because you don't have the capacity to understand how HR in corporate works, because you're not in corporate.
You don’t have the capacity to understand it shouldn’t have been a hr incident in the first place.
Get a fucking cab FFS!
No, that's not right. If I am not at work, and I get up to something that may have dragged my company name through the mud, absolutely it is a HR issue. That's the problem, the more you type, the more it becomes obvious that you have never had anything to do with HR.
and I get up to something that may have dragged my company name through the mud, absolutely it is a HR issue.
The more you type, the more it sounds like you have I(heart)HR on your left buttock.
It was determined Payne didn’t do anything wrong, that’s where it should have ended.
Just because I know how HR works, doesn't mean I love HR, what a stupid thing to say in defence of you being told you are wrong.
Payne may well have done nothing illegal. It doesn't mean he hasn't violated his work contract with the NRL. That's where HR's job comes in. They then investigate their employee to make sure he has done nothing wrong by their standards, and by the terms of his contract.
By not speaking to them, he is denying his employer to do an investigation. Maybe 4 weeks is harsh, maybe he was a scapegoat, maybe it was because of the shit off-season, it doesn't matter. Refusing that interview is a big deal, and he had to be punished for it. Like I said, if he was an employee in corporate, he likely wouldn't have a job if he pulled that.
You believe that's bad but there's a post a couple further back where the poster writes "I'm not talking about players MINDERING younger players" !! I mean, it's not even a word and truthfully I don't even know what he's trying to convey with it.
What’s an adequate punishment now that he’s actually done something truly wrong?
What’s more damaging from a HR perspective? Not divulging the events around an event you were found to have no wrong doing in, or driving unlicensed on your phone.
Absolutely the driving charge. It should also be treated far more severely since it's the second incident involving him this year.
The failure is yours alone then. The purpose of the written word is to convey meaning. If the reader cannot know that which is intended then the turkey has gobbled. I didn't identify you as the gobbler.I've quite obviously over estimated your level of intelligence.
When under the influence, I operate on a higher playing field than most and when I feel a common word needs an adjustment to suit my intended purpose, I certainly don't let the mere boundaries of the Oxford dictionary stand in the way.
Eagles fly....turkeys walk.
The English language continues to evolve, we only settled on an alaphbet just over 100 years ago.I've quite obviously over estimated your level of intelligence.
When under the influence, I operate on a higher playing field than most and when I feel a common word needs an adjustment to suit my intended purpose, I certainly don't let the mere boundaries of the Oxford dictionary stand in the way.
Eagles fly....turkeys walk.