Scandal Lethlean and Simkiss office affairs sex scandal

[hawkgal02]

Why "(understandably)"? You think the moral judgements of one's co workers should be relevant? Perhaps they should be more professional themselves and judge people solely on their ability to do their work?
Or am I missing your point?

Would you be happy with someone having an affair with a senior person in your workplace?
I think these people would assume that they are not going to be treated fairly.
It's also not a good look when some of the people involved are married and have children. Yes it's none of their business who their coworkers sleep with. But if it's creating a perception of inequality in the workplace and stopping them from feeling comfortable at work, they have every right to complain.

 

[Silver Tongue]

Tell me who has more to lose and you will get the answer to who was manipulating who.

So in a predominantly patriarchal western world and a patriatchal organisation like the AFL, based on your theory, women are to blame for the multitude of affairs that take place everyday?

We might agree to disagree on that point.

I prefer the French attitude myself ...

 

[15yearmember]

Would you be happy with someone having an affair with a senior person in your workplace?
I think these people would assume that they are not going to be treated fairly.
It's also not a good look when some of the people involved are married and have children. Yes it's none of their business who their coworkers sleep with. But if it's creating a perception of inequality in the workplace and stopping them from feeling comfortable at work, they have every right to complain.

Lots of things create perceptions of inequality in the work place and lots of lower level staff think are being treated unfairly as a result.

That doesn't mean their innermost insecurities are valid

I agree that it wouldn't help. But in Lethleans case the issue wasn't as you describe. The other party left the AFL employee almost a year ago and was only a part time employee in the Auskick area based in Sydney. Lethlean also held a different job back then.

If people in Melbourne were upset about that this week then I suspect it's based on the moral aspect. Which is none of their ******* business. I mean I am and have been a senior Exec. I hold all sorts of personal views that may be at odds with my fellow execs and them me. Similarly I think many of the lower level staff have all sorts of "off field" issues. These aren't my concern unless they impact work in a meaningful way. If the women (you specifically mentioned women in the AFL office) had an issue doing their jobs because Lethlean had cheated on his wife then, frankly, they are the ones who need counselling. If it's past tense and/or she doesn't work there anymore, I'd need something a bit more concrete then their offended morality

And in answer to your question, it depends on the circumstances. I think blanket views that all such relationships should be met by sackings are wrong. See the QBE story quoted in here and/or the other thread.

 

[Black Panther]

The afl Xmas parties must be entertaining

 

[Nostalgia]

no doubt she went to a very expensive private school

would apply to both employees surely.

looks like she knows how to look after herself

she appears to be from Sydney

Well your quotes are a mixture of fact and opinion.

I know the lawyer ( the 30 year old) went to an expensive private school.
The statement that the policy should surely apply to the males and females is a factual statement of sensible, conventional corporate governance which takes account of any exculpating factors in a person's case.

The other two are opinions based on intuition and life experience.

I maintain that you original criticism was excessive and unwarranted.

 

[Nostalgia]

Mind reading failure on your part. I joined to participate on Demons game day, but I saw so much bullshit posted in this thread I couldn't help but posting.

Your statement of work place policy is largely correct. However, this case has the additional and unusual feature of media speculation and colourful reporting prior to the AFL addressing the issue without any apparent regard to the significant collateral damage caused to spouses, children and members of extended families. There is also a veneer of middle class moralising which is, of its very nature, vomitous and obnoxious.

 

[SBYM]

Someone Cliff Note me...

Is there an AFL policy in place prohibiting said behaviour?

 

[Mr Stokes]

Soft soft soft! Gil has lost me on this one, pandering to extremist polical correctness views and sensationalist muck raking media. It has me fearfull for what the AFL will look like once he has finished his tenure. Where was the AFL's outrage after Ali Fahours coward punch which was a true discrace. He was all but silent on that one for a week.
I think they have set a dangerous precedent here which crosses the boundary of private life vs work place performance and conduct. Is the whole corporate world now to be held to this standard? There will be a hell of a lot of high level jobs opening up accross every industry if this is the case. I might update my CV. The media now will go sniffing around the garbage and social media platforms (which is where they get most of their news from now) looking for the next person to take down along with going back through history to see what they can dig up from the past.

 

[15yearmember]

Someone Cliff Note me...

Is there an AFL policy in place prohibiting said behaviour?

It seems not. As no-one has referenced such a policy. To be honest such rules are difficult to write and enforce and likely would be problematic.

Typically, most large organisations would have a policy requiring certain executives to disclose. Although that will often require disclosure of "relationships" and even that is fraught. It becomes a matter that is then dealt with under conflict of interest areas and, frankly, how it's dealt with really depends on who the 2 parties are. The ones I've seen people "fired" for have been either (a) when confronted with the relationship by fellow execs they lie or (b) they have actually breached conflict rules by abuse of power in decisions or expenses.

The notion that the relationship itself is auto grounds for removal is not at all standard practice. Which has been my objection to much of the comment in this thread (and the other thread).

 

[SBYM]

It seems not. As no-one has referenced such a policy. To be honest such rules are difficult to write and enforce and likely would be problematic.

Typically, most large organisations would have a policy requiring certain executives to disclose. Although that will often require disclosure of "relationships" and even that is fraught. It becomes a matter that is then dealt with under conflict of interest areas and, frankly, how it's dealt with really depends on who the 2 parties are. The ones I've seen people "fired" for have been either (a) when confronted with the relationship by fellow execs they lie or (b) they have actually breached conflict rules by abuse of power in decisions or expenses.

The notion that the relationship itself is auto grounds for removal is not at all standard practice. Which has been my objection to much of the comment in this thread (and the other thread).

Yeah...Mrs SBYM is a senior HR mgr at one of the big four consulting firms and she said it all sounded a bit amateur and half-arsed...

Her mob don't have a policy, and they have a policy for everything.

 

[15yearmember]

Yeah...Mrs SBYM is a senior HR mgr at one of the big four consulting firms and she said it all sounded a bit amateur and half-arsed...

Her mob don't have a policy, and they have a policy for everything.

Indeed they do! Haha.

And they also have this issue occur more often than they'd like. As I'm sure she has advised you they deal with them case by case based on the facts.

The AFL are an odd organisation and seem overly driven by perception and noise rather than substance at times.

 

[SBYM]

As I'm sure she has advised you they deal with them case by case based on the facts.

hahaha...

Almost word for word what she said.

 

[Chief]

Disagree, they're just as guilty as Lethlean and Simkiss - waiting for their resignation. If you disagree with that then you truly disagree with gender equality; deny that if you can

Lol!


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[footyboi1]

Wayne Carey did not ask Gil any questions on MMM.

Gil sounded like he had not slept.

And BT was like "you stayed right out of that one didnt you Duck"

Lol

 

[regpies]

If the same policy of sacking senior male staff for shenanigans applied to the finance and media industry there would be no one left.

 

[basashi]

Well your quotes are a mixture of fact and opinion.

I know the lawyer ( the 30 year old) went to an expensive private school.
The statement that the policy should surely apply to the males and females is a factual statement of sensible, conventional corporate governance which takes account of any exculpating factors in a person's case.

The other two are opinions based on intuition and life experience.

I maintain that you original criticism was excessive and unwarranted.

maintained in the face of fact.

 

[Bingo23]

The old saying is "Don't get your meat where you get your bread" Follow this rule and you don't have anything to worry about.

 

[david addison]

Whoever used the word 'exculpating', * off. It's not good for my self esteem. I'm already a bit shaky after listening to Dwayne for two hours, now I discover I'm not articulate enough for big footy.

I had sex at work once, and it didn't cost me my job. Maybe if it was with another person, the consequences might have been different. Who's the next lucky couple on the AFL dating game? Mark Robinson & Susie O'Brien? Dwayne Russell & Neil Mitchell? The MRP?

Lethlean should have lost his job for not fixing the umpiring. But this'll do. Now that Simkiss is gone, can we take the Toyota sign out of the goal square?

 

[Registered User]

Here's a bit more gossip from Sunday's Herald-Sun.
There's not much to the "big" article. I bet it's on the front page.

This is the only "substance".

-------------------------------

AFL’s toxic culture: Sleazy ‘Top 10’ list ranked women by looks

Stephen Drill
16th July, 12:00am

A TOXIC AFL culture has been exposed, with revelations some men in the office created a “Top 10” list of female employees they wanted to sleep with.
The Sunday Herald Sun has confirmed a woman was told of her ranking on the wish list of males at AFL House.

She was told: “You’re number five on the list.”

.................................

The Sunday Herald Sun understands Lethlean, who was reportedly paid $900,000 a year, is likely to find a job at an AFL club.

....................................

As well as the “Top 10” list, a current male employee at the league’s Docklands headquarters has been dubbed the “King of Tinder” by female employees.

The “Top 10” list was circulating several years ago, but sources within the AFL said they were worried the culture had not changed enough.

However, other female AFL employees told the Sunday Herald Sun they had no issues working at the league.

The AFL did not respond yesterday to questions about the “Top 10” list or the “King of Tinder”.

 

[Black Panther]

‘Top 10’ list ranked women by looks

Secretly the women love it and are just pissed if they don't make the Top 10

“King of Tinder”

 

[hoianbulldog]

Here's a bit more gossip from Sunday's Herald-Sun.
There's not much to the "big" article. I bet it's on the front page.

This is the only "substance".

-------------------------------

AFL’s toxic culture: Sleazy ‘Top 10’ list ranked women by looks

Stephen Drill
16th July, 12:00am

A TOXIC AFL culture has been exposed, with revelations some men in the office created a “Top 10” list of female employees they wanted to sleep with.
The Sunday Herald Sun has confirmed a woman was told of her ranking on the wish list of males at AFL House.

She was told: “You’re number five on the list.”

.................................

The Sunday Herald Sun understands Lethlean, who was reportedly paid $900,000 a year, is likely to find a job at an AFL club.

....................................

As well as the “Top 10” list, a current male employee at the league’s Docklands headquarters has been dubbed the “King of Tinder” by female employees.

The “Top 10” list was circulating several years ago, but sources within the AFL said they were worried the culture had not changed enough.

However, other female AFL employees told the Sunday Herald Sun they had no issues working at the league.

The AFL did not respond yesterday to questions about the “Top 10” list or the “King of Tinder”.

Mark Zuckerberg likes this.

 

[DearHunter]

I've only skim read this, but let's get one thing straight.

Maddi Blomberg was a full time AFL employee, she was State Auskick Manager. Her direct report was Lethlean.

Also when she left, her full time replacement was overseen by Simon and was replaced with another 'young' woman.

 

[ShadeyP]

So in a predominantly patriarchal western world and a patriatchal organisation like the AFL, based on your theory, women are to blame for the multitude of affairs that take place everyday?

We might agree to disagree on that point.

I prefer the French attitude myself ...

With a tongue like that it seems french is very much your thing

 

[AM]

I've only skim read this, but let's get one thing straight.

Maddi Blomberg was a full time AFL employee, she was State Auskick Manager. Her direct report was Lethlean.

Also when she left, her full time replacement was overseen by Simon and was replaced with another 'young' woman.

There is no question there was a big power differential and I'm by no means excusing Lethlean's behaviour as a married man with three children. However, she could have said no, particularly as she was aware of his marital situation.

 

[ShadeyP]

Secretly the women love it and are just pissed if they don't make the Top 10

WOW , what an ensemble ! The hat , The belt and the Scan card pinned to his Member ship .