Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Premier League' started by The Prime Minister, Jan 8, 2017.
You’re 10 stone and a few steps away from being as radicalised as Saxxy.
A summary of the last few pages...the BBC is a crazed lying leftie organisation because it doesn’t exclusively give air time to folk who want a hard Brexit.
Brexit has turned some of its followers utterly batshit mental!
Some employment positions would be subject to having a clean criminal record. This would normally apply to vulnerable people, kids and the elderly and could also apply to data access positions (such as call centres) if the crime was of a nature that applied to your trade ie financial sector. Also a lot of employers now implement social media contracts, so if he spoke about it on social media and his account shows he is a SKY worker, that could be deemed as bringing the company name into it. On face value he would have grounds for appeal, but i would expect SKY to have dotted all the i's and cross all the t's.
If you commit a crime then you put your job at risk if you’re an employee.
Solution = don’t commit a crime.
The guy by her side was a big help......Did Hillary suffer similar when she was over worked and overpaid
I was a bit shocked that the guy didn't break protocol and assist her - one moment when she flinched there she was ready to keel over. I know no one would want to dent her pride, but fook it she clearly needed help. Very uncomfortable viewing.
Or don’t get caught
What did they find?
The video doesn't tell you anything about the european parliament apart from that lots of people on mainland europe drive german cars
Will you stop talking sense, you deranged leftie.
Not sure I completely agree with that Stan, dependent on the nature of the crime. In this case I would judge it as a protest. I watched a documentary on Russia, where a woman lossed her job for holding a one person peaceful protest ie no milkshakes involved. The authroities contacted her employer that she was holding a protest and she was sacked. I'm just suggesting we need to be really careful where we go with this sort of stuff as it was a minor offence and effectively the guy has been punished twice, once by the courts and then by his employer.
He could have protested without covering the **** in milkshake. It was funny but he shouldn't really be surprised that there's been a knock on effect.
The funniest protests against the **** Farage have been orchestrated by the Led By Donkeys group. Nothing they do is illegal and I suspect Farage dreads one of their posters turning up more than a guy with a milkshake.
This was genius
Do you agree?
Oh ffs surely by know you would realise the bbc plays both left and rights strings a merry tune, miss informing is key to a confused society .......if you want real journalism and impartial opinions then look elsewhere.
i agree, I'm not defending the guy on throwing the milkshake, I just feel it's a bit harsh to punish the guy twice. Maybe courts should take this into consideration before handing down penalties. As long has the guy didn't access data from his employer, I'm sure he would have good grounds for appeal, would love to see the noted reason for dismissal. Unless the sentence 'frustrates' the employment contract ie he cannot fulfil his duties. I'm thinking there must be other grounds for dismissal other than the milkshake.
I don't think his position ie and unknown person - would fall into the below categories;
Whether the employee is able to carry out their work after the misconduct; Yes he can
The relevancy of the conduct to the workplace; the risk to their reputation; Negligible
Possible collapse of the relationship the employee has with their colleagues and clients; Only if he has upset snowflakes
Any steps they could take to allow the employee to remain in their employment without jeopardising their business; I don't see this as an issue
Reminds me of the poxy journey over to AFC Wimbledon last season