Moderator: Moderators
WhatsApp isn't social media. It's as close to tapping into a private phone call as you can get.shamalicious wrote:I'm pretty sure I saw a clip of Ulster players getting social media training a couple of seasons ago in the Fitzwilliam hotel possibly?
Most workplaces require it and I'm sure those in the public eye have to as well.
The guys will have legal representation (KRW Law) to ensure that they are not treated unfairly or punished disproportionately.TopPoster wrote:Snipe. Very well written piece. I share those thoughts in that a fair, just and determined organisation driven by strong leadership should and would do in this position. However I do not think that (1) The FIFU are fair and just to their Northen Province, and (2) the strong leadership needed from URFU to ensure the masters at IRFU make fair and just decisions is frankly woefully weak and inadequate.
I think (hope!) you are right - I've always seen this as primarily a PR problem for the IRFU to disentangle..Snipe Watson wrote:Let's not get ahead of ourselves on this.
They are being careful and saying that they are concerned, but there is no explicit threat to withdraw their sponsorship. Nor is there any indication that they want the guys fired or what would be an acceptable outcome.
All they are saying is that they are interested in the outcome of the review and taking the necessary steps to placate the part of their customer base that #believeher. It's a fine PR line they have to walk.
Columbo wrote:
A Bank of Ireland sales manager with an “exemplary record” who was dismissed for “gross misconduct” over “inappropriate” and pornographic emails sent from his personal bank email has won a six-year battle for his reinstatement.
The dismissal of James Reilly (33), who gave unchallenged evidence that the exchange of such emails was widespread within the bank and throughout public companies, had “a catastrophic effect” on his life and career, Mr Justice Seamus Noonan said.
The bank acted disproportionately and unreasonably towards its employee and its “hierarchy” set out make an example of him, he said. It was relevant that the email considered the most serious originated in the bank’s head office and was sent on by an official who was later promoted. No steps were taken to investigate the other employees involved and the bank seemingly went to considerable lengths to conceal the provenance of that email, he said.
The long, complex and hugely expensive process Mr Reilly endured before achieving reinstatement was “oppressive to say the least” and “calls into question” Ireland’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights concernign access to justice, the judge also observed.
That process, involving an initial investigation, a two stage disciplary process, two internal appeals and hearings before the Employment Appeals Tribunal, Circuit Court and High Court, meant Mr Reilly had given evidence on eight different occasions over six years, incurring enormous costs he could ill afford.
The courts previously criticised this process and it was “well past time” the matter was addressed, the judge urged.
He was giving a judgment dismissing the bank’s appeal against a Circuit Court order awarding Mr Reilly compensation of half a year’s salary after upholding a finding by the Employment Appeals Tribunal he was unfairly dismissed. Circuit Court Judge Gerard Griffin did not award the full salary amount because of his view Mr Reilly contributed to his own downfall.
Mr Reilly, Edgewood Lawn, Blanchardstown, who joined BofI in 2001, accepted before the Circuit Court he had forwarded pornographic, rude, racist and sexixt emails he received from other bank employees and said he did so to mask his homosexuality.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Noonan noted Mr Reilly’s dismissal from the bank’s Main Street branch in Blanchardstown came when Ireland was experiencing an economic catastrophe “brought about in no small measure by the activitites of our banks”.
Despite uncontradicted evidence of a widespread practice within the bank of sending inappropriate emails, the bank hierarchy decided early in 2009 to “make an example” of Mr Reilly to deter others from similar behaviour, the judge found.
While “lip service” was paid to observance of procedures, it was “clear there was only going to be one outcome”. The manner in which the bank predetermined this matter and “manipulated” the entire process from the outset reflected little credit on it and visited a “very grave injustice” on Mr Reilly.
The “only appropriate remedy” was reinstatement, the judge told Roughan Banim SC, with Johanna Ronan–Mehigan BL, for Mr Reilly.
I see Neil Best has had a bit of a pop, and another few..All spot on. This is an unfortunate, but hardly unpredicted, turn of events. The sad fact of life is that if sponsors pull the plug on Ulster rugby we will not be able to exist. Now that the Bank of Ireland has opened the can of worms here, don't be surprised to see other sponsors do the same. It is looking increasingly that Jackson/Olding may be in a lose/lose situation, despite legal rights etc..flatpass wrote:Sent this to the BoI media centre.
‘I am astonished and dismayed that the Bank of Ireland has issued a public statement confirming that it has interfered in an internal review process within the IRFU and Ulster Rugby which may result in employees losing their jobs. It seems not only unwise but irresponsible and I would have thought leaves the company wide open to legal challenge and lawsuits from the employees’ legal representatives.
I am also astonished that the Bank of Ireland thinks it has any moral authority to adjudicate on moral issues after the moral fiasco of the tracker mortgage scandal which resulted in people being made homeless, and a cost to the bank (according to the public press) of 108 million euro. The word ‘hypocrisy’ comes to mind.
I am further astonished at the double standards displayed since the Bank has (as I understand it) 2 well-known Munster Rugby employees as brand ambassadors, but those 2 employees were involved in a very unsavoury sexual incident with a young lady, an incident which was well documented and publicised.
Perhaps it should be the IRFU and Ulster Rugby who should be questioning whether sponsorship by the Bank of Ireland is appropriate.’
I hate to quibble, but it's probably a lose win situation. If they lose this battle, they will earn far more playing elsewhere.Spiffsson wrote:All spot on. This is an unfortunate, but hardly unpredicted, turn of events. The sad fact of life is that if sponsors pull the plug on Ulster rugby we will not be able to exist. Now that the Bank of Ireland has opened the can of worms here, don't be surprised to see other sponsors do the same. It is looking increasingly that Jackson/Olding may be in a lose/lose situation, despite legal rights etc..flatpass wrote:Sent this to the BoI media centre.
‘I am astonished and dismayed that the Bank of Ireland has issued a public statement confirming that it has interfered in an internal review process within the IRFU and Ulster Rugby which may result in employees losing their jobs. It seems not only unwise but irresponsible and I would have thought leaves the company wide open to legal challenge and lawsuits from the employees’ legal representatives.
I am also astonished that the Bank of Ireland thinks it has any moral authority to adjudicate on moral issues after the moral fiasco of the tracker mortgage scandal which resulted in people being made homeless, and a cost to the bank (according to the public press) of 108 million euro. The word ‘hypocrisy’ comes to mind.
I am further astonished at the double standards displayed since the Bank has (as I understand it) 2 well-known Munster Rugby employees as brand ambassadors, but those 2 employees were involved in a very unsavoury sexual incident with a young lady, an incident which was well documented and publicised.
Perhaps it should be the IRFU and Ulster Rugby who should be questioning whether sponsorship by the Bank of Ireland is appropriate.’
What Conor may have ended up wearing on his sleeve at one time or another has been a matter of considerable speculation....Columbo wrote:
