In another thread the firing of someone for what was said in a "private" conversation was discussed.
In the "Partner sues PwC for race discrimination" article one sentence grabbed my attention, where it says - "In 2004 he was given a negative appraisal for dating a colleague (now his wife) without revealing the nature of the relationship to his bosses".
I am aware of many larger firms, (Tescos being one example), where staff who have had time off ill are required to submit to an "interview" (described to me by a Tescos employee as an interogation) by their personnel staff upon their return to work.
Now two team leaders in the benefits section of Carlisle City Council has ordered employees to clock out if having a non-work related conversation with fellow workers.
If an employee 'phones in sick, car giant Toyota despatch a member of their staff to visit the employees home to check that they are there and they are ill.
Accountants are expected to file money laundering reports if they "suspect" clients, but at what point is a client's financial dealings simply none of the accountants business. They may be secret gamblers, or lottery winners who simply dont want anyone to know they've won, but accountants are threatened with sanctions if they do not report unexplained monies, and are expected to do this work without payment.
CCTV, whilst useful on town centre streets, is now being introduced into some workplaces to spy on employees, and only last week it was reported that a schopl was planning to put CCTV in every classroom and even in the schools toilets & changing rooms (perfect for any perverts on the staff).
Is it really any business of an employer if his employees are courting? Is it any business of an employer what employees say in private. Does an employer really have the moral right to "check up" on employees, or to interrogate them when they've had a couple of days off ill?
Are they employees - or are they becoming slaves ?
Replies (74)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Sorry
"we can slag off Mexicans and make jokes about Muslims, but woe betide us if we are caught swearing because we wouldn't want to offend anybody!
I find it hard to believe anyone could defend the proposition that racism is less offensive than swearing. Mind you, here we are!"
Sorry chatman I don't follow you, has a posting been deleted or something? Who said racism was less offensive than swearing?
You can't change human nature ...
we will always find things funny which we shouldn't. I believe it was about 90 minutes after 911 that the first 'jokes' started to circulate on the internet. Morticians have dead people jokes, doctors have patient jokes. And in this respect I agree with CD ... I can't think of many jokes that are both funny and not at someones expense. The oldest joke in existance (written on papyrus) was a dirty joke which sterotyped the sexual habits of another race.
Funny is what makes you laugh. You can't legislate otherwise.
@ chatman - all societies develop norms. At a football match I remember one idiot who hurled racist abuse at a player and the police ignored him. It was only when he added the f word that he was arrested! Mind you that was a long time ago.
Jokes
I never said that jokes can't be at someone's expense. C_D point about some jokes being acceptable on stage but not if you said them to a random stranger was valid, but the example 'joke' was appalling.
A joke about religious beliefs for example would be fine when told on stage, but if you went up to someone on the street and started making fun of his religion that would be unacceptable. That is completely different to portraying a negative stereotype of an entire group of people based on the actions of an unrepresentative minority of that group. It's like making a joke suggesting that all white people are nazis. Ludicrous and unjustified.
Offensive
"You say that the example I used is "offensive to muslims". I wonder, have you ever wondered how "offensve" it is to have your legs blown off by a terrorist?"
Even if the joke you used didn't portray all muslims as terrorists then the above sentence does!
This is why you can't be argued with reasonably, you keep going off on one and talking about things which are totally irrelevant...how does saying that you should not use offensive language and make offensive 'jokes' remotely come close to being the same as justifying terrorism? Now I'm not remotely articulate or eloquent but at least I tend to stick to the debate!
This time I'm out of this debate for good.
mwingiol
Nothing specifically in this thread, but Aweb wil censor you (or, to be more precise, me) for swearing, but not if you suggest that Mexicans are all oversensitive and automotively inept or that your average Muslim would blow your legs off as soon as look at you.
@Steven Holloway: you mention it was a long time ago, but apparently nothing's changed.
@ C_D
Most of the things you described as offensive certainly are. Most right-thinking people would not make light of them or include them in their comedy repertoire.
I presume, though, you would not object if they did as you would want to defend their freedom of expression against the 'loony PC brigade'.
-- Kind regards Andy
"Respect is something that is earned"
Respect should be something that is given automatically. How incredibly arrogant would it be of me if I expected someone to earn my respect before I gave it to them.
"You may give people the benefit of the doubt - but that is a lo
You appear to be saying I do not give people respect, merely the benefit of the doubt. I have no idea how you can claim to have such knowledge, but it is not something I will bother to argue. I try to give people respect. For me, disrespect is something that has to be earned.
Can't find your definition of respect in a dictionary
Respect: esteem for or a sense of the worth or excellence of a person,a personal quality or ability, or something considered as a manifestation of a personal quality or ability
Respect
'To avoid violation of or interference with'
'Willingness to show consideration or appreciation'
Now C_D, bearing in mind that you are also the OP, you could have avoided the bloodshed by cutting out the middleman and just having a quiet conversation with yourself.
You are an expert at answering your own questions, just as you are at answering not the question that is asked of you but the one you wished you'd been asked.
I wonder if you would be so kind as to answer this:
Would you object if people mocked your values or would you defend their freedom of expression against the 'loony PC brigade'? Sorry, that's rhetorical as we have already seen that you would and do object.
It seems therefore that you only want to uphold the freedoms of those who agree with your view of the world. If my analysis is correct, that doesn't make you a much of a democrat. In fact you could be described as an enemy of the free world.
-- Kind regards Andy
Ridiculous C_D
As I have said very clearly in other threads, if I agree with you I will tell you (and I do!).
If I don't I will tell you. That's natural in a free and democratic world, isn't it? ;)
-- Kind regards Andy
"The definative dictionary of the english language is the Oxford
On what authority do you base that claim?
are employees slaves?
I keep getting these alerts to comments from people who, apparently can't even speak Latin. The guy with the Welsh Dragon (26-19) says the thread is closed and then starts up again.
"How about the authority of the highest courts, every acedemic,
There is not really anything verifiable there is there? How about a reference that I could look up. Otherwise it doesn't really help.
Regarding your comment about the Flat Earth Society, why do you feel the need to be rude to me?
CCTV is a joke so become a freelancer
Firstly, CCTV on streets is not always such a good thing, when first brought in the government sold them to us by saying it would make our streets safer - OK I can just about buy that, then they gave councils the power to use them to catch people parking where they shouldn't, enforcing ridicules penalties!
I parked on a single yellow line at 11:30 at night for less than 2 minutes to get cash out, 3 weeks later a get a fine through the post for £120.00 now I can understand if this was a red route or double yellows and it was rush hour but 11:30 at night. Where is the common sense? If I wanted to appeal, I would have to take 2 hours off work to go down to the council offices to watch the footage - winds me up no end!
Back to the main thread - DON'T be an employee - go freelance, take control over your working and private life and start contracting by running your own business, then when you're sick, no one can have ago at you. If you’re tired and feel like working from home or staying in bed, then you can - guilt free.
..............................................................................
just thought
that as noone had posted to this thread for a while and its lunchtime I'd just like to say I agree with the comments made but by whom I'm not quite sure...
oh for the good old days of big firm auditing when the jacket over the chair whilst you took an extended watering break in the local hostelry worked a treat...