NEWS Reece Walsh sells his soul to Warriors. No big deal.

[1910]

What other employer fines their employees for such a contrived reason? The notion that a player taking cocaine makes the sport look bad is utter nonsense. The player looks how he looks, not his employer.

If you post a picture of your testicles dangling over a Big Mac on Instagram, are you going to get fined by your employer McDonalds for bringing their delicous range of fast food into "disrepute?" Or is the worst thing that could happen is you'd get a warning?

This "bringing the game into disrepute" chestnut is a load of hairy pie.

Didn’t Australia Post fire their CEO for how her actions looked to the public?

 

[ivanhungryjak]

What other employer fines their employees for such a contrived reason? The notion that a player taking cocaine makes the sport look bad is utter nonsense. The player looks how he looks, not his employer.

If you post a picture of your testicles dangling over a Big Mac on Instagram, are you going to get fined by your employer McDonalds for bringing their delicous range of fast food into "disrepute?" Or is the worst thing that could happen is you'd get a warning?

This "bringing the game into disrepute" chestnut is a load of hairy pie.

I wonder what would happen if a cop posted that crap on their Facebook?

 

[broncos4life]

What other employer fines their employees for such a contrived reason? The notion that a player taking cocaine makes the sport look bad is utter nonsense. The player looks how he looks, not his employer.

If you post a picture of your testicles dangling over a Big Mac on Instagram, are you going to get fined by your employer McDonalds for bringing their delicous range of fast food into "disrepute?" Or is the worst thing that could happen is you'd get a warning?

This "bringing the game into disrepute" chestnut is a load of hairy pie.

Hang on, are you suggesting that if you worked at Maccas and on your identifiable Instagram you posted your testicles over a burger you wouldn’t get fired? Either you are taking the piss or you do not live/work in the real world.

 

[lynx000]

What other employer fines their employees for such a contrived reason? The notion that a player taking cocaine makes the sport look bad is utter nonsense. The player looks how he looks, not his employer.

If you post a picture of your testicles dangling over a Big Mac on Instagram, are you going to get fined by your employer McDonalds for bringing their delicous range of fast food into "disrepute?" Or is the worst thing that could happen is you'd get a warning?

This "bringing the game into disrepute" chestnut is a load of hairy pie.

Mate you are off base here.

You can be disciplined and even have your employment terminated (subject to the circumstances) for conduct occurring outside the workplace.


Following from the seminal decision in Rose v Telstra, we know that there must be a relevant connection between the out of hours conduct in question and the employment relationship. In summary, it must be shown that:

1. the conduct, viewed objectively, is likely to cause serious damage to the relationship between the employer and the employee;
2. the conduct damages the employer’s interests; or
3. the conduct is incompatible with the employee’s duty as an employee.

Social media content?

An employee who sent explicit private messages on Facebook Messenger to 20 of his Facebook friends (19 of them being colleagues) was validly dismissed, for the following reasons:

• several employees had complained about the message
• the employee had been dishonest and uncooperative
• the nexus was established as those who had received the message would not have been Facebook friends with the employee were it not for his employment

Sexual harassment?

In Applicant v Employer, an employee attending training at a hotel groped a waitress at that hotel after work hours. His dismissal was valid for the following reasons:

• his stay at the hotel was organised and paid for by the employer
• he was only in the bar as a result of his employment relationship with the company
• he was drinking with work colleagues, and was to be working the following day
• he had previously been given a warning for his misconduct
• the incident had the potential to damage the employer’s reputation
• the fact that he wasn’t in his normal work location did not discharge him from the responsibility to behave in a way consistent with the conditions of his employment

Another social media case:
A senior commonwealth public servant sacked for posting anonymous criticism of the government on social media:

'A loss for all of us': Public servant loses landmark free speech High Court case

A former public servant at the centre of a free speech case loses her High Court fight, after it was found her tweets breached the public service code of conduct.

www.abc.net.au

You might also remember that the NRL introduced the stand down policy in respect of serious criminal charges that have to date all related to conduct out of work hours. The NRL was able to present evidence to the Federal Court of its interest suffering significant potential damage by a number of sponsors threatening to walk away from the game.

So if you can be legitimately sacked for out of hours conduct, why can't you be fined as part of a disciplinary penalty?

I can find you a heap more examples if you want them.

 

[Foordy]

What other employer fines their employees for such a contrived reason? The notion that a player taking cocaine makes the sport look bad is utter nonsense. The player looks how he looks, not his employer.

If you post a picture of your testicles dangling over a Big Mac on Instagram, are you going to get fined by your employer McDonalds for bringing their delicous range of fast food into "disrepute?" Or is the worst thing that could happen is you'd get a warning?

This "bringing the game into disrepute" chestnut is a load of hairy pie.

Your right other employers don't fine their employees for similar behaviour ... THEY BOOT THEM STRAIGHT OUT THE DOOR AND INTO THE DOLE QUEUE

 

[Huge]

What justifies the NRL fining players for these types of misdemeanors is the fact that poor behavior from players that finds its way into the public eye can affect the whole operation. It is detrimental to the competition's image, which affects the competition's ability and clubs' abilities to attract and keep sponsorships etc etc etc.

If enough damage was done to the NRL's image through more and more off field incidents involving serious offences by players, eventually players wouldn't be getting six and seven figure earnings through the game.

Except it doesn't happen and has never happened. Most u derstand it's not 'the game' doing it but just the odd individual. Just like in every other field. It's just expected, it's normal, commonplace in every slice of our society. The outrage is 99% fake and I know that sponsors will keep lining up. Why? Well, it's for all the reasons outlined plus it's great business. Nobody is thinking about Matt Lodges assault when the games on or any other of the thousands of past indiscretions.

 

[McHunt]

You’d get sacked

But not fined.

What other company pays its employees as much as these guys? As has already been explained to you, why do they get paid so much? Because they are public figures and therefore have a responsibility to live up to certain standards.

Employees on similar salaries as these blokes are all at executive levels, do you think executive level staff would be laughed off if they did something like this and bought disrepute upon the company they are effectively the face of? It is about brand image and if they don't want to agree to this as part of their role than they should also not agree to getting hundreds of thousands / millions of dollars.

Rate of pay is irrelevant.

I wonder what would happen if a cop posted that crap on their Facebook?

No idea but people post all kinds of shit online and seem to hold jobs.

Hang on, are you suggesting that if you worked at Maccas and on your identifiable Instagram you posted your testicles over a burger you wouldn’t get fired? Either you are taking the piss or you do not live/work in the real world.

You might get a warning. Maybe they could sack you but you wouldn’t be fined.

Mate you are off base here.

You can be disciplined and even have your employment terminated (subject to the circumstances) for conduct occurring outside the workplace.


Following from the seminal decision in Rose v Telstra, we know that there must be a relevant connection between the out of hours conduct in question and the employment relationship. In summary, it must be shown that:

1. the conduct, viewed objectively, is likely to cause serious damage to the relationship between the employer and the employee;
2. the conduct damages the employer’s interests; or
3. the conduct is incompatible with the employee’s duty as an employee.

Social media content?

An employee who sent explicit private messages on Facebook Messenger to 20 of his Facebook friends (19 of them being colleagues) was validly dismissed, for the following reasons:

• several employees had complained about the message
• the employee had been dishonest and uncooperative
• the nexus was established as those who had received the message would not have been Facebook friends with the employee were it not for his employment

Sexual harassment?

In Applicant v Employer, an employee attending training at a hotel groped a waitress at that hotel after work hours. His dismissal was valid for the following reasons:

• his stay at the hotel was organised and paid for by the employer
• he was only in the bar as a result of his employment relationship with the company
• he was drinking with work colleagues, and was to be working the following day
• he had previously been given a warning for his misconduct
• the incident had the potential to damage the employer’s reputation
• the fact that he wasn’t in his normal work location did not discharge him from the responsibility to behave in a way consistent with the conditions of his employment

Another social media case:
A senior commonwealth public servant sacked for posting anonymous criticism of the government on social media:

'A loss for all of us': Public servant loses landmark free speech High Court case

A former public servant at the centre of a free speech case loses her High Court fight, after it was found her tweets breached the public service code of conduct.

www.abc.net.au

You might also remember that the NRL introduced the stand down policy in respect of serious criminal charges that have to date all related to conduct out of work hours. The NRL was able to present evidence to the Federal Court of its interest suffering significant potential damage by a number of sponsors threatening to walk away from the game.

So if you can be legitimately sacked for out of hours conduct, why can't you be fined as part of a disciplinary penalty?

I can find you a heap more examples if you want them.

So what other employer fines its employees? Do they consider themselves above the law?

Your right other employers don't fine their employees for similar behaviour ... THEY BOOT THEM STRAIGHT OUT THE DOOR AND INTO THE DOLE QUEUE

This is my point. Who the **** are they to issue fines?

 

[lynx000]

But not fined.



Rate of pay is irrelevant.

No idea but people post all kinds of shit online and seem to hold jobs.

You might get a warning. Maybe they could sack you but you wouldn’t be fined.



So what other employer fines its employees? Do they consider themselves above the law?

This is my point. Who the **** are they to issue fines?

I don't know why you find this so difficult to understand. There is provision in the player's contract for them to be fined. It is something they and the RLPA have agreed to. So one party exercising a contractual power agreed to between the parties in the manner contemplated in the agreement cannot be 'above the law'.

 

[Culhwch]

I think what he's saying is they should have been sacked.

 

[McHunt]

I don't know why you find this so difficult to understand. There is provision in the player's contract for them to be fined. It is something they and the RLPA have agreed to. So one party exercising a contractual power agreed to between the parties in the manner contemplated in the agreement cannot be 'above the law'.

I think what he's saying is they should have been sacked.

I'm not saying they should be sacked for what they do on their holidays that has nothing to do with their on field performance. But I'd understand if the club inserted a loophole into the contract allowing them the option to weasel out if the player winds up in pokey: say they king hit a bouncer in Bali or something.

I'm only commenting on the fines they issue. In my opinion - and what the **** would I know - the most logical form of virtue signalling penance they should serve is a suspension without pay. Fining them on top has no basis in any other employment contract anyone here can name. But being suspended with or without pay does.

Alternatively, the club could put them in stocks so fans could throw handfuls of shit at them, rather than do the online equivalent in forums like this.

The off season reminds me of a succession of witch trials. It's bringing the fans into disrepute.

 

[BroncsFan]

I'm not saying they should be sacked for what they do on their holidays that has nothing to do with their on field performance. But I'd understand if the club inserted a loophole into the contract allowing them the option to weasel out if the player winds up in pokey: say they king hit a bouncer in Bali or something.

I'm only commenting on the fines they issue. In my opinion - and what the **** would I know - the most logical form of virtue signalling penance they should serve is a suspension without pay. Fining them on top has no basis in any other employment contract anyone here can name. But being suspended with or without pay does.

Alternatively, the club could put them in stocks so fans could throw handfuls of shit at them, rather than do the online equivalent in forums like this.

The off season reminds me of a succession of witch trials. It's bringing the fans into disrepute.

The only thing I would suggest as to why they dont do that, because it would make sense to suspend without pay... in fact any suspension could be a suspension without pay if they really wanted to deter foul play... but they may not do this because of how the salary cap is set up??

I believe the salary cap is measured on an accumulation over the year ie. how much salary you pay the players each month.... this was brought up when TPJ's $100k contract with Panthers didnt stack up against his yearly contract of $600k.

So if you suspend without pay it can start to stuff around with how the salary cap is set up.

But anyway several other professional sporting competitions utilise fines if the players stuff up (NBA, NFL, etc.)... it's just common place in that industry

 

[McHunt]

The only thing I would suggest as to why they dont do that, because it would make sense to suspend without pay... in fact any suspension could be a suspension without pay if they really wanted to deter foul play... but they may not do this because of how the salary cap is set up??

I believe the salary cap is measured on an accumulation over the year ie. how much salary you pay the players each month.... this was brought up when TPJ's $100k contract with Panthers didnt stack up against his yearly contract of $600k.

So if you suspend without pay it can start to stuff around with how the salary cap is set up.

But anyway several other professional sporting competitions utilise fines if the players stuff up (NBA, NFL, etc.)... it's just common place in that industry

Yes, I'm aware other sports organizations do it. I honestly don't know how the players have let this creep into their contracts. I don't think you should ever fine an employee unless it's to recoup some kind of damages.

 

[Culhwch]

Yes, I'm aware other sports organizations do it. I honestly don't know how the players have let this creep into their contracts. I don't think you should ever fine an employee unless it's to recoup some kind of damages.

With the price of jerseys these days, it'd only take, what, a dozen or so parents to hesitate over buying their kid a Storm jersey for Christmas and boom, there's your $100 000 in damages.

 

[Financeguy]

Yes, I'm aware other sports organizations do it. I honestly don't know how the players have let this creep into their contracts. I don't think you should ever fine an employee unless it's to recoup some kind of damages.

Think of it this way...part of their pay is to perform on field, part of their pay is being an ambassador of the club. This doesn't mean role model or having to help old ladies cross the street. It means that as part of their employment they are meant to uphold the brand of the club they are at.

The position that Munster and Smith put themselves in was not being a good ambassador for the Melbourne Storm. Doesn't really matter what % of the population consider it 'just a couple of guys letting off steam in the offseason'. This instance made national headlines in a negative light on the Storm. For that they are entitled to reduce or punish that part of the contract that involves being an ambassador of the club.

It doesn't relate to the average punter putting some dodgy shit on facebook as they are generally not remunerated to be a promoter of their employees brand, or if they are, no one gives a shit what they put on facebook so it has no influence.

Many players take advantage of this opportunity they get by doing charity work or promoting their club and turn it into a career after footy or increasing their personal brand for more sponsorship opportunities.

 

[McHunt]

With the price of jerseys these days, it'd only take, what, a dozen or so parents to hesitate over buying their kid a Storm jersey for Christmas and boom, there's your $100 000 in damages.

I was thinking more along the lines of when you break the photocopier glass trying to scan your arsecrack. Who can honestly say, etc...

part of their pay is being an ambassador of the club.

But is it really? Not sure I'm buying into that. No one has yet come up with another employer outside sport that routinely fines its employees.

 

[Culhwch]

But is it really? Not sure I'm buying into that. No one has yet come up with another employer outside sport that routinely fines its employees.

In all fairness, I don't think anyone cares that there isn't. The majority seem to agree that the fines are warranted under the conditions of this specific type of employment, regardless of what you think.

That's the great thing about the world. People can disagree, and in the end it doesn't matter because we'll all be dead someday and no one will be left to care.

 

[Sproj]

In all fairness, I don't think anyone cares that there isn't. The majority seem to agree that the fines are warranted under the conditions of this specific type of employment, regardless of what you think.

That's the great thing about the world. People can disagree, and in the end it doesn't matter because we'll all be dead someday and no one will be left to care.

And for many of us who are still kicking, we just don't care anyway, it is just fun to discuss something stupid.

 

[Financeguy]

But is it really? Not sure I'm buying into that. No one has yet come up with another employer outside sport that routinely fines its employees.

No one has to. Surely you admit that a professional sportsperson who represents a team is a unique occupation? Its already been established that other sports treat their employees the same way.

Do you ever see players kitted out in club gear visiting a hospital, going to a sponsored dinner, being interviewed on tv, attending a school clinic, turning up to a corporate engagement? Do you think during these times the player can do, say and act in whatever manner they please or do they have to follow guidelines set by the club?

If you think the modern day team based athlete is only paid to turn up to training and game day you are mistaken. It's not unreasonable that part of their pay is to comply with the above and should they not, they lose that part of their salary.