|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 21, 2023 13:50:57 GMT
They have been demanding people who do not agree with their viewpoint should be sacked, Simone Clark ring a bell? There are many more. Hopenothate spend much of their time demanding the sacking of people for having views different from them. EDIT you may have repeatedly pointed out something but it is not comparable, insane dropped from common usage over time as Gay rights increased. Why you would keep on comparing a natural event with the wilful decision to impose a definition of woman on a reluctant public I do not know. Whose fault is it if employers can sack people on a whim? It's not the Left's fault. The Right wants a regulation-free Singapore-on-Thames where employers can do anything they please. You reap what you sow, Sandy. You can't have protections against being 'cancelled' and a regulation-free environment. It is if they are demanding the sacking which oft times is the case and make it difficult for the employer to carry on with the person's employment, which was the point. I am not asking for a regulation-free Singapore on Thames. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Nov 21, 2023 14:03:23 GMT
Whose fault is it if employers can sack people on a whim? It's not the Left's fault. The Right wants a regulation-free Singapore-on-Thames where employers can do anything they please. You reap what you sow, Sandy. You can't have protections against being 'cancelled' and a regulation-free environment. It is if they are demanding the sacking which oft times is the case and make it difficult for the employer to carry on with the person's employment, which was the point. I am not asking for a regulation-free Singapore on Thames. If it were a capitalist system and the employer was therefore competing in the market, the only concern he should have is are his employees worth employing. Are they making the firm more money than it is costing. I think that is correct. As the employee you would be secure because all you would need to do is to do you job as well as the other lads. Indeed if you found it harder than the others you are probably in the wrong job anyway and will find you would make more money doing a job that fits your skills. A free hire and fire system would benefit you in this case because not only would you get sacked for doing a job that you were not good at, you would find it easier to get a job in something you were good at, and so your sacking ultimacy leads to a pay rise and safer employment. It's what Economists call liquidity. Can the workforce easily flow into the optimum jobs that fully utilise their skills. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 21, 2023 14:23:48 GMT
If Michael asks you not to call him Mike but you continue to do so it's not Michael who is being a dickhead. What if Michael asks you to call him Gloria? Then I'd call her Gloria. It's no skin off my penis. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 21, 2023 14:27:00 GMT
What if Michael asks you to call him Gloria? Then I'd call her Gloria. It's no skin off my penis. Why did you say her, it is still Michael. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 21, 2023 14:30:34 GMT
This isn’t Terry asking to be called Terence .
It’s lefties demanding that the law indulges deluded men.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 21, 2023 14:33:02 GMT
Whose fault is it if employers can sack people on a whim? It's not the Left's fault. The Right wants a regulation-free Singapore-on-Thames where employers can do anything they please. You reap what you sow, Sandy. You can't have protections against being 'cancelled' and a regulation-free environment. It is if they are demanding the sacking which oft times is the case and make it difficult for the employer to carry on with the person's employment, which was the point. I am not asking for a regulation-free Singapore on Thames. If the employer breaks his contract, a sacked person will have a legal remedy. If the sacked person has no legal remedy, that will be because there is no regulation in place. The Left can't be blamed if there are no protective regulations. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 21, 2023 14:34:38 GMT
This isn’t Terry asking to be called Terence . It’s lefties demanding that the law indulges deluded men. Depends which definition of men you are using. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 21, 2023 14:38:06 GMT
What if Michael asks you to call him Gloria? Then I'd call her Gloria. It's no skin off my penis. Do whatever you want |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 21, 2023 14:38:42 GMT
This isn’t Terry asking to be called Terence . It’s lefties demanding that the law indulges deluded men. Depends which definition of men you are using. Adult biological male human . Unless you follow the lefties path of imposing a new legal definition to fit an agenda to indulge deluded men . |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 21, 2023 14:40:17 GMT
It is if they are demanding the sacking which oft times is the case and make it difficult for the employer to carry on with the person's employment, which was the point. I am not asking for a regulation-free Singapore on Thames. If the employer breaks his contract, a sacked person will have a legal remedy. If the sacked person has no legal remedy, that will be because there is no regulation in place. The Left can't be blamed if there are no protective regulations. If there is no fireguard it does not mean you push people into the fire. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 21, 2023 14:52:34 GMT
Then I'd call her Gloria. It's no skin off my penis. Why did you say her, it is still Michael. Because I didn't fall for your trap. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 21, 2023 14:54:52 GMT
Then I'd call her Gloria. It's no skin off my penis. Do whatever you want Or better still do what Gloria wants. It's just good manners. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 21, 2023 14:57:15 GMT
Why did you say her, it is still Michael. Because I didn't fall for your trap. ?? It seems like whatever 'trap' you may have expected it still comes out as changing a pronoun for the sounds of a name. It is still Michael and it is still him |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 21, 2023 15:02:38 GMT
Depends which definition of men you are using. Adult biological male human . Unless you follow the lefties path of imposing a new legal definition to fit an agenda to indulge deluded men . Yeah, that's right. Your definition is different. They're not women by your definition, but they are by ours. Whether they are women will depend on who you ask and what their definitional frame of reference is. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 21, 2023 15:05:06 GMT
If the employer breaks his contract, a sacked person will have a legal remedy. If the sacked person has no legal remedy, that will be because there is no regulation in place. The Left can't be blamed if there are no protective regulations. If there is no fireguard it does not mean you push people into the fire. Just because you have a brolly, it doesn't mean it's raining. |
|
