Employees - or slaves ?

Employees - or slaves ?

Didn't find your answer?

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.

By mwngiol
04th Feb 2011 16:34

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?

Thanks (0)
By Steve Holloway
04th Feb 2011 16:43

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. 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
04th Feb 2011 16:44

.

'Jokes' suggesting that all muslims are terrorists are clearly unjustified and are clearly offensive.tooltip();

 

Posted by mwngiol on Fri, 04/02/2011 - 16:19

 

Firstly - the simple joke was used as an illustration, not a comment about "all muslims".  Nor was it necessarily my view - you simply chose to assume it was as it was convenient for you to do so. However, at what point does that example suggest that ALL muslims are terrorists ?   Do try to explain that without resorting to twisting words and making tortuous assumptions. (which is what most of the pc taliban do).

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?  How "offensive" it was for two muslim Birmingham councillors to blatantly insult a war hero ? (see todays press).  Any idea how offensive" it is to live with the memory of your closest friends head blown off his body 5 feet from you by a terrorist (something I live with). I wonder how "offensive" returning troops consider animals shouting foul abuse and threats at them in Luton?

Respect is something that is earned, and while a community tolerates and protects people like that they can expect no respect and they deserve none.

But despite all of this, some of us retain our sense of humour - possibly because we know how transient and brief life is - and I will not allow people who have no idea what they are talking about and have never faced real danger dictate to me what I should and should not find funny.

 

Thanks (0)
By mwngiol
04th Feb 2011 16:50

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.

Thanks (0)
By mwngiol
04th Feb 2011 16:57

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.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By chatman
04th Feb 2011 16:58

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.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By andypartridge
04th Feb 2011 17:00

@ 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

Thanks (0)
avatar
By chatman
04th Feb 2011 17:18

"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.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
04th Feb 2011 18:18

.

 

 

"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!

tooltip();

 

Posted by mwngiol on Fri, 04/02/2011 - 16:57

 

Now you expose your OWN pc assumptions and prejudices.

Did I mention muslim terrorists?  No. 

In fact the terrorists I had in mind and who I had extensive personal experience of were Irish terrorists. It was Irish terrorists who murdered my closest friend in cold blood.  It was Irish terrorists who put me in the position of holding a mans intestines in until medical help arrived and telling him he would be alright when it would have been kinder to put a bullet in his head. It was Irish terrorists who tried to kill me on many occasions. And yes, whenever I got the chance to take one of them out - I enjoyed it, and if I could I'd have happily killed the lot of them. THAT is the effect first hand experience of terrorists has on you.  Even now if I hear an Irish accent I'm instantly on my guard - it's called survival instinct.

I've no doubt those affected by muslim terrorists are the same whenever they see a muslim in a burka. 

Come to that people bitten by dogs tend to avoid all dogs, even the gentle ones, from then on.

____________________________________________________

 presume, though, you would not object if they did as you would want to defend their freedom of expression against the 'loony PC brigade'.

tooltip();

 

Posted by andypartridge on Fri, 04/02/2011 - 17:00

 

Everyone has the absolute right to put their point of view, I dont care whether they are BNP or Liberal, whether they are devout Catholics or aethiests.  What I DO object to is when they live in a country, live off that country by drawing benefits, then abuse the troops who protect their freedom to do so, or plot to murder those who keep them.

 

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
04th Feb 2011 18:20

.

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.

tooltip();

 

Posted by chatman on Fri, 04/02/2011 - 17:18

 

You may give people the benefit of the doubt - but that is a long way from respect.  Respe4ct is reserved for those who earn it - not those who demand it.

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By chatman
04th Feb 2011 23:35

"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.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
04th Feb 2011 23:56

.

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.tooltip();

 

Posted by chatman on Fri, 04/02/2011 - 23:35

 

"knowledge" ?  No - simple logic.  You are confusing respect with politically correct doctrine.

You are saying you dont DISrespect others - that is not the same thing as respecting them. 

Respect is defined as "a feeling of admiration" for someone.  How can you admire anyone unless they have given you reason to?  In other words respect has to be earned.

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By chatman
05th Feb 2011 00:40

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

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
05th Feb 2011 09:15

Definition

The definative dictionary of the english language is the Oxford Dictionary.

It defines respect as follows -

 

noun

1 [mass noun] a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements

 

verb   [with object] 

1 admire (someone or something) deeply, as a result of their abilities, qualities, or achievements:

 

 

In other words, it is something that is EARNED.

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnnaKournikovasKnickers
05th Feb 2011 10:28

are employees slaves?

quoit servir tot hostes

Thanks (0)
avatar
By andypartridge
05th Feb 2011 18:29

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

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
05th Feb 2011 19:02

.

 

 

Oh dear, not for the first time Andy is twisting & turning, misquoting and misrepreseting in an attempt to either inflame a response, or merely post personal abuse.

Your "definitions" are not taken from the authorative dictionary of the english language and have obviously been carefully sought out from some lesser work to prop up your weak contentions.  

Might I suggest Andy that as you seem to disagree with me on any and every topic, and appear obsessed with insulting me, perhaps you could do us all a favour and refrain from posting in threads I start.

 

 

   WITH THAT IN MIND I SUGGEST THAT EVERYONE NOW TREATS THIS THREAD AS CLOSED.

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By andypartridge
05th Feb 2011 19:39

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

Thanks (0)
avatar
By chatman
05th Feb 2011 22:54

"The definative dictionary of the english language is the Oxford

On what authority do you base that claim? 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
06th Feb 2011 09:47

.

On what authority do you base that claim? tooltip();

 

Posted by chatman on Sat, 05/02/2011 - 22:54

 

How about the authority of the highest courts, every acedemic, and even parliament which has also been known o refer to it as the definative work.

Do you belong to the flat earth society too ?

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnnaKournikovasKnickers
06th Feb 2011 11:16

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.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By chatman
06th Feb 2011 18:35

"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?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By chrisjoynes
07th Feb 2011 10:01

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.

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

Freelance  Limited Company Advantages

Thanks (0)
avatar
By pembo
15th Feb 2011 13:09

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...

Thanks (0)

Pages