SACKED

HashRouge said:
Do I think what she did was awful? Yes.

Do I think she should have lost her job over it? No.

The thing is that this could affect her whole life. She has lost her job and may well struggle to find another teaching job (in fact almost certainly will), because a quick google of her name will bring this up. She may well struggle to find another job full stop. As a punishment I don't think that is in proportion with what she has done. She may well never raise a hand to another horse again, but she will be paying the price for this video potentially for decades to come.

As to why she lost her job, I'm willing to bet that it has a lot to do with the reputation of the school. I also work at an independent school and there is no way I would keep my job if a video like this went viral.
Click to expand...
If you were a bank manager and someone was being interviewed for a cashiers job but you knew they had robbed a bank in the past, would you employ them?
If you were the senior partner in a law firm and you knew that the person you were interviewing had been suspended whilst being investigated fraud would you employ them?
If you were the owner of a child care facility and someone applied for a job that you knew had lost their temper with an animal in their care. Would you employ them?

When there is any possiblity of a transference of risk you would have to ascertain that persons suitability for their role, or if the risks are significant enough to be a cause for concern.

No to all three I would have thought.
 
Last edited:
I'm not a recruiter but if someone was suspended pending investigation, and the investigation found they were not guilty of anything then it would be pretty crap if that was held against them forevermore.
People in my org have kept their job after being put on gardening leave while something was quickly investigated. they did nothing wrong, an investigation is to find out what happened not to say that person is guilty of anything.
 
Never mind employment... Let's chuck everyone who has ever done a Wrong Thing out of society altogether. That should minimise the risk of Wrong Doing. How about some kind of camp? Maybe we could employ the Bad People in some kind of menial work that is a bit beneath the Good People? That sounds like a plan. We can at least make the Bad People wear a badge for the rest of their lives so we can spot them easily.

How do we decide who is Bad? Well, we'll let the mob decide. That way the authorities can wash their hands of the consequences. "Crucify Him!" they shouted so it is on them.

These tales are as old as time aren't they? Is it ever good?
 
PapaverFollis said:
Never mind employment... Let's chuck everyone who has ever done a Wrong Thing out of society altogether. That should minimise the risk of Wrong Doing. How about some kind of camp? Maybe we could employ the Bad People in some kind of menial work that is a bit beneath the Good People? That sounds like a plan. We can at least make the Bad People wear a badge for the rest of their lives so we can spot them easily.

How do we decide who is Bad? Well, we'll let the mob decide. That way the authorities can wash their hands of the consequences. "Crucify Him!" they shouted so it is on them.

These tales are as old as time aren't they? Is it ever good?
Click to expand...


Totally agree. What she did was wrong, without question. But this trial by people who dont know the full facts is just as wrong.

Leave the woman alone now.
 
PapaverFollis said:
Never mind employment... Let's chuck everyone who has ever done a Wrong Thing out of society altogether. That should minimise the risk of Wrong Doing. How about some kind of camp? Maybe we could employ the Bad People in some kind of menial work that is a bit beneath the Good People? That sounds like a plan. We can at least make the Bad People wear a badge for the rest of their lives so we can spot them easily.

How do we decide who is Bad? Well, we'll let the mob decide. That way the authorities can wash their hands of the consequences. "Crucify Him!" they shouted so it is on them.

These tales are as old as time aren't they? Is it ever good?
Click to expand...
This is where, if we're not careful, cancel culture will take us. It's also why we have things called laws, courts, judges, etc.
 
PapaverFollis said:
Never mind employment... Let's chuck everyone who has ever done a Wrong Thing out of society altogether. That should minimise the risk of Wrong Doing. How about some kind of camp? Maybe we could employ the Bad People in some kind of menial work that is a bit beneath the Good People? That sounds like a plan. We can at least make the Bad People wear a badge for the rest of their lives so we can spot them easily.

How do we decide who is Bad? Well, we'll let the mob decide. That way the authorities can wash their hands of the consequences. "Crucify Him!" they shouted so it is on them.

These tales are as old as time aren't they? Is it ever good?
Click to expand...

So is the alternative that people can do whatever they want without being called out on it as long as it’s not illegal? (and I’m not saying that splashing stuff all over social media is the right way to go either). If there are no consequences for bad or inappropriate behaviour what will happen to society then? I don’t know what the answer is by the way, but I am interested in people’s views on this.

Slightly off topic, but what about famous people who have historic unsavoury stuff they put on social media dug up many years later and their careers end or badly suffer as a result? We need to realise and be mindful that anything we say or do now can be dragged up and used against us thanks to social media.
 
Upthecreek said:
Slightly off topic, but what about famous people who have historic unsavoury stuff they put on social media dug up many years later and their careers end or badly suffer as a result? We need to realise and be mindful that anything we say or do now can be dragged up and used against us thanks to social media.
Click to expand...
i actually hate it when that happens, quite often the person who gets stuff dragged up has changed substantially in their views or attitudes. it's like saying people can never change or learn. I think they can, they might forget that they said something once 15 years ago when they were young and stupid or naive.
 
Upthecreek said:
So is the alternative that people can do whatever they want without being called out on it as long as it’s not illegal? (and I’m not saying that splashing stuff all over social media is the right way to go either). If there are no consequences for bad or inappropriate behaviour what will happen to society then? I don’t know what the answer is by the way, but I am interested in people’s views on this.

Slightly off topic, but what about famous people who have historic unsavoury stuff they put on social media dug up many years later and their careers end or badly suffer as a result? We need to realise and be mindful that anything we say or do now can be dragged up and used against us thanks to social media.
Click to expand...
The bottom line is that behaviour is either legal or not, that can and does include hate crimes on social media. If the behaviour is legal, then while you may not like it, and especially if it does not impinge on you, then you have no right to know about it, let alone judge and decide who should and should not be punished.
 
Upthecreek said:
So is the alternative that people can do whatever they want without being called out on it as long as it’s not illegal? (and I’m not saying that splashing stuff all over social media is the right way to go either). If there are no consequences for bad or inappropriate behaviour what will happen to society then? I don’t know what the answer is by the way, but I am interested in people’s views on this.

Slightly off topic, but what about famous people who have historic unsavoury stuff they put on social media dug up many years later and their careers end or badly suffer as a result? We need to realise and be mindful that anything we say or do now can be dragged up and used against us thanks to social media.
Click to expand...


Yes. Who do you think should be the judge of whether legal behacviour should be called out? You? Me? CP? Or somebody who has had an ASBO against him? The list could be endless but we already have a perfectly workable system within the law.
 
Pearlsacarolsinger said:
Yes. Who do you think should be the judge of whether legal behacviour should be called out? You? Me? CP? Or somebody who has had an ASBO against him? The list could be endless but we already have a perfectly workable system within the law.
Click to expand...
Child protection or Position of Trust. Experts who have multi agency input (training providers/head teacher/police) and sit around the table and discuss the person of interest. They who have years of experience headed by a LADO (Local Authority Designated Officer) who chairs the meeting. Where every aspect of the person under scrutiny's life is examined from their home life, whether they have a criminal record, previous allegations made against them, previous work history, any additional information. All goes in the cooking pot. And out comes the outcome which is then acted on.

Before the meeting is held it has to be decided whether it meets the threshold. If it doesn't no meeting will take place but the head of the school may be advised on the actions he/she should take, and whether that is suspension, sacking or additional training. The head may wish to get additional information about the incident or talk to witnesses or whatever.

Its not for us to comment whether or not they are guilty or not. But its frustrating when people keep saying "they only got the sack because the hunt sabs caused them to lose their job" or "its because of social media" or "because the school felt under pressure due to the public outcry". All those statements are incorrect as the law and protocols don't work like that.

And people who say "its not right she lost her job, complete overreaction" are not party to all the facts. And not everything is black and white in life and there are reasons for everything. I am not suggesting there is no smoke without fire but we are not party to the facts so there may be every justification for doing what they have done, nobody knows.
 
Last edited:
FestiveG said:
The bottom line is that behaviour is either legal or not, that can and does include hate crimes on social media. If the behaviour is legal, then while you may not like it, and especially if it does not impinge on you, then you have no right to know about it, let alone judge and decide who should and should not be punished.
Click to expand...

But due to social media we do know about it and we do make judgments on what we see every single day. Of course the general public don’t get to decide on punishments, but we are all entitled to an opinion on things that are in the public domain regardless of whether or not they impinge on us personally.
 
milliepops said:
i actually hate it when that happens, quite often the person who gets stuff dragged up has changed substantially in their views or attitudes. it's like saying people can never change or learn. I think they can, they might forget that they said something once 15 years ago when they were young and stupid or naive.
Click to expand...

It’s scary that once the information is out there you can’t take it back. I am constantly banging on about that to my kids because they live their lives on social media and it’s worrying that something they do or say as young people could go against them many years in the future. Some employers do background checks by looking at the social media of prospective job candidates for example.
 
Birker2020 said:
If you were a bank manager and someone was being interviewed for a cashiers job but you knew they had robbed a bank in the past, would you employ them?
If you were the senior partner in a law firm and you knew that the person you were interviewing had been suspended whilst being investigated fraud would you employ them?
If you were the owner of a child care facility and someone applied for a job that you knew had lost their temper with an animal in their care. Would you employ them?

When there is any possiblity of a transference of risk you would have to ascertain that persons suitability for their role, or if the risks are significant enough to be a cause for concern.

No to all three I would have thought.
Click to expand...


There is a very big difference between taking on a new employee and sacking one you already employ.
 
i expect that it's fairly common now to screen on SM presence. but i still think it wouldn't be *proportionate* to make a decision on employing someone who posted something stupid when they were a teenager, for example. Not to say that wouldn't ever happen of course.
 
milliepops said:
i expect that it's fairly common now to screen on SM presence. but i still think it wouldn't be *proportionate* to make a decision on employing someone who posted something stupid when they were a teenager, for example. Not to say that wouldn't ever happen of course.
Click to expand...
Even less so to base the decision on what other people claimed to believe about the content
 
Upthecreek said:
But due to social media we do know about it and we do make judgments on what we see every single day. Of course the general public don’t get to decide on punishments, but we are all entitled to an opinion on things that are in the public domain regardless of whether or not they impinge on us personally.
Click to expand...

But we should also be mindful that this is about one woman. Who, i would imagine is having a pretty tough time right now.
 
Asha said:
But we should also be mindful that this is about one woman. Who, i would imagine is having a pretty tough time right now.
Click to expand...
Yes I would imagine she is having a rubbish time of things and I feel sorry for her. Its a horrible situation for her to be in but even so, kicking a horse in public is only ever going to end one way.
 
Birker2020 said:
Yes I would imagine she is having a rubbish time of things and I feel sorry for her. Its a horrible situation for her to be in but even so, kicking a horse in public is only ever going to end one way.
Click to expand...
Only if it is spread on social media, particularly by a known activist, who has a high profile because of his employment on a public broadcasting service.
 
There are three sets of responses to this.

1. Anyone who kicks a pony once in the belly and slaps its nose 3 times deserves everything coming to them no matter how bad that is.

2. Anyone who kicks a pony once in the belly and slaps its nose 3 times and is unlucky or stupid enough to get themselves filmed doing it deserves everything coming to them no matter how bad that is.

3. People should receive a punishment which is proportionate to the rules they can be proved to have infringed.

I am happy to be in group 3 and hope the people in groups 1 and 2 never have to live to experience the possible consequences of a society that lives by those rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top