Religion Folau

Opine

Premium Gold
Aug 30, 2018
3,037
5,658
AFL Club
Carlton
Just as I expected Opine, words elude you mate.
If you have anything to give to this conversation, now is the appropriate time?
What do you really want CC?
Are you wanting me to engage you on the validity, or otherwise, of theistic belief? If so, there is another thread specifically dedicated to that.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

shellyg

Spec Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
6,906
10,013
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I'm unconvinced they're not the same from a free speech perspective (switch religion for code) but looking forward to seeing how the saga with RA is resolved.

Australian Catholic University vice-chancellor Greg Craven said the Folau cases were “quite different”.

“If you’re a person employed at a Catholic school and in contact with students, one of the objects of providing such an education is to be consistent with the religion,” Professor Craven said. “It is impossible to do this if you are telling students everything they are taught is complete rubbish — it’s about mission alignment.”

 

shellyg

Spec Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
6,906
10,013
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Most people know it as Voltaire which reminds me of the time one of my kids was suspended from high school for "exercising her right to free speech!" as if there should be no consequence. It was her second "big mouth" suspension and my fight with the principal not to expel her was almost exhausted I so I sent her away to her grandparents on the farm for two weeks of quiet time and general labor helping out. No TV, just a big library of books a piano and classical music.

She came back with Voltaire and drove me nuts with that line. But she gets it now she's earning six figures and understands the social media clause in her contract.
 

The Passenger

Mr. Mojo Risin'
Mar 25, 2003
30,531
17,252
Hasa Diga Eebowai
AFL Club
West Coast
She came back with Voltaire and drove me nuts with that line.
Which is not actually something Voltaire ever wrote or said.

As an aside we currently have a case where Danny Lim was arrested and is in court over carrying signs. That's far more serious than someone losing their job. Haven't heard much from the zealots in the quest for free speech which is interesting. :think:
 

shellyg

Spec Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
6,906
10,013
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Which is not actually something Voltaire ever wrote or said.

As an aside we currently have a case where Danny Lim was arrested and is in court over carrying signs. That's far more serious than someone losing their job. Haven't heard much from the zealots in the quest for free speech which is interesting. :think:
She had a book, she quoted it but I didn't go through it to check accuracy or even if it was in English ok? And I still don't care to hunt the thing down. :p
 

Sainteric

Club Legend
Aug 5, 2016
2,710
1,467
AFL Club
St Kilda
I think the high court's decision is very interesting today. A public servant, taking government coin criticised the government anonymously and continuously on twitter. She was found out and sacked. What she did was against the public service act which is pretty specific on this. She screamed free speech and won till she got to the high court. I won't go in detail but the high court said it was reasonable to sack her because her employer made repeated and concerted efforts to rectify it, the Public Service act trumps many freedoms and directly criticising her employers was constant and ongoing.

RA are screwed.
 

Sainteric

Club Legend
Aug 5, 2016
2,710
1,467
AFL Club
St Kilda
Most people know it as Voltaire which reminds me of the time one of my kids was suspended from high school for "exercising her right to free speech!" as if there should be no consequence. It was her second "big mouth" suspension and my fight with the principal not to expel her was almost exhausted I so I sent her away to her grandparents on the farm for two weeks of quiet time and general labor helping out. No TV, just a big library of books a piano and classical music.

She came back with Voltaire and drove me nuts with that line. But she gets it now she's earning six figures and understands the social media clause in her contract.
I still don't think she does
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
18,499
6,173
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1

Interesting take by a prominent legal mind.

Josh Borstein:

One of the striking features of the culture war that erupted after Folau took to Facebook to condemn many of us to hell is the repeated appeals to the sanctity of the employment contract.

Progressives who prioritise human rights over commercial contracts have, in many cases, done an about-face. "But he breached his contract!" they chorus.

Conservatives, who cheer on the sacking of employees who express views they disapprove of, have a new-found respect for freedom of expression and anti-discrimination legislation.
 

Opine

Premium Gold
Aug 30, 2018
3,037
5,658
AFL Club
Carlton
She's adulting. Not only can she comprehend her employment contract, she understands pointy opinions that may tend to undermine or damage an employer's brand can also have a detrimental affect on everybody else that works there.
Perhaps it's a pity that she has. I think the notion that adulting need/should, by default, amount to the surrender of an employee's own personal brand, in favour of that of her employer's, is symbolic of the not so distant employer/employee master and servant relationship. Australia has thus far resisted, but in the UK the implied right of mutual trust and confidence has been found to exist in various employer/employee cases. Hopefully, in the not to distant future, adulting will give way to more progressive thinking.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

TheWoodenSlug

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 24, 2008
5,670
10,971
AFL Club
Geelong
Which is not actually something Voltaire ever wrote or said.

As an aside we currently have a case where Danny Lim was arrested and is in court over carrying signs. That's far more serious than someone losing their job. Haven't heard much from the zealots in the quest for free speech which is interesting. :think:
A $500 fine isn't that serious is it? I'd rather that than to lose my job.

Not that I agree with the fine mind you.

ABC Article said:
But the court heard the arrest was triggered by a single complaint from a woman who was walking to work at Barangaroo and called a nearby police station.

When asked how offended she was, she replied: "As a woman, I found this word highly offensive."

Pfft, harden the fu** up cvn't!

 

Chief

Admin
Dec 1, 1999
76,422
46,140
Brisbane
AFL Club
Carlton
A $500 fine isn't that serious is it? I'd rather that than to lose my job.

Not that I agree with the fine mind you.




Pfft, harden the fu** up cvn't!

An interesting part of that article was the language the police were using to Mr Lim and to other people in the street who criticised them.
 

shellyg

Spec Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
6,906
10,013
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Perhaps it's a pity that she has. I think the notion that adulting need/should, by default, amount to the surrender of an employee's own personal brand, in favour of that of her employer's, is symbolic of the not so distant employer/employee master and servant relationship. Australia has thus far resisted, but in the UK the implied right of mutual trust and confidence has been found to exist in various employer/employee cases. Hopefully, in the not to distant future, adulting will give way to more progressive thinking.
How did you get to the idea she doesn't have her own brand or her own opinion on the information you have? It's hilarious in consideration of what she does when she isn't at her full time government job which includes guest radio that has nothing to do with her 'day job'.

If she wanted to take a whistleblower status in relation to her job, she'd have my full support but until then I'm impressed she's found self discipline and has my full support in conducting herself within the terms of her employment contract.

Are you sure you're a lawyer? :huh:
 

Opine

Premium Gold
Aug 30, 2018
3,037
5,658
AFL Club
Carlton
How did you get to the idea she doesn't have her own brand or her own opinion on the information you have? It's hilarious in consideration of what she does when she isn't at her full time government job which includes guest radio that has nothing to do with her 'day job'.

If she wanted to take a whistleblower status in relation to her job, she'd have my full support but until then I'm impressed she's found self discipline and has my full support in conducting herself within the terms of her employment contract.

Are you sure you're a lawyer? :huh:
The point in my post clearly went over your head. It was meant as a compliment to your daughter and her generation, at the expense of your, and perhaps my, generation. Delve a little deeper into the possible implications of that emerging implied right I mentioned above and you might understand what I was saying. Perhaps my mistake is assuming that you have studied law. We are after all, just footy fans on a footy site; no more and no less.
 

shellyg

Spec Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
6,906
10,013
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
The point in my post clearly went over your head. It was meant as a compliment to your daughter and her generation, at the expense of your, and perhaps my, generation. Delve a little deeper into the possible implications of that emerging implied right I mentioned above and you might understand what I was saying. Perhaps my mistake is assuming that you have studied law. We are after all, just footy fans on a footy site; no more and no less.
Nah, I don't think so although we might be on a slightly different plane and I can respect that if tending to prefer plain speak being of the mind that if a person can't explain simply, they generally may not understand well enough.

I've never claimed to be a lawyer but I have enough study and experience to understand when anybody talks about 'implied' anything be it freedom of speech or mutual trust and confidence, it's abstract. We have to live in realities.
 

Opine

Premium Gold
Aug 30, 2018
3,037
5,658
AFL Club
Carlton
Nah, I don't think so although we might be on a slightly different plane and I can respect that if tending to prefer plain speak being of the mind that if a person can't explain simply, they generally may not understand well enough.

I've never claimed to be a lawyer but I have enough study and experience to understand when anybody talks about 'implied' anything be it freedom of speech or mutual trust and confidence, it's abstract. We have to live in realities.
Shall I explain?
 

Opine

Premium Gold
Aug 30, 2018
3,037
5,658
AFL Club
Carlton
Yes, please do if you have the time :)
As abstract as implied rights may be, they form an integral mechanism of our legislative framework; not everything is, nor can be, codified. At its pinnacle, Australians have only one entrenched freedom which, arguably, cannot be removed by lawmakers, but even that is implied; i.e the implied freedom of political expression. It's implied because it's inferable from the very structure of our constitution; our democracy won't function if our ability to express our political views is removed. Other than that, every other right and obligation is posited; and can be diminished in the same way. So when we talk of an implied right, it's a right that, although not expressly stated, may nonetheless be inferred as necessary to facilitate the exercise of some other right or power.

Although now an instrument of contract law, an employment relationship operates in a similar way; in that binding terms need adhere to, for lack of a better expression, a constitutional hierarchy of rights and powers emanating from applicable laws; whether expressed or implied. This is why, the existence of expressed rights and obligations found in work place legislation are accompanied by range of implied duties of employer and employee.

Until relatively recently, the relationship between employer and employee took the form of employer as master and employee as servant; there was a time where an employee was subject to imprisonment for leaving his/her employment. As repugnant as that might seem, there are some persisting features of the master servant relationship in modern employment arrangements; eg employers power to exercise authority over an employee, and the idea that workplace conduct rules can be incorporated by reference as implied terms. Some have referred to the latter in the current public debate concerning the subject of this thread, in support of employer rights; while others have attempted to infer the scope of right of religious expression from the implication that comes from other legislative instruments, in support of employee rights.

The implied duty of mutual trust and confidence, which has received judicial recognition, outside of Australia, is said to derive from the notion that the employment contract is not merely about economic exchanges; but rather reflects broader public concerns relating to equity and fairness. It has been opined that if broadly applied it could potentially rebalance the interests of employer and employee. I regard this as progressive thinking, and believe that proceeding generations will continue to explore and pursue its potential application.
 
Last edited:

shellyg

Spec Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
6,906
10,013
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
As abstract as implied rights may be, they form an integral mechanism of our legislative framework; not everything is, nor can be, codified.
At its pinnacle, Australians have only one entrenched right which, arguably, cannot be removed by lawmakers, but even that is implied; i.e the implied right of freedom of political expression. It's implied because it's inferable from the very structure of our constitution; our democracy won't function if our ability to express our political views is removed. Other than that, every other right and obligation is posited; and can be diminished in the same way. So when we talk of an implied right, it's a right that, although not expressly stated, may nonetheless be inferred as necessary to facilitate the exercise of some other right or power.

Although now an instrument of contract law, an employment relationship operates in a similar way; in that binding terms need adhere to, for lack of a better expression, a constitutional hierarchy of rights and powers emanating from applicable laws; whether expressed or implied. This is why, the existence of expressed rights and obligations found in work place legislation is accompanied by range of implied rights for employer and employee.

Until relatively recently, the relationship between employer and employee took the form of employer as master and employee as servant; there was a time where an employee was subject to imprisonment for leaving his/her employment. As repugnant as that might seem, there are some persisting features of the master servant relationship in modern employment arrangements; eg employers power to exercise authority over an employee, and the idea that workplace conduct rules can be incorporated by reference as implied terms. Some have referred to the latter in the current public debate concerning the subject of this thread, in support of employer rights; while others have attempted to infer the scope of right of religious expression from the implication that comes from other legislative instruments, in support of employee rights.

The implied duty of mutual trust and confidence, which has received judicial recognition, outside of Australia, is said to derive from the notion that the employment contract is not merely about economic exchanges; but rather reflects broader public concerns relating to equity and fairness. It has been opined that if broadly applied it could potentially rebalance the interests of employer and employee. I regard this as progressive thinking, and believe that proceeding generations will continue to explore and pursue its potential application.

Thanks for that.

We're in a bit of a mess unfortunately and we have to just put up with it all until the issues of employer/employee rights predominantly over social media inevitably end up before the High Court and we see decisions which brings me to yesterday where after seven years through the courts, Michaela Berjiklan operating over twitter as @LaLegale lost her case over her termination. The High Court ruled her conduct breached the Public Service Code of Conduct and it trumped her 'implied freedom of political communication'. That doesn't mean she's locked out of engagement and participation.

Are you familiar with this case and her history? If so, would you agree with the High Court ruling?
 

shellyg

Spec Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
6,906
10,013
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
The implied duty of mutual trust and confidence, which has received judicial recognition, outside of Australia, is said to derive from the notion that the employment contract is not merely about economic exchanges; but rather reflects broader public concerns relating to equity and fairness. It has been opined that if broadly applied it could potentially rebalance the interests of employer and employee. I regard this as progressive thinking, and believe that proceeding generations will continue to explore and pursue its potential application.
I didn't intend to ignore this paragraph, we've quite a way to go before getting anywhere near that though imo.
 

Opine

Premium Gold
Aug 30, 2018
3,037
5,658
AFL Club
Carlton
Thanks for that.

We're in a bit of a mess unfortunately and we have to just put up with it all until the issues of employer/employee rights predominantly over social media inevitably end up before the High Court and we see decisions which brings me to yesterday where after seven years through the courts, Michaela Berjiklan operating over twitter as @LaLegale lost her case over her termination. The High Court ruled her conduct breached the Public Service Code of Conduct and it trumped her 'implied freedom of political communication'. That doesn't mean she's locked out of engagement and participation.

Are you familiar with this case and her history? If so, would you agree with the High Court ruling?
I wasn't familiar with it, until I saw a reference to it posted in here, and your question earlier. But I have just read it; albeit quickly.

I think I agree with HC's finding, that it is reasonable to impose some restrictions on freedom of political expression; if that restriction applies to political officers charged with the responsibility of ensuring that an apolitical system exists, and providing there are other mechanisms in place capable of serving as a check on political power. After-all, the ability of private individuals to express their political views rests, to some degree, on the ability of government to provide relevant and accurate information, efficiently, to its community; This enables greater participation of political expression on the whole.

She arguably isn't locked out because she participates in promoting greater overall political expression, but I think her personal engagement is effected; at least to the extent deemed necessary to facilitate the greater democratic benefit.

There has been differing opinions on whether the notion of proportionality, in which the court looks behind a statute to establish whether underlying circumstances are such that the exercise of a political power is proportionate, should be justiciable; separation of powers often used as argument against proportionality. However, the court has exercised such power over a long period of time, so it clearly exists; the Communist Party Case being a prime example of this. if it didn't have the power to exercise proportionally then the question of whether termination of employment was a proportionality appropriate response would arguably not have been relevant.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom