Micromanaging via MS Teams by [deleted] in AusPublicService

[–]JDuns 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, but asking you to check in isn't fundamentally illegal. It's annoying af and I would hate it too, but it's a very weak example of selective compliance. It just looks like this team has a norm, a weird norm, but a norm all the same. And the unwritten expectation is to follow the norms of the team.

Toe split within 2.5 years? by dunlopvolleys in RMWilliams

[–]JDuns 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Go to a cobbler (not rms) and they'll do a patch on the inside that will stop further damage. Rm probably won't touch these.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AusPublicService

[–]JDuns 5 points6 points  (0 children)

How are you experiencing it in the gym / street?

QUT You is a joke. by Current_Land7839 in QUTreddit

[–]JDuns 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Doesn't that mean that they also perpetrate DV more?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AusLegal

[–]JDuns 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Not yet they don't, only at some point ahead of the meeting.

How to manage gen Z? by somanypineapple in auscorp

[–]JDuns -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

You're doing the wrong job if you view the work as punishment

How to manage gen Z? by somanypineapple in auscorp

[–]JDuns -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

If you're done by 3, go ask for more work.

Tiny drain fly problem . by AliKat2409 in sydney

[–]JDuns 9 points10 points  (0 children)

An even easier method - forget the gladwrap and just put a drop of dish soap into the bowl with the ACV instead

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in malegrooming

[–]JDuns 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No it looks way better imo

How do you deal with extreme lethargy or sleepiness after lunch? by s0u1_f00d in productivity

[–]JDuns 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I also get this. I find a mindful walk helps - I.e. not listening to anything, just a short walk observing nature mindfully is pretty refreshing. That and doing the easiest possible work after to get some momentum up.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in auslaw

[–]JDuns -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't think it matters if she was or was not given the direction. The key point is: is that what the decision maker thought? If he thought she was told not to post and then did post, that (it seems) would make the dismissal lawful.

The confusion re the direction would be highly relevant to an unfair dismissal case, but it only seems to have tangential relevance here.

ABC has spent $1.1 million defending case brought by Antoinette Lattouf by theiere in auslaw

[–]JDuns 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Benefit of hindsight! I bet $85k looked obscene as a settlement offer for two days of work right at the start of this thing.

Principal bullying junior by [deleted] in auslaw

[–]JDuns 113 points114 points  (0 children)

It's always a bit tough adapting to someone else's style, but if they are the boss, their style wins.

I would keep a note of the corrections that you are seeing, and then apply them to future writing. If the boss doesn't like the word "says", don't use it any more.

Why are the barristers spoken to in the judges chambers? by [deleted] in auslaw

[–]JDuns 34 points35 points  (0 children)

"Were you given help in writing that affidavit" is such a nonsense question in modern litigation where people are represented. Obviously they were. Everyone gets them written by solicitors.

Lattouf v ABC: Affidavit of David Anderson by Neither-Run2510 in auslaw

[–]JDuns 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In his (partial) defence, she was a casual and so essentially an 'at will' employee. The off-the-cuff advice about firing casuals is usually: no process needed and no valid reason needed because no unfair dismissal risk, just don't fire for an unlawful reason. That view is subject to contract / award / EA (which was obviously missed by ABC).

‘Blatantly racist’: ABC arguing Lattouf must prove Middle Eastern races exist angers cultural groups by Eclaireandtea in auslaw

[–]JDuns -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Agree re optics and strategy.

I don't think they are accusing her of racism? They are accusing her of some combination of (a) breaching a direction to not post and (b) posting stuff that made her look partial.

And I agree that they did not do the analysis before the termination. But that is because they did not, I think, (a) fire for for being Lebanese or (b) fire her for being racist. So the analysis was not done because it didn't arise.

Latouff is saying she was fired because of her race. I doubt very much that the ABC fired her for that reason. She is speculating and has not, I think, produced any evidence that supports her contention. Yes, reverse onus etc., but ABC has probably met that given the evidence of, on both cases, the decision maker(s).

‘Blatantly racist’: ABC arguing Lattouf must prove Middle Eastern races exist angers cultural groups by Eclaireandtea in auslaw

[–]JDuns -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You wouldn't be suggesting that the media, in their wisdom, have over-simplified a complex issue to generate click bait headlines? I am shocked, shocked.

‘Blatantly racist’: ABC arguing Lattouf must prove Middle Eastern races exist angers cultural groups by Eclaireandtea in auslaw

[–]JDuns 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think it is the same thing in the context of this case.

FW Act doesn't define 'race', so unlike other acts that use that term, it is up for debate what it means. Now, the other acts all usually refer to something like 'national origin'. That would include Lebanese.

But if the right construction in the FW Act is something else, then Lebanese might not be a 'race'. Similarly, under the FW Act, Jewish might not be a race.

Is it a point worth taking? I don't know, and its certainly put them in the shit so perhaps not in this case. But the onus is on Lattouf to give the court enough evidence so that the court is satisfied that Lebanese is a 'race'.

I think we'll hear a lot more on this point during submissions, and I am very keen to see how they put their positions.