ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 23rd September 2020, 02:48 AM   #41
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 94,218
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Wrong. You only have to look at the link that Carrot Flower King provided above (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...-lgbt-22719934) to see that she did no such thing. She never mentioned the school nor her role in the education system.

She was criticizing the Government Consultation into making Relationships Education mandatory in primary schools and Relationships and Sex Education mandatory in secondary schools. She was sacked for not agreeing with government policy.
From reading the article I would say her ex-employers had no grounds for dismissal for gross misconduct, however there is a rather large however and that is at the moment the only "side" that is presenting its case is the "Christian Legal Centre". I've seen this before - they prepare "copy ready" press-releases that of course paints their case in the best possible light for their agenda (which is not merely legal representation for Higgs). That sets the tone of the article, and since the ex-employer is constrained by what they can say until the tribunal the CLC creates the impression it wanted, e.g. that Christians are a persecuted group, that they are unfairly treated and so on.

I think we have to wait until we get the other side's case before we can determine who was right and who was wrong in this.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 02:57 AM   #42
Carrot Flower King
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 262
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Posting an opinion as a private individual was labeled "gross misconduct" just so that she could be sacked. I have no reason to apologize for pointing that out.


When one can be penalized just for posting an opinion that doesn't coincide with the official line then that is totalitarian.


Well she couldn't very well use the name "Carrot Flower King".
As I, and others, have already pointed out this class of thing is covered by her employment contract, UK-ian contract and employment law, same as it is/was for many, if not all of us, in the public sector (my professional code of conduct also had some similar strictures in it): she signed up to that job and its contract and terms and conditions; gross misconduct and all other things disciplinary are set out in employers' policies and procedures, which ALL employees have access to...She chose to accept all of that when she took the job. She then chose to breach a whole heap of that, knowing what she was doing and, by her own admission, deciding that she is above the laws of the land. How are the choices of a competent (per UK-ian laws) adult, made in full possession of the relevant facts, "totalitarian"? It is a set of choices.

Also, how would her and her ilk imposing their "Bible truth" views on LGBTQ+ issues, which is what she was after doing let's not forget, be any less "totalitarian"?. FFS, we've already been through a lot of this sort of thing in this country in my working life: I was restricted in how much I was allowed to talk to our young people about issues pertaining to their sexuality by legislation (and court interpretations) introduced by one of the Thatcher governments. Was that "totalitarian"?

A related question: RC schools, including the ones subsidised by the state, all require teachers and other staff to be practising Catholics. Is this "totalitarian", as it also dictates what they should believe and say, at pain of disciplinary action?

And she is still decided to use her maiden name to post, rather than the married name she works under...Why?
Carrot Flower King is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 03:08 AM   #43
Carrot Flower King
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 262
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
From reading the article I would say her ex-employers had no grounds for dismissal for gross misconduct, however there is a rather large however and that is at the moment the only "side" that is presenting its case is the "Christian Legal Centre". I've seen this before - they prepare "copy ready" press-releases that of course paints their case in the best possible light for their agenda (which is not merely legal representation for Higgs). That sets the tone of the article, and since the ex-employer is constrained by what they can say until the tribunal the CLC creates the impression it wanted, e.g. that Christians are a persecuted group, that they are unfairly treated and so on.

I think we have to wait until we get the other side's case before we can determine who was right and who was wrong in this.
The CLC do have previous on this sort of case.

They represented the nurse who was sacked (eventually, after the usual internal disciplinary process) over the wearing of jewellery at work. They claimed it was because she was a "Christian" wearing a cross. It wasn't: it was because she was wearing a necklace while working in an area in which any and all wearing of jewellery was forbidden (all UK-ian nurses know about these rules and policies, 'cos pretty much all of us will have had to remove ear rings, wedding rings, necklaces, bangles, wrist watches'n'all at one time or another - even me!). But, no! In CLC World it was all about Persecuted Christians! And in Psion World will be TOTALITARIAN! Restricting someone's god-given right to wear jewellery at all times!

Facts have never troubled the CLC too much...
Carrot Flower King is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 03:11 AM   #44
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 33,319
Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King View Post
As I, and others, have already pointed out this class of thing is covered by her employment contract, UK-ian contract and employment law, same as it is/was for many, if not all of us, in the public sector (my professional code of conduct also had some similar strictures in it): she signed up to that job and its contract and terms and conditions; gross misconduct and all other things disciplinary are set out in employers' policies and procedures, which ALL employees have access to...She chose to accept all of that when she took the job. She then chose to breach a whole heap of that, knowing what she was doing and, by her own admission, deciding that she is above the laws of the land. How are the choices of a competent (per UK-ian laws) adult, made in full possession of the relevant facts, "totalitarian"? It is a set of choices.

Also, how would her and her ilk imposing their "Bible truth" views on LGBTQ+ issues, which is what she was after doing let's not forget, be any less "totalitarian"?. FFS, we've already been through a lot of this sort of thing in this country in my working life: I was restricted in how much I was allowed to talk to our young people about issues pertaining to their sexuality by legislation (and court interpretations) introduced by one of the Thatcher governments. Was that "totalitarian"?

A related question: RC schools, including the ones subsidised by the state, all require teachers and other staff to be practising Catholics. Is this "totalitarian", as it also dictates what they should believe and say, at pain of disciplinary action?

Theocracies are never totalitarian, of course.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 03:21 AM   #45
Carrot Flower King
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 262
Of course!
Carrot Flower King is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 03:41 AM   #46
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 94,218
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Theocracies are never totalitarian, of course.
Of course they aren't - there is only one truth after all.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 03:50 AM   #47
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 16,713
Originally Posted by Hlafordlaes View Post
Now, please show how your position does not contradict any grounding/first principle in any democracy. No rights -- rights being protected by the same government based on that principle -- can be sustained if they are contradicted by law or policy. Let's see that first principle first. No fair quoting dead men or writings by others, or existing legal systems, as this is foundational; your own words, please.

MUZAK WHILE WE WAIT....
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

I think you will find, along your tortured path, that you need to introduce a contradiction if you hold that gender identity disqualifies someone as protected. You will also find that advocating for such a measure is an attack on -- gee -- your own principles.

I'll let you figure it out.
I can't figure out what you are on about.

She expressed the political view in facebook that a child should not be taught values that run counter to their religious upbringing. Others might argue that a child should be taught those values in spite of their religious upbringing or even that a child should not be brought up in a religion that runs counter to modern values.

Are you arguing that any one of these opinions should be a crime?
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 03:53 AM   #48
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 16,713
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
From reading the article I would say her ex-employers had no grounds for dismissal for gross misconduct, however there is a rather large however and that is at the moment the only "side" that is presenting its case is the "Christian Legal Centre". I've seen this before - they prepare "copy ready" press-releases that of course paints their case in the best possible light for their agenda (which is not merely legal representation for Higgs). That sets the tone of the article, and since the ex-employer is constrained by what they can say until the tribunal the CLC creates the impression it wanted, e.g. that Christians are a persecuted group, that they are unfairly treated and so on.

I think we have to wait until we get the other side's case before we can determine who was right and who was wrong in this.
There may well be more going on between her and the school than has been revealed so far. However, there is not more to her facebook posts than has been shown and they are clearly a political opinion and not a criticism of any individual school or teacher.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 04:38 AM   #49
RedStapler
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 839
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I can't figure out what you are on about.

She expressed the political view in facebook that a child should not be taught values that run counter to their religious upbringing. Others might argue that a child should be taught those values in spite of their religious upbringing or even that a child should not be brought up in a religion that runs counter to modern values.

Are you arguing that any one of these opinions should be a crime?
Their religious upbringing claims (and the **** also uses this to support her "argument"): "God does not make mistakes. "

Which of course means, LGBTQ+ are not a mistake, therefore there is nothing to complain.

Last edited by RedStapler; 23rd September 2020 at 04:47 AM.
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 04:58 AM   #50
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 16,713
Originally Posted by RedStapler View Post
Their religious upbringing claims (and the **** also uses this to support her "argument"): "God does not make mistakes. "

Which of course means, LGBTQ+ are not a mistake, therefore there is nothing to complain.
Thanks for that OT derail.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 05:13 AM   #51
RedStapler
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 839
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Thanks for that OT derail.
Citing the article is an OT derail?
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 05:16 AM   #52
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post

Are you arguing that any one of these opinions should be a crime?
Why are we talking about crimes all of a sudden? She was sacked. Not jailed.

Her views are incompatible with teaching the curriculum and interacting with LGBTQ+ kids. By making them public she made her continued employment untenable.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 05:44 AM   #53
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 16,713
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
Why are we talking about crimes all of a sudden? She was sacked. Not jailed.
If you punish somebody then it means that you think they committed a crime (even if not in the legal sense).

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
Her views are incompatible with teaching the curriculum and interacting with LGBTQ+ kids. By making them public she made her continued employment untenable.
She didn't say anything about her employer. She criticized government policy.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 06:07 AM   #54
RedStapler
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 839
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
If you punish somebody then it means that you think they committed a crime (even if not in the legal sense).
If, for example, I get punished by my workplace for not showing up by being fired, does my employer think I committed a crime?

And what is a "crime, even not in the legal sense"?

Last edited by RedStapler; 23rd September 2020 at 06:11 AM.
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 06:40 AM   #55
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 94,218
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I can't figure out what you are on about.

She expressed the political view in facebook that a child should not be taught values that run counter to their religious upbringing. Others might argue that a child should be taught those values in spite of their religious upbringing or even that a child should not be brought up in a religion that runs counter to modern values.

Are you arguing that any one of these opinions should be a crime?
What has crime got to do with this?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 06:43 AM   #56
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 94,218
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
There may well be more going on between her and the school than has been revealed so far. However, there is not more to her facebook posts than has been shown and they are clearly a political opinion and not a criticism of any individual school or teacher.
I've only gone off the report in the Mirror so I don't know what other posts she made, can you copy me the link to the rest of her posts as of course that may change my mind.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 07:11 AM   #57
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
If you punish somebody then it means that you think they committed a crime (even if not in the legal sense).
No it doesn't. It means you committed a sackable offence.

Quote:
She didn't say anything about her employer. She criticized government policy.
I didn't say she said anything about her employer.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 08:57 AM   #58
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 16,713
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
No it doesn't. It means you committed a sackable offence.
OK If I say "Are you arguing that any one of these opinions should be a crime sackable offence? " will that make your silly objection go away?
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 09:07 AM   #59
RedStapler
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 839
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
OK If I say "Are you arguing that any one of these opinions should be a crime sackable offence? " will that make your silly objection go away?
You brought the word crime into this, and now objecting to it is silly?
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 09:33 AM   #60
Carrot Flower King
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 262
Again: breaching one's terms and conditions of employment, after having signed a contract agreeing to them, will have consequences;
those consequences, and definitions of terms such as "gross misconduct", are clearly spelled out in the policies of the relevant employer, which are available to every and all employee/s;
all of this has to abide by UK-ian contract and employment legislation, which are in turn influenced by such things as human rights and equality legislation;
all of that legislation has gone through our Parliament and been passed into law;
included in our Parliaments, specifically the Lords, are representatives of our established church (that's certain bishops of the Church of England), meaning religionistas get a say and a vote on these laws.

In and amongst all of this Kristie Higgs made certain choices and acted upon them, while being legally competent and having access to all the sorts of things I mentioned. And now she doesn't like those consequences...

Last edited by Carrot Flower King; 23rd September 2020 at 09:48 AM.
Carrot Flower King is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 09:42 AM   #61
Carrot Flower King
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 262
Oh, re the name used on the internet thing: I first started using 'nyms as there were things I wanted to say in various places (nursing press, other MH related places, even BTL on newspaper sites) which directly concerned my employer and were often critical, were related to my area of employment or my profession, much of which could have brought me into conflict with my employer (per my contract of employment) or my professional regulator (per my code of conduct), so I made sure I wasn't identifiable or traceable.

Many of these things were also said directly to my management in the appropriate settings and in appropriate language. My management, shortly before I retired, did, despite that, assume incorrectly that I was the source of a critical piece about my specific bit of the forest which was run in Private Eye's "Rotten Boroughs" column - I wasn't, but I quickly worked out, by that cunning method of reading the piece, who it was.
Carrot Flower King is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 09:52 AM   #62
Carrot Flower King
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 262
And a little bit more from that well-known totalitarian legal setting, the employment tribunal...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-54271331
Carrot Flower King is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 10:18 AM   #63
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 26,186
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
It also doesn't go into any detail about the allegedly extreme language she's said to have used in her posts. On the face of it this seems a strong reaction; on the other hand, having seen how difficult it is to get any action taken against a school employee who flagrantly undermines the messages given out by the school (one of my kids' physics teachers, a young Earth creationist, told the class he was teaching that the science of radioactive decay was completely wrong but he was required by law to teach them that it was true, and the school refused to take any action whatsoever), I'm inclined to suspect, as does the OP, that there was a great deal more going on than a single complaint leading to an immediate sacking.

Dave
A physics teacher that says the science of radioactive decay is completely wrong? He definitely shouldn't be a physics teacher. Radioactive decay is so dependable that clocks are set by it.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 11:32 AM   #64
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 94,218
Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King View Post
And a little bit more from that well-known totalitarian legal setting, the employment tribunal...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-54271331

I'm really struggling to see how her language could amount to gross misconduct. Unless there is more evidence to be revealed I think she’ll win her case for unfair dismissal.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 11:42 AM   #65
RolandRat
Muse
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 721
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I'm really struggling to see how her language could amount to gross misconduct. Unless there is more evidence to be revealed I think she’ll win her case for unfair dismissal.
I'm kinda on the fence here. I can understand the issue with being sacked for expressing an opinion. But I can also understand that she was employed in a role as a teachers assistant and perhaps her opinions are incompatible with that.

Is she able to stop her own personal opinions from creeping into the work environment? /shrug, only she and the school know this.
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 02:42 PM   #66
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 15,478
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
I'm kinda on the fence here. I can understand the issue with being sacked for expressing an opinion. But I can also understand that she was employed in a role as a teachers assistant and perhaps her opinions are incompatible with that.

Is she able to stop her own personal opinions from creeping into the work environment? /shrug, only she and the school know this.
In sharing this post....



...she encouraged criticism and opposition of school policy while being employed under a contract by that very same school. That is misconduct any way you slice it.... as to whether it should be considered "gross misconduct" is the thing that is up for debate. The proper forum for her complaint was in a school staff meeting, not a social media platform.

We didn't have social media when I was a teacher, but what she did was tantamount to me taking out an advertisement in a newspaper or writing a letter to the editor criticizing and stirring up opposition to my school's policy. I know with absolute certainty that if I had done that when I was a teacher I would expect to suffer severe consequences. It would have resulted in my immediate suspension, and probable, eventual sacking.
__________________
"Woke" is a pejorative term used by racists, homophobes and misogynists to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 03:00 PM   #67
RolandRat
Muse
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 721
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
In sharing this post....

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qmzmp6m3hc...ost1.jpg?raw=1

...she encouraged criticism and opposition of school policy while being employed under a contract by that very same school. That is misconduct any way you slice it.... as to whether it should be considered "gross misconduct" is the thing that is up for debate. The proper forum for her complaint was in a school staff meeting, not a social media platform.

We didn't have social media when I was a teacher, but what she did was tantamount to me taking out an advertisement in a newspaper or writing a letter to the editor criticizing and stirring up opposition to my school's policy. I know with absolute certainty that if I had done that when I was a teacher I would expect to suffer severe consequences. It would have resulted in my immediate suspension, and probable, eventual sacking.
Is encouraging criticism and opposition of policy to the organisation you are employed by actually misconduct? If she allowed her religious beliefs to actually impede her duties, then fair enough. But actually just stating opposition to official policy doesn't seem like it should be a sackable offence to me.

Did she actually name the school she was employed by? her comment seems more like a general complaint against Government rather than the school.

Last edited by RolandRat; 23rd September 2020 at 03:40 PM.
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 04:02 PM   #68
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 15,478
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
Is encouraging criticism and opposition of policy to the organisation you are employed by actually misconduct?
If it is in your contract, and that criticism and opposition is public, then yes, it is.. and it is almost certain that it will be in her contract.

Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
If she allowed her religious beliefs to actually impede her duties, then fair enough.
Given what she said, I cannot see how it would not impede her duties as a guidance counselor for children - she would be effectively be forced, from her viewpoint, to sin - to counsel children against the Word of God.

Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
But actually just stating opposition to official policy doesn't seem like it should be a sackable offence to me.
Again, if you are precluded from that by your contract, then yes, its misconduct and a sackable offence.

Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
Did she actually name the school she was employed by? her comment seems more like a general complaint against Government rather than the school.
It doesn't matter. If the school's policy is to adhere to government education policy, and again, if it's in your contract, then your public criticism and opposition of government policy is de-facto public criticism and opposition to the school's policy, and therefore, its misconduct.

There is no wiggle room here to spin what she did as OK.
__________________
"Woke" is a pejorative term used by racists, homophobes and misogynists to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 23rd September 2020 at 04:03 PM.
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 04:50 PM   #69
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 15,478
For clarification, here is the wording of the social media clause in my employees' contracts
15. Social Media
The Employee has the right to participate in personal social media activities to express their thoughts or ideas. This shall only be done on the Employee’s personal time, using either their personal equipment or using the laptop computer provided in the break room. Such activities are not permitted on work time or using the computers, mobile phones, notebooks, tablets and other communications equipment belonging to the Company.

Social Media activities must not conflict with the Company's policies or business or harm the Company's reputation or goodwill. The Employee shall not do any of the following on Social Media sites;

(a) make disparaging or defamatory statements about the Company, its suppliers, its activities, its employees or its clients,
(b) make statements or comments criticizing Company policy,
(c) harass other employees of the Company,
(d) disclose confidential information about the Company's staff, employees or clients,
(e) use the Company's name or information in connection with the expression of any individual opinion or position.
(f) use or reproduce Company's logos, website links or use the Company's name for personal or individual purposes.

If the Employee uses social media to promote the efforts or initiatives of the Company, they must disclose their employment relationship to the Company or connection to the Company's employees and staff within that social media content or communication.

For the purposes of this Contract, term “social media” refers to on-line blogs, forums, chat rooms and social networking sites such as Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Reddit, Yelp and YouTube, as well as all other similar sites, communications or activities.

Posting anonymously or under a pseudonym is not a defense against violation of this clause
__________________
"Woke" is a pejorative term used by racists, homophobes and misogynists to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 05:58 PM   #70
RedStapler
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 839
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
Is encouraging criticism and opposition of policy to the organisation you are employed by actually misconduct? If she allowed her religious beliefs to actually impede her duties, then fair enough. But actually just stating opposition to official policy doesn't seem like it should be a sackable offence to me.

Did she actually name the school she was employed by? her comment seems more like a general complaint against Government rather than the school.
Well, the topic is also important.

"School lunches are terribly unhealthy and the government does nothing about it" should not be sackable but

Quote:
Higgs explained in her statement her religious beliefs. “I believe that God created mankind as ‘male and female’ and what he has created is good. He does not make mistakes,” she said.

“I therefore do not believe in the modern ideas of gender fluidity and transgenderism. I did not think much about this issue until it was brought up in my younger son’s primary school.

“I am aware that same-sex marriages are now recognised under UK law, but I believe that is contrary to God’s law, which only recognises marriages between one man and one woman.”

"My god thinks that LGBTQ+ people are unnatural freaks and the government should not allow that children even get to know the topic" absolutely should.
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 06:25 PM   #71
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 15,478
Originally Posted by RedStapler View Post
Well, the topic is also important.

"School lunches are terribly unhealthy and the government does nothing about it" should not be sackable but

"My god thinks that LGBTQ+ people are unnatural freaks and the government should not allow that children even get to know the topic" absolutely should.
This

Some people are failing to comprehend that context matters, it alters the acceptability of what she has said. If Higgs was a supermarket shelf-stacker, a secretary at a stock-brokers, the owner of her own small businesses or any one of dozens of other jobs and occupations, even a stay-at-home mum, then what she posted is technically acceptable. Personally, I find her views vile and repulsive, but she is entitled to her opinion and objections to a school policy and to express them. Where the line is drawn is when she is contracted by an employer, and that contract restricts what she can say about her employer's activities. FFS, she was a school guidance counselor! That means her words are important - they influence young minds.
__________________
"Woke" is a pejorative term used by racists, homophobes and misogynists to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 23rd September 2020 at 06:26 PM.
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 06:49 PM   #72
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 46,493
Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King View Post
And a little bit more from that well-known totalitarian legal setting, the employment tribunal...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-54271331
Your description of the article is misleading:

Quote:
a tribunal has heard
The tribunal has made no finding, and the quote is not "from the tribunal" but from a submission to the tribunal.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 11:37 PM   #73
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 16,713
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
...she encouraged criticism and opposition of school policy while being employed under a contract by that very same school.
No she didn't. She criticized government policy.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

Last edited by psionl0; 24th September 2020 at 12:21 AM.
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 11:51 PM   #74
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Gundungurra
Posts: 7,847
"Sacked for the Biblical truth"

No. There is no biblical truth. Nor Koran truth. No bhagavad gita truth. These are simply philosophies.

Truth is physics and maths.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2020, 12:05 AM   #75
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 33,319
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
"Sacked for the Biblical truth"

No. There is no biblical truth. Nor Koran truth. No bhagavad gita truth. These are simply philosophies.

Truth is physics and maths.

Maths maybe, but physics is just mathematical models of the universe, not “truth”.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2020, 01:36 AM   #76
Hlafordlaes
Disorder of Kilopi
 
Hlafordlaes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Flux
Posts: 13,760
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Maths maybe, but physics is just mathematical models of the universe, not “truth”.
Forget "truth". Worst word in the dictionary, descendant of religious absolutism and a worldview fitted for a static, unchanging world, making it a failure from the get-go.

"Best fit" for science, and "logically consistent with desired outcomes and premise" for preferential reasoning, are all we need. Both, unsurprisingly, use consensus as a final arbiter. In science, that's peer review, to ensure only valid and reliable knowledge gets added to the knowledge base. In philosophy, that means social convention and agreed principles among a community.

In religion, note that believers, to choose a leader or decide if a text or statement agrees with their tenets, use consensus, from Popes to Grand Ayatollahs, to "who's the next raving lunatic to run our puppy mill Christian university". Not that they would ever admit that there is no, and can be no, flawless, divine and error-free way to understand, state, or agree on anything.

The dark counterpart of consensus is absolutism. Absolute truths are those that can only exist in conceptual space, and so require force or coercion, foregoing consensus, to reach agreement in physical space.
__________________
"Absolute truth" is opinion in disguise and often carrying a weapon.

Last edited by Hlafordlaes; 24th September 2020 at 01:40 AM.
Hlafordlaes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2020, 01:48 AM   #77
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 15,478
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
No she didn't. She criticized government policy.
The school policy was to follow the government policy - you criticise one, you criticize them both.
__________________
"Woke" is a pejorative term used by racists, homophobes and misogynists to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2020, 02:04 AM   #78
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 16,713
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
The school policy was to follow the government policy - you criticise one, you criticize them both.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2020, 03:01 AM   #79
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 94,218
I still think you will find that the sacking for gross misconduct will be decided as a wrongful dismissal. I'm basing that call on the following:

  • An employment contract can't override your statutory rights.
  • There is no doubt that her beliefs would fall under the Equality act as a "philosophical belief" which means she can't be discriminated against for her beliefs
  • Our right to freedom of expression.
  • The evidence we have (so far) appears to be the two posts on Facebook they express religious views which is she is allowed to do regardless of her employment contract.

If the dismissal was based solely on those two facebook posts she was wrongfully dismissed.

But as I said we know the CLC are pushing their agenda and will have only publicised what they think will help their goals. For instance she could have been sending those posts or links to them to parents with kids at the school, to teachers at the school and that type of campaigning can be curtailed by an employment contract and in some circumstances would make it no longer "protected" freedom of expression.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2020, 03:02 AM   #80
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 7,370
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
OK If I say "Are you arguing that any one of these opinions should be a crime sackable offence? " will that make your silly objection go away?
They certainly could be.

If a binman goes online and says all Muslims are terrorists then I would say they may have committed a crime but not a sackable offence - their bigoted views on Muslims has no impact on their ability to pick up bins.

If a cancer doctor goes online and says chemotherapy is a con and that the best treatment for cancer is a mixture of prayer, homeopathy then he may have committed a sackable offence but not a crime. If he goes on to say 'and daily application of his special CancerAway2000 device... only £79.99' then he may have committed both.

A teacher going online to criticise government policy on teaching is probably doing neither...a teacher going online to rant about how LGBTQ+ people are sinners and aberrations creates a problem because they may well have LGBTQ+ people in their class. So yes that's a sackable offence.

in this case it seems that the person in question was a lot closer to the last of those examples
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:38 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.