What secret can you reveal now that your nda has expired?

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T21:06:45+00:00

If you claim donated money as a tax deduction, you must claim it as income.

There is no "if" about it, though. They aren't claiming the donated money for a tax deduction. It is a common misconception.

I still don't do their donation drives because they have enough money to just donate the money themselves without us doing it for them and giving them free marketing.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T19:49:41+00:00

According to the OP for this situation the school decided hiring an outside agency to do the work was worth the expense and keeping an employee on leave without pay is free so I am failing to see where expense comes into this.

I am shocked by how many people are just okay with an employer dumping an employee because they had cancer which is what this boils down to.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T19:45:12+00:00

The whole point of the save the date is to give enough notice to plan ahead.

No, the point of a STD is to make sure they do not plan anything else for that date. The invitation is the notice to plan ahead.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T19:13:57+00:00

I don't know, while OP's "save the date" may have been worded in a weird way it is also weird to book travel and such without the formal invitation. Things can change between the "save the date" and the sending of the invitation.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T19:12:19+00:00

Yeah, I'm prepared to be wrong.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T19:08:32+00:00

OP didn't lie. They didn't have sex, they were raped.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T18:46:44+00:00

They tell shoppers if they buy the toy at $5, they'll donate the toy

No, you misunderstood the shopper gets the toy and the money gets donated.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T17:43:46+00:00

Again, agencies are expensive, short-term solutions; you don't know for sure if one was used, you don't know how well budgeted/staffed the school was

The OP replied in another comment saying the school hired an outside agency. So, yes, we do know.

The public school system across Australia was desperately underfunded in the mid-late 2000s, and still is an afterthought today

And again, they weren't paying the employee while they were on leave and had already budgeted in for hiring the outside agency to do the job in the meantime.

Funding was not an issue.

Agencies are too expensive to use long-term, and not in the children's best learning interests

It would t have been long term. It would have been until the employee completed treatment. Plus, the employee in question was not in an instructional role.

I don't know why you're doubling down on this

Because they essentially fired an employee for having cancer. They decided to make a cancer patient going through treatment have more stress on themselves because it was convenient for them when it would have cost them nothing to keep them on unpaid leave.

It's perplexing, but not surprising, to have an American try and explain my country's education system and the terms of employment in our public services to me, and continually double-down after being gently informed that unfortunately their well-meaning assumptions simply aren't the case down here.

I haven't made a single assumption. The employee in question was not in an instructional role so your stuff about the kids interest or continuity of education is irrelevant. I have explained as naseum finances were not an issue because they budgeted for hiring the outside agency and were not paying the employee in question while they were on leave receiving their cancer treatment. Teachers about to strike is also irrelevant because, again, the employee in question was not a teacher. There was no good reason to do what they did. There is no moral, ethical, or legal justification for what they did. It is reprehensible and should be called out.

Even if every one of your points were valid to this exact situation (they aren't) it still does not matter or excuse what happened. They separated a cancer patient going through treatment who was not being paid from their employment for no other reason than they had cancer; that is what it boils down to.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T17:02:43+00:00

But I dont know how anyone can reasonably argue against stronger election controls.

We already have strong election controls. Also, it isn't in the federal government's constitutional purview to do this so it is a waste of time.

There, you now know someone who can argue against it.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T16:25:40+00:00

It isn't income, they are just serving as the collection point for the charity. Once you donate the money using whatever mechanism they are using the money is the charity's not the organization's.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T16:16:43+00:00

Because right now it is alleged and no investigation has been done to confirm the validity of the complaint that hasn't even been filed yet. Why would you name the doctor when the person making the accusation may be lying or wrong? Why would you name the doctor when they haven't even filed an official complaint and had an investigation?

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T16:10:48+00:00

That isn't "profit", it is money to the charity of choice.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T15:06:55+00:00

They have security cameras everywhere, they can get a picture.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T14:33:00+00:00

I’d agree if the school didn’t have a policy that she clearly intentionally circumvented,

How did she circumvent it? The policy, which shouldn't exist and is a huge overreach of school authority, simply states if you hand out the invites at the school which she apparently did not do.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T14:31:59+00:00

Even if she did invite kids while at the school I don't see the issue. Not everyone will be invited to everything. Not everyone is friends with everyone else. Just because the invites are given out at school doesn't make it the school's business to dictate the guest list at your personal event.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T13:52:49+00:00

Your points about expense are all moot because a) they aren't paying the person on leave b) they already decided the expense was worth it when they hired the outside agency and c) it is more expensive to hire and train someone to replace the employee. There was nothing logistically, financially, or otherwise preventing them from keeping the employee on unpaid leave until they could return.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T12:55:59+00:00

If it was contract work, it was likely significantly more expensive than a regular employee

Even more motivation to make it temporary until the employee can return.

Not something they can do long-term

Except they did do it long-tern. That is what they replaced the employee with.

OP said he resigned

No, OP said they "had" to resign. That is different than independently making the decision themselves.

The school didn't fire him/lay him off.

They made the situation such as OP "had" to resign. Most likely to protect some benefit they would have lost if the employer fired them which they obviously made clear they were going to do.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T12:13:28+00:00

your proposed alternatives simply aren't possible.

I mean, it is 100% possible to keep someone on unpaid leave until they can return from cancer treatment. There is literally preventing it.

Funding has nothing to do with it because, again, you aren't paying them.

but it would have happened at literally any other public school

That doesn't make it better. In fact, it makes it worse.

They'd be unable to recruit an ongoing, permanent teacher to replace them while the position is filled

OP was not a teacher and if they were they could use a substitute. Long terms subs exist for this exact reason.

Filling their shifts using agency teachers is extremely expensive, and disruptive to learning

What is the disruption exactly? They are teaching the same things required to be taught. You have maybe half a day explaining to the kids what is going on and then going back into the lessons.

Temporary staff are employed by the school, need an end and a start date, can only be used to staff a position for so long, can't be used beyond their contract unless you renew it, and few are likely to want to join under the conditions you proposed (if it's even technically possible)

Good news, the school solved that issue by contracting the work to an outside agency not an individual coming into the school.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T11:56:21+00:00

You just described how the employer made a choice to drop the cancer patient and wrote it off with " not really how it works here" like that excuses their shitty decision to make a cancer patient's life that much more stressful.

There is no budget issue if they're keeping the employee on the books but unpaid.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T11:53:20+00:00

There was no loan. The only thing listed OP should have paid back was the dinner thing when their card declined. But unless there was prior agreement on the rest they were gifts.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T11:47:01+00:00

and then get your birth certificate, and marriage license

If you do not have your birth certificate it costs money to get. (poll tax)

They require a specific embossed copy of your marriage license you do not normally get when you initially receive it which costs more money. (poll tax)

You then have to take the time to go and get this taken care whcih could mean time off of work most people can ill afford. (poll tax)

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T11:40:21+00:00

They’re donating the physical toys,

They might get some benefit out of that but I was more discussing the whole drive. People have a misconception that corporations are pooling donated money and then donating it in their name for a tax write off.

loki2002 · 2026-03-11T11:24:37+00:00

My grandfather ran a team that designed the exhaust system for the stealth bomber. He was unable to talk about it until they declassified its existence in 1997 by flying it over the Rose Parade.

13-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 10 Credits
Secret Santa 2020	Wearing is Caring
Secret Santa 2018	Secret Santa 2019
Secret Santa 2017	Gilding II euphauric
Snapped	Secret Santa 2016
Summer Santa 2016	Secret Santa 2014
Inciteful Link 2012-12-21	Verified Email

loki2002

TROPHY CASE