Honestly, I just don't know where to start with this it is so so so so wrong

[World's End Stella]

on so many levels.

Deep breaths, Burney, deep breaths.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/gymnastics/37832754

[Burney]

on so many levels.

Deep breaths, Burney, deep breaths.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/gymnastics/37832754

All too typical, I'm afraid. You can charge a man with discrimination for refusing to bake a cake, but if someone dares mock Islam in any sense they will be hung out to dry. The place has gone mad.

[Pokster]

on so many levels.

Deep breaths, Burney, deep breaths.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/gymnastics/37832754

In effect though the ban doesn't cause him any hardship as he is touring the country dancing.... should never have come to this though

[Burney]

In effect though the ban doesn't cause him any hardship as he is touring the country dancing.... should never have come to this though

It came to this because British Gymnastics was either:
a/ scared of rampant Allans going mental
b/ Desperately wanting to virtue signal its zero tolerance of 'Islamophobia' :rolleyes:
or
c/ Both

Whichever, it's a damn poor way to make any decision.

[World's End Stella]

It came to this because British Gymnastics was either:
a/ scared of rampant Allans going mental
b/ Desperately wanting to virtue signal its zero tolerance of 'Islamophobia' :rolleyes:
or
c/ Both

Whichever, it's a damn poor way to make any decision.

I've never really understood the legalities surrounding a company or organisation of some kind being able to suspend or dismiss someone for something that isn't illegal. As an example, there are now states in America where you can legally purchase and smoke marijuana. Yet most, if not all, sports leagues drug test for marijuana and if caught you can be suspended from playing, thereby preventing you from earning a living even though you did nothing illegal.

Would the athlete win if he sued the league? Similarly, could Louis Smith sue UK Gymnastics given that he did nothing that was illegal?

[Burney]

I've never really understood the legalities surrounding a company or organisation of some kind being able to suspend or dismiss someone for something that isn't illegal. As an example, there are now states in America where you can legally purchase and smoke marijuana. Yet most, if not all, sports leagues drug test for marijuana and if caught you can be suspended from playing, thereby preventing you from earning a living even though you did nothing illegal.

Would the athlete win if he sued the league? Similarly, could Louis Smith sue UK Gymnastics given that he did nothing that was illegal?

Your employer can make all sorts of stipulations about what you can and can't do in a contract and none of it need have anything to do with the law.

[Pokster]

I've never really understood the legalities surrounding a company or organisation of some kind being able to suspend or dismiss someone for something that isn't illegal. As an example, there are now states in America where you can legally purchase and smoke marijuana. Yet most, if not all, sports leagues drug test for marijuana and if caught you can be suspended from playing, thereby preventing you from earning a living even though you did nothing illegal.

Would the athlete win if he sued the league? Similarly, could Louis Smith sue UK Gymnastics given that he did nothing that was illegal?

I would guess that most employers could sack someone if they deemed that they had doen something against company rules, doesn't have to be illegal.

He competes under gymnastics rules, same as all sportsmen, they have to abdide by the rules no matter how daft they might seem

[Pat Vegas]

I've never really understood the legalities surrounding a company or organisation of some kind being able to suspend or dismiss someone for something that isn't illegal. As an example, there are now states in America where you can legally purchase and smoke marijuana. Yet most, if not all, sports leagues drug test for marijuana and if caught you can be suspended from playing, thereby preventing you from earning a living even though you did nothing illegal.

Would the athlete win if he sued the league? Similarly, could Louis Smith sue UK Gymnastics given that he did nothing that was illegal?

Like Nick Diaz originally banned for 5 years

[Burney]

I would guess that most employers could sack someone if they deemed that they had doen something against company rules, doesn't have to be illegal.

He competes under gymnastics rules, same as all sportsmen, they have to abdide by the rules no matter how daft they might seem

Yup. Drinking's legal, but your employer has the right to institute alcohol testing and sack you if you fail.

[World's End Stella]

Your employer can make all sorts of stipulations about what you can and can't do in a contract and none of it need have anything to do with the law.

I think that's a generalisation. Employers cannot put whatever they want in a contract, they are required to ensure that the contract does not contain restrictions which would limit certain personal freedoms, as an example. I expect that if Louis Smith took UK Gymnastics to court and said that they were preventing him from earning a living because he laughed at a joke, he would probably win, as would the NFL player who legally purchased and smoked marijuana yet was banned anyway.

I also expect that most people simply decide it isn't worth it, so nonsense like this ban slowly becomes acceptable.

[World's End Stella]

Yup. Drinking's legal, but your employer has the right to institute alcohol testing and sack you if you fail.

I don't believe this to be true, unless the use of alcohol is in some way linked to the job the employee is being asked to perform i.e. he showed up drunk and could not do his job.

[Burney]

I don't believe this to be true, unless the use of alcohol is in some way linked to the job the employee is being asked to perform i.e. he showed up drunk and could not do his job.

You could argue that the use of alcohol is likely to impair anyone's ability to do their job - any job. :shrug:

[Pokster]

I don't believe this to be true, unless the use of alcohol is in some way linked to the job the employee is being asked to perform i.e. he showed up drunk and could not do his job.

Where I used to work made lunchtime drinking an offence.... 3 strikes and you were out.

[Pat Vegas]

Where I used to work made lunchtime drinking an offence.... 3 strikes and you were out.

in my younger days working in the hotel bar and restaurant we'd be drinking every night.

An order for 'table 11' was a special order.

We were send out to buy stuff once for the bar. ended up in the pub for a few hours and I came back completely pissed. they just stuck me in the back office for a while.

[PSRB]

You could argue that the use of alcohol is likely to impair anyone's ability to do their job - any job. :shrug:

:rubchin: I strongly suspect that it improves most in the advertising world, to a point

I've just had 2 pints and have got more done this afternoon than I did this morning.......clearly, I'll have to check it all again in the morning

[Pat Vegas]

:rubchin: I strongly suspect that it improves most in the advertising world, to a point

I've just had 2 pints and have got more done this afternoon than I did this morning.......clearly, I'll have to check it all again in the morning

Actually some of my best work has come from being hungover.
I think when you are in that state you mind shuts of unnecessary thinking and you get on with work.

[dismalswamp]

I'm really disappointed in him....for apologizing. Anyone who gets offended over anything ever deserves to be.
And they can **** Off!
Religious dimwits have no place on this planet anymore. We need a wall!

[World's End Stella]

Where I used to work made lunchtime drinking an offence.... 3 strikes and you were out.

A contract that says you must not be under the influence of alcohol when performing your duties and a contract that says you are not allowed to drink alcohol at all are very different things. I think Burney meant that an employer could test you during working hours for an amount of alcohol deemed to be sufficient to prevent you from performing your duties. That is certainly true.

[Pat Vegas]

I'm really disappointed in him....for apologizing. Anyone who gets offended over anything ever deserves to be.
And they can **** Off!
Religious dimwits have no place on this planet anymore. We need a wall!

How's the telecaster coming along?

[eastgermanautos]

on so many levels.

Deep breaths, Burney, deep breaths.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/gymnastics/37832754

I think it's a good decision, honestly. But then I will soon be forming my own splinter Islamic sect so I may not be objective. Women will be required to wear full head-to-navel hijabs. Below the navel, just the panties.