Jump to content RIP Sheffield Admin Mort

The Conservative Party - Part Two.

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ECCOnoob said:

Stop with the rhetoric and read what I have posted.   

 

On this occasion it is NOT entirely her fault.  The Inquiry says that in the same conclusions that you also chose to selectively mention from.

 

My opinion is that it is not an automatic sacking as there is too much ambiguity.  

 

Now, let's try and debate like adults. Put your clear agenda to one side and explain why you are so certain a case is proven.  

What’s my agenda?

 

But what would help is the release of the full report. Boris doesn’t want to release the full report. I wonder why? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, West 77 said:

In the case of Priti Patel it's not been proven that she has committed a sackable offence.  The evidence against her is just opinions. In the real World outside of the public sector a business has to take the commercial implications into account whether to terminate an employee who has committed a sackable offence. The reality is an employee who is excellent at their job is likely to be treated more leniently than an employee who is poor at their job. 

Please tell me that you dont employ people...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, West 77 said:

In the case of Priti Patel it's not been proven that she has committed a sackable offence.  The evidence against her is just opinions. In the real World outside of the public sector a business has to take the commercial implications into account whether to terminate an employee who has committed a sackable offence. The reality is an employee who is excellent at their job is likely to be treated more leniently than an employee who is poor at their job. 

If two people commit the same sackable offence,  one stays because he/she is better at their job, the person not as good gets the sack.  Surely that can't be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

What sackable offence was proven?   

 

 

 

Do you mean this time she was investigated, or last time?

 

Because in both cases she was found to have breached the ministerial code. That’s automatic resignation/ sacking territory for any  government, willing to uphold standards in public life. 

 

Theresa May had the moral fibre to sack Patel. Johnson didn’t. 
 

Not so long ago, you were happy to accept the findings of the EHRC report, in order to have a go at Jeremy Corbyn. You don’t seem  as keen to accept the findings of Sir Alex Allen. Does it not suit your political outlook?

 

Johnson has behaved as disgracefully as Patel. Sadly, we are stuck with both of them

for now. We deserve better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Pettytom said:

Do you mean this time she was investigated, or last time?

 

Because in both cases she was found to have breached the ministerial code. That’s automatic resignation/ sacking territory for any  government, willing to uphold standards in public life. 

 

Theresa May had the moral fibre to sack Patel. Johnson didn’t. 
 

Not so long ago, you were happy to accept the findings of the EHRC report, in order to have a go at Jeremy Corbyn. You don’t seem  as keen to accept the findings of Sir Alex Allen. Does it not suit your political outlook?

 

Johnson has behaved as disgracefully as Patel. Sadly, we are stuck with both of them

for now. We deserve better.

Have you not read ECCOnoob's recent posts regarding the inquiry?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, banjodeano said:

Please tell me that you dont employ people...

I've only stated what happens in the real World.  What difference does it make whether I employ people or not. 

 

51 minutes ago, PRESLEY said:

If two people commit the same sackable offence,  one stays because he/she is better at their job, the person not as good gets the sack.  Surely that can't be right.

I'm not saying it's right only that it happens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, West 77 said:

Have you not read ECCOnoob's recent posts regarding the inquiry?

I have.

 

Why do you ask?


Is it ask a random question day?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, West 77 said:

I've only stated what happens in the real World.  What difference does it make whether I employ people or not. 

 

I'm not saying it's right only that it happens. 

It doesnt make any difference at all, i just wondered.

If you were an employer you sound like you would be really horrible with your workers, but if you prefer not to answer that's up to you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Pettytom said:

I have.

 

Why do you ask?


Is it ask a random question day?

I asked because ECCOnoob provided ample evidence from the inquiry report to support it is not proven that Priti Patel has bullied anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, West 77 said:

I asked because ECCOnoob provided ample evidence from the inquiry report to support it is not proven that Priti Patel has bullied anyone.

The inquiry concluded that Patel had breached the ministerial code. Every single other minister ever, who has breached the ministerial code, has lost their job. All of them.

 

That’s all you need to know.

 

Except for the fact that “unintentional bullying” doesn’t exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, banjodeano said:

It doesnt make any difference at all, i just wondered.

If you were an employer you sound like you would be really horrible with your workers, but if you prefer not to answer that's up to you

Wow.  

 

17 minutes ago, Pettytom said:

The inquiry concluded that Patel had breached the ministerial code. Every single other minister ever, who has breached the ministerial code, has lost their job. All of them.

 

That’s all you need to know.

 

Except for the fact that “unintentional bullying” doesn’t exist.

There is nothing set in stone that a cabinet minister has to resign or be sacked for breaching the ministerial code. Priti Patel will receive a written warning and has already made an apology.

 

 All you really need to know is that as the sole arbiter of the rules, the prime minister decides if there has been a breach of the ministerial code. The prime minister has decided that Priti Patel hasn't breached the ministerial code.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, West 77 said:

Wow.  

 

There is nothing set in stone that a cabinet minister has to resign or be sacked for breaching the ministerial code. Priti Patel will receive a written warning and has already made an apology.

 

 All you really need to know is that as the sole arbiter of the rules, the prime minister decides if there has been a breach of the ministerial code. The prime minister has decided that Priti Patel hasn't breached the ministerial code.

 

 

Fair enough

 

It’s very telling that there are quite a few of our Tory contributors who seem to be totally at ease with workplace bullying. I’d like to say I was surprised, but I’m not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.