I actually made the point to say they are not role models if you bothered to read my posts so not sure a lot of your post is relevant in a reply to me.
Mmm, if I read you wrong I'm sorry and I probably wasn't making points in response to you personally. That would be 'my bad'.
All good huge…I totally agree they are not role models.
After re reading your other post I wondered about the part where you say 'part of their remuneration is for sporting performance and part is for ambassadorial duties', obviously paraphrasing you here. It made me wonder about how that is presented? Like , do they say 80% of what we pay you is for your onfield efforts and the remainder is for your other 'role' ?
No, I don’t think it is as clear cut as that and of course I am only guessing as never seen a footballers contract.
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:
- the conduct, viewed objectively, is likely to cause serious damage to the relationship between the employer and the employee;
- the conduct damages the employer’s interests; or
- 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:
Sexual harassment?
- 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
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:
Another social media case:
- 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
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.
I don't dispute your reasoning! Nothing unsound here. My question though does raise a valid point I believe.
Defence force do it all the time.
Then suspend them without pay and don't fine them. That is my point.
You sound like Peter Vlandys.
I keep saying it's not unfair to suspend without pay, and everyone keeps giving me examples of being suspended or sacked. The NRL is suspending AND issuing fines over and above what the Australian courts are imposing. They are treating these players more harshly than any other industry. And I'm not buying into this contrived bullshit they're role models.
I'm not sure whether that's true (fining them), but somehow I don't think the country's national security is at stake here.
If your superiors had seen a video of you using drugs, you’d be gone, if they randomly test you (which they do) and were positive, you would be charged and fined. Then have to show cause to stay in and then be with the regimental police for at least 7 days wishing you just got out instead.
I don't think anyone has said they are role models, that's got nothing to do with the discussed issue.
It's totally true and no one is talking about national security... just an employer who fines employees on top of normal law punishments if they choose to.
this year Keenan has quickly become one of my favourites.
I also love his quip to the journo who asked him if he minded coming off the bench instead of starting. He quickly fired back "I'll peel oranges for Kevvie if i thought it would help the team". When I heard that I had a quiet chuckle as I know it's attitudes like that that form the foundations of premiership winning teams.
