Off Topic CHELSEA SUPPORTING LAWYER DISMISSED AFTER LIVERPOOL RANT

Nah. Its just wrong.

 

Sorry I actually didn't pay much attention to the details. Did his employer sack him because they snooped on his social media and found the crap and that made it media worthy or did they sack him because it all hit national media and they reviewed in light of that fact? I thought it was the latter.

Big difference between the two.

As for your beef. Its the modern world. Putting something on social media with open privacy settings equates to shouting it in a shopping mall. You know very few of the people listening to you and how they will react. Unlike shouting however its relatively permanent. Its a judgement call. Is what you have to say worth the risk of offending. In this case the guy wasnt calling for equal rights or to save the Scouse honey badger, he was having an immature bigoted rant attacking an entire city (2 big football clubs remember) with bigoted stereotypes. It showed piss poor judgement and no self control: two things you expect a competant solicitor to have as minimum.

Thats the definition of PR UIR: you try not to anger the mouthiest in society as a company to get as much work as possible...

 

Never use your real name on social media.

 

He had a camera shoved in his face right after a game.

How is he a bigot? I seriously doubt he despises Liverpool the city despite his silly rants. Its almost certain all his bile relates to one side of Liverpool, the red half. Most people have little issue with Everton fans but will use the term scouse to refer to Liverpool fans.

After that they certainly did go snooping as they also reported he wrote stuff on his Facebook and then linked him to an anonymous blog...

It was a football fan reacting like millions of others to a poor result. Have you seen the reactions on here? You do know an employer could, by rights request your IP address and actually find out who any poster is on here? Regardless of being anonymous or using usernames as we do. Its that easy I managed to do it myself a few years ago with that pathetic bellend you had on here.

So those of you who have ever said manc scum, which is quite a few of you, might want to go back through your history and remove them, just incase

What a load of ****

 

Sadly this is true. Because you don't actually have to do anything wrong. Just make an online enemy.

 

If he was a Police Commissioner would you say the same mate?

A man of his standing was a cock for doing what he did. You can argue that the punishment doesn't fit the crime and that there may well have been ulterior motives at play, but it doesn't alter the simple fact that he was a prize cock for putting himself in that situation.

 

I would yes. Unless he was doing it on his work accounts. His own accounts then no.

It would be wrong to say its right for some and not for others. I'm not disagreeing with anyone that he's a cock but the fact a man, ****er or not, has lost his job over some petty football rubbish, is just wrong.

Whether he was a cleaner at McDonalds, a top lawyer, top copper or the PM, it would be wrong.

 

He's a bigot because he used generalised sterotypes about an entire city when attacking a specific set of fans. To his employer it doesn't matter if he meant it. He said it. Its a decision on his lack of judgement and self control more than the detail of what he said.

You're sidestepping. His employers didn't go snooping, they didn't go IP adress hunting. They reacted to one of their employees being splashed across the news and investigated whether it was true by reviewing his social media where it was claimed he said it. Which he did.

I highly doubt unless he had told them his not606 user name would they have searched for him here and even if he did unless he used his real name and posted his place of work would it be suitable grounds for dismissal...unlike facebook and twitter. And they do not have the right to access any IP adress other than their own unless youve have agreed to use IT equipment owned by them at home on your personal broadband. Its why companys like to keep these things very separate so no confusion over usage developes.

Interesting though that you admit to taking part in the actions you criticise so strongly. I'm very sure that very few others if any (other than mods) went to such lengths to identify another user.....

So Im sure most on here, if theyve used such stereotypes in such a derrogatory way are quite safe from their employers. Maybe not safe from you of course lol...

 

If you were given an IP address of another poster on here then the site owner is out of order. The website is covered by data protection act - only the police can be given IP addresses - unless you're telling us you hacked it.

You spectacularly miss the point that nobody on here cares what he said, it's all about his job and the fact a lawyer working for a firm who actually have a social media department that advises clients on misuse of social media, can't be seen to protect one of their own for ......... misusing social media. Did you not see the quote I put up from their policy saying say nothing online that you wouldn't want to see on the front cover of the NYT. He gave them no choice. I bet they're even sorry they had to sack him but were backed into a corner.

As for the red half of Liverpool comments, do you think we all 'crawl into our horrible Merseyside home' while the blues all live in the lap of luxury in the alternate universe Merseyside? If he wanted to insult us there's more than enough football related ammunition [after all it's just about football, right] without it getting personal

 

The guy in question spent his days mocking death. If I were you I would cease from defending him pretty sharpish if I were you

Had this chav done something similar, then his sacking would have been fair. He didn't. Not even close.

 

I know nothing about the poster in question (you introduced them only as an example of your own dubious actions without expanding on your reasons why) and as such I have said nothing to defend or criticise the posters actions. As far as I am aware this board has policies that dictate what can and can not be posted with consequences if they are breached; with voluntary mods and site owners to enforce and to take complaints to.

As JB said however, if you obtained that information from anyone running this site that would be outside of the conditions of use and have very real data protection repercussions.

Its irrelevant anyway. You used it as example of what employers can do to us and you were completely and utterly wrong....unless my employer breached data protection laws like you did: but in their case any action they took against me based on that information would be reversed by an employment tribunal.

 

I think you're just arguing for the sake of it now. If a contract of employment includes a social media clause ie using it responsibly, and you don't use it responsibly - whether that was comments about football, asylum seekers or the 'scum' who work in your local bread shop - you broke the contract and with it your terms of employment, it's really that simple. Whether you agree with it or not, whether I agree with it or not - he broke his terms of employment.

 

Personal? Are you insane? How in the hell is it personal, its about as impersonal as you could get. It was a throway insult from a Chelsea fan after a defeat and his other comments are a very poor attempt at banter. He is a Chelsea fan after all so doesn't know what banter so like all chavs, throws silly stuff about.


I noticed the quote you put up. Is it a big seller on Merseyside, the New York Times? Its a bit flimsy don't you think?

Where is the line? When employers can decide what's offensive we are all in trouble. We have laws that state what is and isn't acceptable. Scouse scum isn't covered by those laws. It would be ridiculous of it was and make a farce of all discrimination laws. Though thats been in underway for years.

 

The chap was KPR. It was pretty easy when he posted the same stuff everywhere. I just searched one of his comments (Munich related) and up he popped.

And are you that naive that employers are not exploiting this to easily and freely get rid of employers. Its making this very easy for employers. All of the steps in place to protect us, the employee's are thrown out the window. Hence the frigging advice from the UK government.

And the data protection act does very little to protect information available online. Freely or not. It didn't stop the people who leaked the BNP membership list, nor does it prevent the numerous trials by social media. Its not great really.

 

This is just stupidly naive. You seemed to believe this kind of action by employers only started in the internet age. It's been happening since year dot. In fact people used to get sacked for hanging with the wrong people or going to the wrong church or getting drunk in public once too often or sleeping around a little to publicly.

Its actually during the IT age that most of the laws protecting employees from indiscriminate firing came about.

The fact you keep viewing him as a football fan rather than an employee in his very public outbursts is where you are going wrong.

You didnt expand by the way. Did you obtain the stalky info from someone in site or did you use some other illegal method?

Being easy to do doesn't make it right. So far the company in question didn't do anything illegal. They did the internet equivelant of wandering into the pub where theyd heard their employee was on a psychotic rant....

Edit: youve since explained how you got the info so ignore my question.

 

Just because something is written down and passed off as terms or conditions, doesn't mean they are right. Companies know they have a brilliant loop hole here that gives them the opportunity to easily remove employees. Without following any of the legal steps required.

Regardless of your own views on this person, that is wrong. Regardless of how you try and defend the employer.

Anyway, I should be defending the employer and you the employee, according to our political preferences.... Oh ****, that's generalising.... Sacked.

 

There's a rather large inquest going on in Warrington at the moment and a lot of statements from those in authority (mainly the police from the top down) on the day used stereotypical bullshit as an excuse not to do their job properly when if they hadn't had preconceived ideas about people from Liverpool they might have prevented the terrible events that happened that day.

The feller who was sacked was being a bigoted smartarse and his company decided he had to go end of, a few months ago a scumbag from Nottingham who happened to be a fireman used the same kind of ****e on his twitter account and got ****ed off for it(as far as I know)when he mocked the sister of someone who died at Hillsborough.


The line must be drawn somewhere and if employers of trolls and bigots decide to get rid of the vermin you've come to the wrong place to whinge on their behalf.
We as a club and as supporters of it had no say on whether your man was sacked.

 

So he called scousers scum? No big deal.

Let's call black people scum. Or any other race in that matter.

Is that acceptable?

 

I used google

And wait, people were sacked for who they associated with? What the actual ****. Do you not see what is wrong with that at all? Does that make it right? When people were excluded from certain jobs or positions for all kinds of reasons, was that right? It damn sure wasn't illegal at the time so it was fine, right?

I dont think so.

And yes, these laws to protect employees are relatively new but they are being undermined by things like this.

 

Again you've proved the point with your example. A person being so careless and stupid with their online behaviour they are that easily identifiable. Lack of judgement. More damning than the content itself.

You seem to be deliberately blurring the line between what employers can do legally and illegally. If you a)don't post anything that can be seen as damaging to their rep or b) set your privacy settings to not allow public viewing. Its the same as me saying something to a friend in the house over a beer and saying it loudly in the street. Then your employer can not touch you. If they optain the info illegally you are protected by law.

If you are careless and don't take any of those precautiond then you are too stupid and incompetent to be in employment.