Re: Drivers and guards to be sacked.

["Tezza" <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au>]

"Dave Proctor" <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
VEvn5.9356$ug2.141762@news5.giganews.com">news:VEvn5.9356$ug2.141762@news5.giganews.com...
> "Tezza" <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
> 399e8360$0$772$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au">news:399e8360$0$772$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
>
> > But it's OK for the employer to do something unlawful? ie, sack the
> > employee.
>
> If the employer has gone through the process of warning and counselling
the
> employee (as CityRail seem to be doing) then the dismissal is not
unlawful.

The appeals board keeps saying differently.


> > > > Guard who doesn't want to wear a tie is not riff-raff.
> > >
> > > Someone who will not comply with lawful directions from their employer
> is riff-raff.


Moronic statement.

> > > AGree there. But if you don't like the conditions that management
wants
> > you to work under, why not find another job?
> >
> > They changed the conditions.
>
> So change jobs if you don't like them. Plenty of people have done that.


Why should someone have to change jobs because they have an employer with an
antiquated mindset? An employer who consistently worries more about veneer
than substance? An employer who cares more about cutting costs than safety?

I happen to like my job despite management who live in the steam-age. I
think I'll stay.