why are there so many threads started by men on thumped about how shit women are? (2 Viewers)

[snakybus]

way to make a thread really boring, lads!

 

[Corey]

Janer just shouted 'Tits!'


Disgusting.

 

[snakybus]

Janer just shouted 'Tits!'


Disgusting.

You're disgusting.

 

[oh shit]

that's news to me - what law?

you seem worried

 

[Mormon Nailer]

you seem worried

No way. Person was a psycho. I could get into bigger trouble of they were hired on a bullshit good reference I gave.

So. Anyway. What law?

 

[zero_hero]

No way. Person was a psycho. I could get into bigger trouble of they were hired on a bullshit good reference I gave.

So. Anyway. What law?

Ok maybe not one particular law but if theres no legal basis for the bad reference then you can sue for discrimination. I know I read an article about it before but I found this which is similiar

http://home.eircom.net/recruitment/interview/8942463/

 

[magicbastarder]

No way. Person was a psycho. I could get into bigger trouble of they were hired on a bullshit good reference I gave.

So. Anyway. What law?

so don't give a reference.

libel law. well, it's not against the law to give a bad reference per se, but you can be sued under libel law unless you can prove what makes the reference a bad one.

 

[MDR]

Libel only applies to things that are untrue so if you gave a bad reference to someone for genuine reasons, wouldn't that be ok?

 

[RSJ]

Yes but could you prove those reasons in court?

 

[MDR]

Well, if the person missed deadlines, was late regularly, and submitted poor quality work then I'm sure you could.

 

[CitySickness]

Well, if the person missed deadlines, was late regularly, and submitted poor quality work then I'm sure you could.

You can call me as an expert witness on poor quality work.

 

[Mormon Nailer]

When it comes to personal issues - if the person was moody difficult etc you might have a problem but you would always have the say of the persons colleagues.

With work stuff you are their supervisor you are presumably qualified to judge the standard of their work.

 

[zero_hero]

When it comes to personal issues - if the person was moody difficult etc you might have a problem but you would always have the say of the persons colleagues.

With work stuff you are their supervisor you are presumably qualified to judge the standard of their work.

Isnt that why they bring in all those appraisals now so they have records of your work performance? That and they get you to work extra hard if theres one coming up.

 

[magicbastarder]

Well, if the person missed deadlines, was late regularly, and submitted poor quality work then I'm sure you could.

as long as you had it all documented.

 

[MDR]

With work stuff you are their supervisor you are presumably qualified to judge the standard of their work.

In my place you're allowed grade people on moodyness and dead-onness.

 

[MDR]

as long as you had it all documented.

Or heard about it in the toilets.

 

[Mormon Nailer]

Written on a cubicle wall is documented as far as im concerned.

 

[magicbastarder]

anyway, can someone please summarise this thread for me?

 

[Mormon Nailer]

anyway, can someone please summarise this thread for me?

I dont think I'd be doing Jane's post justice to summarise them - go back and read them in full.

 

[ernesto]

anyway, can someone please summarise this thread for me?

yeah, men are pricks because women are.