Off Topic CHELSEA SUPPORTING LAWYER DISMISSED AFTER LIVERPOOL RANT

OK. Tell me about the derogatory term, Wools. Used by scousers to refer to people who live in the surrounding areas of Liverpool who apparently wish they were scousers. (I doubt that).

Would you be happy if someone lost their job over use of that derogatory word? And strangely enough, you didn't seem all that bothered when someone related to your club used a racial slur.

Weird eh?

 

Companies have every right to protect their own brand image though.

A senior executive of a business for example, who makes a glib and seemingly inane comment can have massive repercussions. Remember Gerald Ratner?

In this case the law firm obviously felt that the fact that the national media had got hold of this guys rant, and could reflect on them badly, so they canned him and broke the association with their brand.

It comes with the territory, you're being naive here imo.

 

Are you actually comparing a race to a nickname for people in a city?

Really?

Ffs, next you'll be claiming you scousers are up their with the Jews for the most persecuted people in history.

 

Nope. There is no law against viewing publicly available info (as youve proved). There is however no system forcing anyone to make their darkest thoughts globally public. Its choices and personal responsibility.

There are laws against surveliance by private companies or how they access such information. This case has not undermined one current law.

The guy was careless, thoughtless and arrogant. He learned a painful lesson. Is it harsh? Yes. But he's not some illiterate gobshite ffs. He's a qualified solicitor who has clearly been using multiformat media...every single one of them has a settings button....

Should have created a not606 account and vented instead!

 

He had a camera shoved in his face moments after the game. I can show you a few examples of what happens when high profile figures are asked, on camera to give their reaction moments after a game../

Common sense would have had his boss taking him aside and discussing the incident. Followed by a warning, public apology and everyone gets on with it. Instead his boss made a YouTube video.... This says a lot about the firm and his boss. Theyve used this to try and spin some good PR. Unfortunately looking at the various stories in the papers, this has backfired for the firm.

 

Do you know what a race is?

So apparently you can call people 'scum' just as long as they're not black?

 

Maybe I am being naive but it is still wrong.

And it has reflected badly on them. Because they have sacked him. Not because of what he's said.

 

It wasn't just that recording though was it. He made repeated (and worse comments) on twitter and facebook before and after that match. Hard to use "heat of the moment" in that light.

For all you know if the recording had of been all there was when his employers looked they could have defended him (while warning him to be smarter) but after seeing the rest and knowing it would all be put up in the media they could hardly do that could they?

 

Yes I know what race is. You don't. As you're demonstrating here.

 

His boss made a YouTube video to announce they had sacked him. Can you really not see what's in front of you. The firm tried to use this to raise their profile and look like the good guys.

Its backfired on them. Because most people are talking about he pathetic they are. The comments in the echo are quite funny, most seem more offended by the fact the firm thought they were offended by anything the chav said.

 

You are either fishing or seriously off your barnet, the feller that got sacked said we were inbred(I reckon you know what that means), he also said we were clones of the worst *****phile this country has ever known.

As for trying to pin racism on me, did II refer to the united player in a racial way on here ever?, nah you know I never.
If you wanna play the guilt by association game you support and defend a dirty scumbag that just happens to be the assistant manager over at OT blah blah blah.

You are overly offended that the man was sacked UIR, have you emailed his former employers yet to demand his reinstatement?

Maybe if you do your blood pressure will go back to normal.

 

The company's American, so using the NYT I'd say was about right. They're hardly going to say as part of their company policy 'don't say anything you wouldn't want appearing on the front page of the Evening Standard'.

'The line' as you say, is firmly written into employment contracts. If you don't like the terms, don't sign up for them. Simple. He broke his terms of employment, what's hard to grasp about that?

 

Here's another one that went OTT online.

"The owners of Blackpool Football Club have each won £20,000 in damages after they were defamed by a fan on a website.

Owen and Karl Oyston sued supporter David Ragozzino over posts on a message board on Another View From the Tower.

The posts included "lurid allegations of a sexual nature" and allegations of "fraudulent and corrupt behaviour", a High Court hearing was told.

Judge Stephen Davies ruled the claims were of a "defamatory nature"

 

He said you were inbred? Bless. Are you? Why are you offended?

I'm not sure if you noticed but Saville and the good people of Liverpool, kind of had a similar fashion sense. Not the brightest thing to say but I dont think he was calling all older scousers *****philes. But you knew that anyway, your weak attempt at fishing by pretending to be outraged can been seen through with ease, Page.

I'm not offended he was sacked either, its about more than just the chav fan.

Ironically the firm has probably done more damage for the City of Liverpool than the guy they have sacked. They're offended on your behalf.... Think about that one.

 

Have a snickers.

 

That little snippet doesn't explain anything. It doesn't detail punishments or what's acceptable. Are American companies allowed to include such flimsy terms of employment? Then again, his boss made a YouTube video to announce the sacking. Sums up the law firm.

 

Sorry pal. Can't take you seriously at all after your scouse and black people comment <OK>

 

You ain't got an igloo UIR, his bosses were offended by what he said and sacked him, we had no part in his sacking.

What are you looking for an apology?, aa petition to get his job back maybe?

And it's strange that you know exactly what he meant with his Saville comparison, but whether you're right or it was something more sinister his bosses clearly weren't happy with it.

 

I'm guessing that was what he was referring to. The shell suit stereotype is one of the most famous aimed at Liverpudlians after all.

And his bosses were offended. On your frigging behalf. Are you not slightly concerned that some posh idiots are deciding what does and doesn't offend you? I mean I would be pretty offended that someone thought I or my entire city were a bunch of sensitive souls.

 

No worries, I can't take you seriously since you think it's ok to to aim insults at certain people and not others.

You stay classy though.

 

On my behalf.

I must admit my first thought was I wish he had the plums to say it face to face to someone from this neck of the woods instead of being a ****bag but nah, I never wanted him sacked but he hung himself out to dry because he thought he'd get away with it.