Folau’s feat of Clay

CHIEF Fairfax sports writer, Andrew Webster, has lashed out today over Rugby Australia’s humiliating capitulation to Israel Folau. Webster is not merely livid about the multi-million dollar compensation payment and apology. He’s also mystified as to why Raelene Castle – a contender with Peter Beattie for the title of worst administrator in the recent history of Australian sport – didn’t continue the war against Folau and his family. It seems obvious: RA was advised by its lawyers that what they did to the star playmaker was unlawful and they didn’t have a prosthetic leg to stand on. It was a grovelling admission of moral defeat. Webster comes awfully close to saying Folau was uppity to fight back and takes an ugly swipe at father and son for wanting to earn a quid. Left-wing orthodoxy insists black men are all too often exploited by the white sporting establishment. When they’re devout Christians, however, they’re greedy:

Spurred on by the likes of broadcaster Alan Jones and emboldened by a chorus of supporters on social media, he started to feel more popular than Jesus and the Beatles — and acted accordingly.

After he was sacked following his infamous post on April 10 in which he warned homosexuals they would go to Hell if they didn’t repent, he had the audacity to ask the public to fund his looming legal stoush with RA.

I’ve been writing stories about Folau since he was a teenager, when he was a spring-heeled centre for the Melbourne Storm.

From his move to the Broncos, to the GWS Giants, then to rugby, he and his father have been motivated by one thing: money.

These were exactly the kind of things said against Cassius Clay in the 1960s after he changed his name and made a number of unpopular statements of religious principle.  Eventually, boxing in the United States also surrendered to legal and moral reality. A difference in contemporary Australia is that haters have fought even harder to keep a champion out of work and out of the ring. “People can be bigots if they want,” says Webster. Sure they can but in the Folau case, it just cost them several million dollars.

This entry was posted in Australian Story, Hypocrisy of progressives and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

222 Responses to Folau’s feat of Clay

  1. Nice to see some haters so butt hurt.

  2. RomeoWhiskey

    IMHO – Rugby Australia was forced to settle because they botched the termination of Folau. They didn’t allow due process to be effected which meant he had plenty of ammunition and would have likely won his case on that alone.

    In saying that while I believe that RA are complete clowns and should all go, the “Free Speech” issue here is blended with a commercial decision. Employee makes an offensive* post. Employer’s biggest sponsor threatens to pull cash because of offended values*. Employer tells employee to pull head in or be fired. Employee doesnt. Employee fired.

    While this could likely breach some anti trust or equivalent law, the alternative is that the Sponsor pulls the cash and the employer is worse off for the employees behavior?

    At the very least this will highlight to employers to add in explicit clauses into contracts that give them the right to say what you can and cant say on social media, so there is no grey area in the future.

    Free speech is not going to jail for saying something someone dislikes, but shouldn’t be able to impede one’s business if they make a commercial decision that you are bad for business. (again IMHO)

    * denotes that i don’t believe the post to be offensive (stupid yes) or Qantas to have any values given their blatant middle east hypocrisy.

  3. stackja

    Webster left the ‘hostile’ Daily Telegraph to the ‘friendly’ SMH. His opinion is, off course, slanted.

  4. Snoopy

    Folau’s advice to sinners caused absolutely no one to be excluded from rugby. Conversely, Raelene Castles’ solution to guaranteeing ‘inclusion’ which was never under threat has excluded a committed evangelical Christian.

  5. Pyrmonter

    Yet again, a ‘conservative’ upholds the right of tribe-members to break the promises they make in employment contracts. It’s all good and fun while the tribe-leaders have some influence, but wait until the Left accept the gift you offer them and start expropriating your contractual rights.

  6. Leigh Lowe

    I predicted here yesterday that the Vicar of Rugby will cop the extreme wrath of the scorned SJWs over this.
    Karma.
    She was put up on a pedestal as the brave defender of “Diversity and Inclusion”.
    Now she has sold out they are stacking the firewood around the pedestal.

  7. C.L.

    They’re going to need a lot of firewood.

  8. feelthebern

    Webster (& all other alleged sports jouno’s) are now simply mouth pieces for player agents & administrators.
    Been a long time since this country has had real sports journo’s.
    Unlike the US where ESPN (owned by Disney) gives it to players, teams & administrators.
    Do that in Australia & you get cut off by the league in question.

  9. Iampeter

    Another day another left wing thread at the Cat.

    Christianity-hating Rugby Australia’s capitulation to Israel Folau.

    RA is not Christian-hating. This is a shamefully dishonest and obviously false statement.

    Left-wing orthodoxy insists black men are all too often exploited by the white sporting establishment.

    It is Folau and his supporters that are behaving like triggered snowflakes and playing identity politics, like the conventional leftists that you are.

    “People can be bigots if they want,” says Webster. Sure they can but in the Folau case, it just cost them several million dollars.

    That was the message to Andrew Bolt too, when he was dragged through 18C hell.
    As with all conservative positions, their opposition was just a pretence.

  10. Leigh Lowe

    Pyrmonter

    #3253600, posted on December 6, 2019 at 11:14 am

    Yet again, a ‘conservative’ upholds the right of tribe-members to break the promises they make in employment contracts. It’s all good and fun while the tribe-leaders have some influence, but wait until the Left accept the gift you offer them and start expropriating your contractual rights.

    Huh?
    Let me explain the law of contract to you.
    The more the terms of a contract depart from the fundamentals (description of goods and services, consideration, term or finalization) the less likely it is that a court will enforce that contract.
    There is much conjecture about what was in Folau’s contract but one thing is for sure … Folau effectively had one single potential employer (RA) and that employer placed onerous personal conditions on him which had zero to do with the services he provided (ie playing rugby).
    Insertion of those clauses was a textbook case of unconscionable conduct by RA, and no doubt their lawyers advised them that a court would see it that way.
    There has been no departure from the principles of contract law here. On the contrary, this is entirely in line with legal precedent in contract law.

  11. Tom

    Another day another left wing thread at the Cat.

    Glad that was your intro, you Goebbelsian clown, so I didn’t have to read the rest of our upside-down gibberish.

  12. jupes

    RA is not Christian-hating. This is a shamefully dishonest and obviously false statement.

    No. The above is a shamefully dishonest and obviously false statement.

    Try again fuckhead.

  13. Leigh Lowe

    Unlike the US where ESPN (owned by Disney) gives it to players, teams & administrators.
    Do that in Australia & you get cut off by the league in question.

    Yep.
    The big codes have “accredited journalists”.
    Accredited means a warm box on game day with free drinks and food.
    If they pull your accreditation you pay for your tickets, sit in the outer and have no access to press conferences etc.
    Players and clubs are warned off talking to you.
    Remember the guy who discovered the drug rehab medical records of three players (including one yuuge AFL name)?
    Gone.
    Accreditation removed and unloaded from the channel he was working for (who happened to hold the AFL broadcast rights).

  14. candy

    Those contracts need to be pretty precise in regard to what can be said on social media, and not just in relation to religious beliefs. I’m not seeing a problem with that. It is a commercial enterprise and someone being paid fair and generous salaries to “work” for RA. It is the way of the world now.
    Definitely a Muslim putting certain beliefs on social media would be bound to offend people too and cause a ruckus.

    So saying though Ms Castle I think seemed fond of Folau and was not too miffed about his first posts. It was after certain SMH and Qantas woke folk got involved that she could not handle the situation at all.
    I actually think they bullied her, but still she did not handle it well – at all.

    She seems a nice lady. Maybe lacking in self esteem judging by the terrible wig and clothes she wears, she’s not unattractive.

  15. candy

    Those contracts need to be pretty specific in regard to what can be said or not said on social media, and not just in relation to religious beliefs. It is a private organisation and “employees” are being paid fair and generous salaries etc. It is the way of the world.

    So saying though, Ms Castle I think seemed fond of Folau and was not miffed about his first post(s) too much, until certain SMH and Qantas woke folk got involved and I think – bullied her. She handled it not very well at all , seemed all at sea. But she did not shine.
    She seems a nice lady but lacking in self esteem judging by the fake wig and unattractive outfits she wears.

  16. Pyrmonter

    @ Leigh

    By which standard of ‘unconscionablity”?

    There is no suggestion of common law or equitable unconscientiousness of the traditional Amadio variety: Folau has access to lawyers, ‘players agents’ and the like and can be presumed to have struck a commercial bargain with an employer which regards aspects of its reputation as important. It’s the same as Burmah Oil.

    Or do you mean the ‘we re-write contracts at large, after the fact, because we think there is some sort of injustice’ sort of unconscionability based on that phoney, pseudo-marxist notion of ‘inequality of bargaining power’. If you do, you’ve forgotten the basics of commercial law, and why until very recently commercial bargains were expected to be adhered to (and why any sound ‘conservative’ government would act to remove this trust-destroying lawyers picnic from the ACCL).

  17. Porter

    If Latham is correct – and he’s chums with Jones who’s chums with Folau – there was evidence Qantas had interfered, which was a clear breach of law.
    Join the dots: once that became evident, Folau knew he had them and upped his demand to $14 million. RA folded faster than a deck chair after that.

  18. C.L.

    If they pull your accreditation you pay for your tickets, sit in the outer and have no access to press conferences etc.

    Sports journalism is a thing that can be done without access to the sportsmen themselves, though, really. You write about the games, matches, tournies, derbies, meets and races. They’re just hookers. I’ve met and known a few of the species. They’re mostly the same. They think they’re “sports” themselves and love the image, the boyo mission and, yes, the tickets.

  19. Des Deskperson

    ‘the promises they make in employment contracts.’

    I’ve never actually seen the contract that Folua signed up to. Some people here seem to have seen it. I’d be obliged if one of them could post a link or at least transcribe or summarise it.

  20. candy

    There was evidence Qantas had interfered, which was a clear breach of law.

    Yes, that’s what I think happened.
    Ms Castle was bullied into certain statements/positions. She could have come to a much earlier agreement with Folau and perhaps he could have still played, which is what he wanted.
    They both seemed well intentioned, good people.

  21. mh

    People of colour in Australia take note. Once you don’t follow the Left’s rules they will attempt to destroy you.

  22. Pyrmonter

    @ Porter

    It is a tort to induce breach of a contract. But not to induce performance.

  23. woolfe

    Qantas and probably ANZ told RA to settle as they knew they would be dragged before the courts.

  24. Mark A

    candy
    #3253626, posted on December 6, 2019 at 11:59 am

    There was evidence Qantas had interfered, which was a clear breach of law.

    Yes, that’s what I think happened.
    Ms Castle was bullied into certain statements/positions. She could have come to a much earlier agreement with Folau and perhaps he could have still played, which is what he wanted.
    They both seemed well intentioned, good people.

    Are you for real?
    Why can’t you accept things at face value?
    For one she is incompetent as an admin, the mess she made in of her previous job proves it.

    If she was so buddy buddy with Folau, she would have behaved differently, there was no need for bullying she was capable of being nasty and vindictive on her own accord.

  25. woolfe

    Leigh your comment has been put as a comment in the Australian (Israel Folau payout ‘will hurt the rugby clubs’) article by “Denis”

  26. candy

    she was capable of being nasty and vindictive on her own accord.

    Mark A, I don’t see her that in her, in my opinion. She just seemed ineffectual and confused about what to do. And I don’t see Folau as anything but courteous and respectful.

  27. Mark A

    candy
    #3253639, posted on December 6, 2019 at 12:22 pm

    she was capable of being nasty and vindictive on her own accord.

    Mark A, I don’t see her that in her, in my opinion. She just seemed ineffectual and confused about what to do. And I don’t see Folau as anything but courteous and respectful.

    OK Cindy you obviously didn’t follow the events and accusations, utterances, nasty remarks made as close as some of us did.
    No problem, stick to you opinion.

  28. Lee

    Yet again, a ‘conservative’ upholds the right of tribe-members to break the promises they make in employment contracts. It’s all good and fun while the tribe-leaders have some influence, but wait until the Left accept the gift you offer them and start expropriating your contractual rights.

    Yet some well-informed people have said that there was nothing in Folau’s contract stopping him from what he said/wrote.

    Ergo, there was no “promise.”

    From the way Rugby Australia folded, they obviously knew they had no legal leg to stand on.

  29. feelthebern

    I always thought Leigh Lowe was Denis Denuto.

  30. feelthebern

    From the way Rugby Australia folded, they obviously knew they had no legal leg to stand on.

    Correct.
    The mediation etc was pure theatre.
    Folau was always going to get a payday.
    Only the size of the payday was in question.

  31. sabena

    Just a reminder-Folau was found guilty of a breach of the rugby code of conduct by a panel consisting of John West QC,Kate Eastmann SC & John Boultbee.
    Amid the calls for Cameron Clyne and Raelene Castle to go,what about that trio?

  32. Old School Conservative

    Candy, Raelene has repeated that Israel’s sacking still stands and that it was highly unlikely that he would sign on with any Super Rugby team in Oz.
    Sounds vindictive to me.

  33. JC

    Imploder supports 18c. Huge fan.
    Thought it was great Bolt was dragged in court and lost the case because of a left wing judge.

  34. Mother Lode

    After he was sacked following his infamous post on April 10 in which he warned homosexuals they would go to Hell if they didn’t repent, he had the audacity to ask the public to fund his looming legal stoush with RA.

    Which they did, with gusto.

    The Fearfacts writer is shocked.

    Seems he doesn’t really understand people or the world that well. Very likely that is what impels him to progressivism: You don’t have to understand what people think. You pass a law telling them what to think.

  35. feelthebern

    It is Folau and his supporters that are behaving like triggered snowflakes and playing identity politics, like the conventional leftists that you are.

    Top 10 stupidest comment to be made at the Cat.

  36. feelthebern

    Folau will sign with the Bulldogs.
    The league ones.
    Not the afl ones.

  37. Lee

    Imploder supports 18c. Huge fan.
    Thought it was great Bolt was dragged in court and lost the case because of a left wing judge.

    And he has the audacity to accuse conservatives here of being “left wing.”

    He seems to think that conservatives and right wingers should take their cue from lefties.

  38. Old School Conservative

    Folau will sign with the Bulldogs.

    Verrrrrrrry interesting!
    Are you serious, having a lend, or joking about the Castle/Bulldogs backstory?

  39. Iampeter

    Folau hasn’t alleged any breach of contract. He just took his employer to FWA. There is no contract law at play here.
    He also has no legitimate Fair Work claim to make either because his income is well outside the threshold.
    This should never have gotten as far as it did, but the enormous pressure put on Fair Work and the very existence of leftist organizations like Fair Work, make these shake-downs possible.
    The only precedent that has been established here is that millionaires can now shake down their employers for millions too.

    Sad that no one at Australia’s leading Right-Wing blog is opposed to the leftist stunt that Folau and the Christian Lobby pulled here.
    This is why I always refer to conservatives as the religious and politically illiterate arm of the left wing.

  40. Bronson

    Agreed Sabena the role of the code of conduct panel in coming to the finding they did also deserves attention and further investigation lest future panels repeat the same errors that contributed to this high farce.

  41. JC

    #3253659, posted on December 6, 2019 at 12:41 pm
    Folau hasn’t alleged any breach of contract. He just took his employer to FWA. There is no contract law at play here.
    He also has no legitimate Fair Work claim to make either because his income is well outside the threshold.

    Of course. That’s why RA settled with lots of money comp and a grovelling apology. You fucking imbecile.

    18c! Plodes! Huge fan.

  42. feelthebern

    Bulldogs want to medically retire Foran.
    They want Folau.
    He’d play centre or fullback.

  43. feelthebern

    Or both during the season depending on rep duties of other players.

  44. Mother Lode

    The ABC pumps out a constant stream of sewage that denigrating half the country in the crudest tone they can, accusing them of all manner of sinister motivations and vile behaviour.

    The columnists in the SMH and the Ague pollute and rot fish to Biblical volumes every day, by the mere act of the fish being wrapped in them, almost as soon as they come out.

    All of it far worse than the frankly trite religious belief that drunkedness, lechery, gluttony, rectum-reaming etc annoys God, but all will be forgiven if you but repent.

    Only the special victim class beloved of progressives gets in a tizz. Everyone else shrugs it off.

    Their transports of butt hurty feelz frankly highlights that they are the problem here, that they cannot bear someone somewhere not as obsequious and yielding to their every whim as they want. They are the ones who stand out for their petulance and their hypersensitivity.

    Easy Flower took RA to court not because of hurty feelz, but because of his livelihood. Progressives think this ridiculous.

    The gothic gargoyle and the toxic leprechaun screwed up royal. Good.

  45. Infidel Tiger

    Hahaha!

    The only people more butt hurt than the SJW mob are the corporate state worshipping neo-liberals. Their whole ideology has been exposed as complete and utter bunkum. Fuck off.

  46. Infidel Tiger

    The NRL admitted yesterday it was powerless to stop clubs signing I$$y.

    I hope they try and Beattie is jailed.

  47. Spurgeon Monkfish III

    If there was any justice in this world the toxic leprechaun, Rae GothDyke and Iampeter Bleattie would all now be unemployed and unemployable.

  48. Rohan

    FFS. Just because his income throshold exceeded that required for the protection of FWA, doesn’t mean he isn’t entitled to challenge this decision under the FW act under the religious discrimination clause. He still has the exact same comon law rights just as any other high paid executive has. And Folau decided to exercise that right. Had mediation (which was conducted outside of FWA) not worked, it wasn’t going to be a FWA trial either.

  49. Cassie of Sydney

    “I hope they try and Beattie is jailed.”

    I would love to see Beattie jailed. He is a particularly repulsive individual.

  50. Mother Lode

    And he has the audacity to accuse conservatives here of being “left wing.”

    Poida is adamant that having friends makes you a left-wing collectivist.

    He is equally adamant that he is not a left-wing collectivist.

    Make of that what you will.

  51. Tim Neilson

    I’ve never actually seen the contract that Folau signed up to. Some people here seem to have seen it. I’d be obliged if one of them could post a link or at least transcribe or summarise it.

    Very good call Des.

    So many people seem so adamant that Folau was in breach of his contract, and others are so equally adamant that he wasn’t, yet no-one actually posts the text of the relevant clause so we can all judge for ourselves.

  52. mh

    The NRL admitted yesterday it was powerless to stop clubs signing I$$y.

    So is this just post settlement or was former boss Peter Beattie bullshitting the whole time?

  53. mh

    I wonder if Craig Bellamy has considered the idea of Folau returning to the Melbourne Storm?

  54. Fisky

    Nothing excites phony “neo-liberals” more than Christians being censored and sacked from their jobs. They are fine with bank bailouts and corporate fraud, but if any employee fails holds the wrong opinions they suddenly become extremists on contract law.

  55. Winston

    Folau hasn’t alleged any breach of contract. He just took his employer to FWA. There is no contract law at play here.

    Ah huh . . .

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-06/israel-folau-sues-rugby-australia-for-breach-of-contract/11185064

    Sacked former rugby international Israel Folau has launched legal proceedings with the Fair Work Commission against Rugby Australia (RA) and NSW Rugby for breach of contract.

    Some people’s grip on reality is amazing.

  56. feelthebern

    Unless Izzy took a massive pay cut, there is no-way he’d fit into the Storm’s plans.
    Dogs are the best bet.

  57. C.L.

    He should go to a club where there are plenty of Muzl1mzz.
    They can be untouchable human shields when the gay issue-baiting begins.

  58. Infidel Tiger

    Izzy should go to France and get the sweet billionaire mogul money.

  59. Warwick

    Andrew Webster is a gay man. That is all the explanation needed for this article.

  60. Cassie of Sydney

    “Fisky
    #3253693, posted on December 6, 2019 at 1:28 pm
    Nothing excites phony “neo-liberals” more than Christians being censored and sacked from their jobs. They are fine with bank bailouts and corporate fraud, but if any employee fails holds the wrong opinions they suddenly become extremists on contract law.”

    Those same ““neo-liberals”” are also the biggest hypocrites around. They only ever reserve their venom, vitriol and censorship towards Christians and Christian theology…imagine if Izzy was a Muesli and had posted an excerpt from the Koran…do you reckon there would have been the same outcry? Nope….there would have been either silence from the cowards, or tepid, meek censure or tut tut condemnation. You only have to look at how that grotesque clown Fitzsimian has treated Mundine’s opinions on gays and SSM over the years (opinions happen make anything said or inferred by Folau look mild) compared to the way he treats Folau and Margaret Court’s opinions.

  61. Iampeter

    Imploder supports 18c. Huge fan.
    Thought it was great Bolt was dragged in court and lost the case because of a left wing judge.

    And he has the audacity to accuse conservatives here of being “left wing.”

    He seems to think that conservatives and right wingers should take their cue from lefties.

    I’m the only one in this thread arguing against things like 18C. You guys are supporters of 18C and don’t even realize it.
    I’m not disputing that you are true conservatives, I’m just pointing out that being a true conservative makes you a politically illiterate leftist.

    The lack of understanding of the issues is beyond parody. You couldn’t have things more backwards.

  62. Bec

    Iampeter if it was all such an open and shut contract law case RA wouldn’t have settled. If they had definitive advice that their case was likely to succeed, they certainly wouldn’t have settled given the significant cost of the settlement from the RA perspective – not just the settlement sum itself, but for the long term reputational consequences for current management and for the handling of future issues of this nature. The fact is all those red hot lawyers and bush lawyers assuring us that this was just an open and shut contractual dispute in which RA’s position under the contract was unassailable (without reference to particular watertight provisions of the contract itself on which RA was relying , naturally) were almost certainly incorrect. Good.

  63. Iampeter

    Those same ““neo-liberals”” are also the biggest hypocrites around. They only ever reserve their venom, vitriol and censorship towards Christians and Christian theology…imagine if Izzy was a Muesli and had posted an excerpt from the Koran…do you reckon there would have been the same outcry? Nope….

    That’s an exact description of the hypocrisy Folau’s supporters are engaging in.
    As we can easily see in this thread…

  64. Iampeter

    Nothing excites phony “neo-liberals” more than Christians being censored and sacked from their jobs.

    Excepting sacking someone from a job can never censor anyone, even if he was sacked for being a Christian, which he wasn’t.

    Don’t worry your pretty head about any of this. It requires more than a total zero understanding of politics.

    Great content on Australia’s leading Right Wing blog!

  65. Cassie of Sydney

    “Iampeter
    #3253719, posted on December 6, 2019 at 1:50 pm”

    Iamshiteater needs a panel to treat him.

  66. Iampeter

    “Iampeter
    #3253719, posted on December 6, 2019 at 1:50 pm”

    Iamshiteater needs a panel to treat him.

    Awe Cassie, I didn’t realize you were trailer-trash level like the other spergs here 🙁

  67. feelthebern

    Iampenis is an idiot.

  68. Juan

    Yes, that’s what I think happened.
    Ms Castle was bullied into certain statements/positions. She could have come to a much earlier agreement with Folau and perhaps he could have still played, which is what he wanted.

    I remember the days when conservatives were all for the rights of employers and captains of industry to bang their fists on the table while screaming: ‘You’ll never work in this city again!’

    Those days are in the past, and bullying, if it happens, takes on a more subtle form.

    The real problem with the Folau case is it’s solved nothing. We have no idea how the courts will decide the fundamental questions his case posed. There will be another Israel Folau, of that we can be certain.

    Even if we can agree on overarching principles; we don’t agree, and the courts haven’t told us, exactly where the line is drawn.

    For instance, a lot of conservative commentary is focused on a claim Israel Folau signed a standard RA contract with the ‘boiler plate’ reference to the organisation’s inclusion policy; but subsequently, supposedly realising their error or omission, RA sought to add a specific clause to cover social media, and Folau, as would have been his right, declined its inclusion.

    So, as this theory goes, this weakened RA’s case and forced them to concede.

    But what if Israel Folau had agreed to that clause? Moving beyond hypotheticals, what if RA, the NRL, AFL, etc insert such clauses in every contract offered to players from this point onwards?

    The Folau case tells us nothing about what employers and employees are allowed to do.

    Almost in exasperation we turn to to the draft Religious Discrimination Bill 2019.

    Looking for the ‘Folau Clause’, one’s eye immediately goes to Section 8 on Page 10:

    ( 1 ) A person discriminates against another person on the ground of the other person’s religious belief or activity if:

    ( a ) the person imposes, or proposes to impose, a condition, requirement or practice; and
    ( b ) the condition, requirement or practice has, or is likely to have, the effect of disadvantaging persons who have or engage in the same religious belief or activity as the other person; and
    ( c ) the condition, requirement or practice is not reasonable

    So far, so good. In Section 5, on Page 7, we find the definition of:

    relevant employer: an employer is a relevant employer at a particular time in a financial year if:

    ( a ) the employer has or had revenue for the current or previous financial year of at least $50 million; and
    ( b ) the employer is not the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory 12 or a body established for a public purpose by or under a law of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory.

    And then returning to Section 8, this time on Page 12, the Bill sets out when an employer may discriminate:

    ( 3 ) For the purposes of paragraph ( 1 )( c ), an employer conduct rule that:

    ( a ) is imposed, or proposed to be imposed, by a relevant employer; and
    ( b ) would have the effect of restricting or preventing an employee of the employer from making a statement of belief at a time other than when the employee is performing work on behalf of the employer;
    is not reasonable unless compliance with the rule by employees is necessary to avoid unjustifiable financial hardship to the employer.

    So, had this been the law of the land prior to Folau’s case, it could have provided a statutory framework for RA to terminate Israel Folau’s employment; or it could have protected Folau from having his employment terminated.

    Which is it? Your guess is as good as mine.

    The key to unlocking if it’s the first option or the second one lies in the words ‘unjustifiable financial hardship’.

    Advocates for both religious and employer bodies have said this is too vague and in the absence of a crystal-clear definition it will be left to the courts to determine what constitutes unjustifiable financial hardship.

    Which means we will still be where we are now, awaiting the next Folau in order for the courts to determine the practical limits of religious freedom.

  69. Iampeter

    Iampenis is an idiot.

    Probably the closest to an argument someone has managed in this thread. Pretty good for the Cat.

    On a more serious note, discussing politics with conservatives has now reached this absurd level:

    Conservatives: We’re not a bunch of clueless Marxists, Iampeter! We just want the state to regulate every aspect of peoples lives. Totally different! You Neo-Liberal-atheist!

    It’s going to be fun watching movements like the groypers eat you fools alive.

  70. Leigh Lowe

    woolfe

    #3253637, posted on December 6, 2019 at 12:21 pm

    Leigh your comment has been put as a comment in the Australian 

    Which comment?

  71. Mother Lode

    My recollection is that the Vicar claimed that Easy’s Instagram was not inclusive enough and that it damaged the reputation of RA and Rugby.

    The first ground was a bit silly. He never said anything should be done to anyone. In fact Christianity has a tradition of engaging the unenlightened as a way for them to sell itself.

    He also bracketed QWERTY people with enthusiastic shaggers and people fond of the drop. How serious are is the general population about those vices?

    Warmies and progressives in general are utterly unrestrained in their denunciation of just about anyone and always demanding that other people change their lifestyles – or their lifestyles will be changed for them.

    A single Clemmie Ford column is far more excluding and vicious than anything issuing from the more amiable and better disposed Easy’s Instagram posts.

  72. Juan

    woolfe

    #3253637, posted on December 6, 2019 at 12:21 pm

    Leigh your comment has been put as a comment in the Australian

    Which comment?

    I’d be asking for a single use licence fee from woolfe, if I were you, Leigh. 😜

  73. Iampeter

    The real problem with the Folau case is it’s solved nothing.

    Sadly that’s not true.
    This case has now set precedent that you can still make Fair Work complaints even if you don’t meet the salary threshold.
    It’s also set into motion upcoming legislation which will grant further special privileges to religious collectivists. This will backfire badly on Christians though, when certain religious people they disagree with start leveraging these laws to their own benefit.

    We have no idea how the courts will decide the fundamental questions his case posed. There will be another Israel Folau, of that we can be certain.

    Sadly the process worked exactly as intended. The FW process is designed to lead to settlement. It’s leftist legislation that shakes down private enterprise.
    We will indeed have a lot more Folau’s.

    But what if Israel Folau had agreed to that clause? Moving beyond hypotheticals, what if RA, the NRL, AFL, etc insert such clauses in every contract offered to players from this point onwards?

    Apparently he did accept it verbally but refused to sign. Aside from what this says about his character, it means RA has grounds for an actual breach of contract lawsuit. Verbal agreement is as good as signing.
    I’ve said in other threads that RA should’ve counter sued Folau for breach of contract (the real kind, not the FW kind) and also sued both Folau and the Christian lobby for incitement. They may not have won either, but I think proving damages would be doable and they certainly would not have been put into a position to settle.
    A good offence is always the best defense.

    I think in the background though, there was enormous pressure put on RA to shut this down and as is often the case they settled.

  74. Ellie

    Enjoyable reading – the comments. Keep up the good work, Iampeter. There is a reason you are here. Hold the so-called “conservatives” to account.
    PS. Love how the name calling and abuse simply bounces off you.

  75. Porter

    There was no social media clause in Israel Folau’s contract. That is why they sacked him on the grounds of an alleged breach of the code of conduct, not a breach of contract.

  76. mh

    feelthebern
    #3253707, posted on December 6, 2019 at 1:42 pm

    Unless Izzy took a massive pay cut, there is no-way he’d fit into the Storm’s plans.
    Dogs are the best bet.

    What did he get at the Waratah’s?

  77. Infidel Tiger

    I remember the days when conservatives were all for the rights of employers and captains of industry to bang their fists on the table while screaming: ‘You’ll never work in this city again!’

    Whigs and libs kiss the feet of corporates.

  78. Spurgeon Monkfish III

    Some people’s grip on reality is amazing

    Iampiñata clearly exists in a bizarre parallel universe. Reality is a concept he is yet to experience.

  79. Leigh Lowe

    After he was sacked following his infamous post on April 10 in which he warned homosexuals they would go to Hell if they didn’t repent, he had the audacity to ask the public to fund his looming legal stoush with RA.

    That was key to this.
    The money.
    The Toxic Poofter and Barren Cat Lady thought they would starve Izzy out.
    That’s why they were so desparate to shut down the GoFundMe page and return the cash. They knew they were screwed and had to remove the source of legal funding.
    When the ACL appeal raised $2 meg in a day it was game over. The funds could ONLY be used for ONE purpose … suing the ample arse off RA. Beautiful Karma. The tables were turned, with Izzy now holding a massive war-chest with the ability to starve RA out of existence through the process.
    At that point the jig was up, and they simply had to find a way out (albeit after a couple of rounds of shadow boxing and posturing).
    They other magnificent thing about the ACL appeal was not just the money. It was the depth of anger and resolve exhibited by tens of thousands of Australians (as distinct from a couple of dozen slacktivists on Twatter).
    That was the real shock for the Toxic Leprechaun, the Vicar and Bandana Man.

  80. P

    The consequences that follow
    By Michael Cook – The Catholic Weekly, May 17, 2019.

    Today I looked again at the above article, particularly the comments from The Oz by Katrina Grace Kelly (formerly known as Grace Collier).

  81. Porter

    The absence of a social media clause in Folau’s contract and Raelene Castle’s attempt to have one retrospectively inserted was widely reported by the press, including Fairfax.

  82. Leigh Lowe

    feelthebern
    #3253707, posted on December 6, 2019 at 1:42 pm

    Unless Izzy took a massive pay cut, there is no-way he’d fit into the Storm’s plans.
    Dogs are the best bet.

    Hellooooo.
    As of yesterday he doesn’t need the money.
    Truth is, if an NRL club signs him they will sell out of memberships before Christmas.
    The NRL hierarchy will, of course, be seething but know they cannot do a thing without costing millions in another payout.

  83. Juan

    What did he get at the Waratah’s?

    His Waratahs player payments were topped up by RA for playing for the Wallabies, and for marketing and promotions work, and for licencing of his image rights, etc.

    It was reputed to total $1.4 million per year.

    Only in Europe or Japan could he earn as much money. For rugby purposes Europe includes the UK, but the Billy Vunipola incident might suggest an English club might not be the best landing spot for Israel Folau.

  84. The BigBlueCat

    Excepting sacking someone from a job can never censor anyone, even if he was sacked for being a Christian, which he wasn’t.

    No one ever said sacking someone from their job was censorship – you just made that up! But he was sacked for posting an uncontroversial Christian viewpoint regarding certain behaviours that, if the committer of such behaviour remains unrepentant, would result in a certain eternal outcome. That he stated that Christian viewpoint, as a Christian, and he clearly holds that view as a deeply-held religious conviction, it is not unrealistic to suggest he was sacked because he was a Christian expressing his deeply-held religious convictions, which RA and its sponsors didn’t like. There was no reason why Folau should have taken down his post other than to appease a sponsor whose CEO was angry.

    Folau’s case was based on the FW Act’s definition of unlawful dismissal – but the end result (apologies all around, and probably a chunk of money going to Folau as compensation) should not have gone as far as it did. But it was RA’s intransigence that brought the matter to the point that it did. There is no reason why Folau shouldn’t be able to play rugby again, though we can well understand why he wouldn’t want to given the crap he’s copped from RA, Peter Beattie, Peter FitzSimons and the intolerant left in general.

  85. Juan

    Truth is, if an NRL club signs him they will sell out of memberships before Christmas.

    Memberships aren’t like t-shirts. There’s no limit after which you “sell out”. 😜

  86. areff

    Folau exercised his right to free speech. Folau was punished for it. Folau is a ratbag. Folau is now a rich ratbag. Good. That’s all there is to it, Iampeter’s sophistries notwithstanding.

  87. Juan

    uncontroversial Christian viewpoint

    Hardly an “uncontroversial Christian viewpoint”.

    I’m sure you know this is a point of sharp disagreement across the Christian denominations and even within denominations. It’s even threatening to split the Anglican Church of Australia, as it has already done in New Zealand.

    And all of that’s without even mentioning the Uniting Church!

  88. The BigBlueCat

    Verbal agreement is as good as signing.

    You’re joking!!!! My dad used to say “verbal agreements aren’t worth the paper they’re written on!”

    The problem with verbal agreements is that everyone has a different view of the “facts”.

  89. Leigh Lowe

    Porter

    #3253759, posted on December 6, 2019 at 2:18 pm

    The absence of a social media clause in Folau’s contract and Raelene Castle’s attempt to have one retrospectively inserted was widely reported by the press, including Fairfax.

    Yes.
    The initial reporting was that he was done cold for “breaching the soshul meeja clause in his contract”.
    Then the reporting became less absolute.
    It went from a “breach of a clause in his contract” to “a breach of RA’s soshul meeja policy”.
    Whoop-whoop. Alarm bells.
    My understanding is that he signed neither a contract with the offending clause in it, nor a written policy on the same subject.
    The best Raelene could do was extract a verbal undertaking not to do anything “damaging to the interests of RA”.
    Trouble is, I suspect that the striking out of the soshul meeja clause in his contract was known to very few people. The Vicar, RA’s legal counsel, the Chairman and maybe some board members.
    I also suspect Qantas were told there was a locked down bullet-proof clause, and no-one had the balls to tell them otherwise (not that employment contracts were any of their fucking business).

  90. The BigBlueCat

    I’m sure you know this is a point of sharp disagreement across the Christian denominations and even within denominations. It’s even threatening to split the Anglican Church of Australia, as it has already done in New Zealand.

    All they need do is read their foundational religious text (aka The Bible). It is very clear. If they don’t like what it says, they should consider renouncing their religion as they do not have a clear view of what constitutes sin and salvation according to their religion.

  91. MatrixTransform

    Merry Christmas Mr Folau

  92. Leigh Lowe

    Verbal agreement is as good as signing.

    Call me.
    I’ll meet you and offer you $10 meg to buy your shitbox house over a cup of coffee.
    No witnesses.
    Sue me if I don’t pay.
    Moron.

  93. Ubique

    Word is that the Goth Rugby Football Club is looking for a new orange boy/girl with Goth looks a definite advantage. Can anyone think of someone well-suited to the role?

  94. Cassie of Sydney

    The BigBlueCat
    #3253774, posted on December 6, 2019 at 2:32 pm
    I’m sure you know this is a point of sharp disagreement across the Christian denominations and even within denominations. It’s even threatening to split the Anglican Church of Australia, as it has already done in New Zealand.

    All they need do is read their foundational religious text (aka The Bible). It is very clear. If they don’t like what it says, they should consider renouncing their religion as they do not have a clear view of what constitutes sin and salvation according to their religion.”

    Which is precisely what the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney said recently. And for that crime he was smeared by the usual progressive sneerers at the Guardian, SMH and ABC.

  95. Snoopy

    It’s even threatening to split the Anglican Church of Australia, as it has already done in New Zealand.

    And all of that’s without even mentioning the Uniting Church!

    What do the left wing of the Anglican church and the Uniting church have to do with Christianity?

  96. Juan

    What do the left wing of the Anglican church and the Uniting church have to do with Christianity?

    You see it’s a central tenet of religious freedom that you don’t get to decide who calls themselves “Christian”. The self-professed believer does. 😇

    And in the case of the Anglican Church of Australia, if the liberals are within the national church, by law they get to sit under the banner “Christian”. (One of the oddities of our religious dispensation is the ACA exists by virtue of a number of Acts of Parliaments.)

  97. Porter

    I think Qantas will now increase their sponsorship, which will allow RA to pay the Folau bill and keep Qantas’s illegal interference off the front pages.

  98. Juan

    All they need do is read their foundational religious text (aka The Bible). It is very clear. If they don’t like what it says, they should consider renouncing their religion as they do not have a clear view of what constitutes sin and salvation according to their religion.”

    Which is precisely what the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney said recently.

    I see this has morphed into a religious discussion. Where’s Bruce of Newcastle when you need him! 😋

    But returning to your point, Cassie, the real dilemma for the Anglican Diocese of Sydney is they don’t want to be in communion with liberals whom they regard as close to heretics (perhaps I am being kind there); but they also don’t want to break away to become a more pure manifestation of a Christian church because doing so — based on precedent in the US, Canada, and New Zealand; and conceded by Peter Jensen — would mean they would have to leave all the Sydney Diocese’s assets behind; in the hands of a new Synod and Archbishop probably elected by the liberal Sydney Diocese rump.

  99. Infidel Tiger

    Juan you know less about religion than you do law, of which you know nothing.

    Please be quiet.

  100. Leigh Lowe

    OK.
    Riddle me this.
    If the “binding verbal legal contract” was watertight and Izzy had breached that contract, or committed a sackable offence under the FWA, why did the Vicar piss away millions of RA money when she was on a winner.
    Seems a tad reckless and incompetent if true.

  101. Leigh Lowe

    I see this has morphed into a religious discussion. 

    No.
    You and Iampoofter were losing the legal argument so you diverted to religion.

  102. Juan

    Juan you know less about religion than you do law, of which you know nothing.

    Happy to debate you on either topic at any time, which will place on display our respective knowledge. or lack thereof. 😜 Any debate would, of course, entail arguments other than ad hominems.

  103. Lee

    I’m the only one in this thread arguing against things like 18C. You guys are supporters of 18C and don’t even realize it.

    Rubbish, I have always been opposed to laws like 18C.

    I’m not disputing that you are true conservatives, I’m just pointing out that being a true conservative makes you a politically illiterate leftist.

    That’s news to me, after being abused by leftists on other blogs, just because I disagree with their evil ideology,

  104. Juan

    You and Iampoofter were losing the legal argument so you diverted to religion.

    I think you’ll find Iampeter and I were making different points. In fact, he replied disagreeing with me! I thought his points (in reply) were wrong, particularly the first one.

  105. Leigh Lowe

    Only in Europe or Japan could he earn as much money. For rugby purposes Europe includes the UK, but the Billy Vunipola incident might suggest an English club might not be the best landing spot for Israel Folau.

    Eau Cointtreau, champ.
    Given the commonality between the British and Australian legal systems, it is more likely Brit Rugby Unions and clubs are taking legal advice about how gung-ho they can afford to be about curtailing someone’s career for something that has fuck all to do with playing rugby.

  106. Up the Workers!

    All things considered, it is probably far preferable to have “feet of clay” and several million dollars in compo sitting in your pocket, than to have a head filled with clay and a humongous great hole on your bank account from all the compo you had to fork out for fear of something worse.

    I don’t hold with Israel Folau’s particular religious beliefs, but nor do I support the cretinously stupid religious beliefs of gullible “gerbil wormists” either – yet I don’t for a moment suggest that such carpet-bagging dills all be arbitrarily sacked from their Leftard livelihoods merely for holding views I disagree with.

    Good on you, Israel.

    Keep fighting the good fight.

  107. Iampeter

    Juan you know less about religion than you do law, of which you know nothing.
    Please be quiet.

    Yea Juan!
    Stop interrupting the retiree-aged-teenage-marxist from telling us about evil corporations.
    You just don’t understand politics like Infidel Tiger does.

    I see this has morphed into a religious discussion.

    No way! A political discussion with conservatives morphing into a discussion about religion because they don’t know anything about politics? Well I never…

    No.
    You and Iampoofter were losing the legal argument so you diverted to religion.

    Yep. That’s totally what’s happening in this thread…

  108. Des Deskperson

    ‘This case has now set precedent that you can still make Fair Work complaints even if you don’t meet the salary threshold.’

    You are confusing unfair dismissal with unlawful termination, two separate provisions under the fair Work Act 2009.

    Just to be clear:

    Unfair dismissal is when employee is dismissed from their employment in a harsh, unjust or unreasonable manner. There is a salary threshold – from memory $144.000 pa – above which one is not entitled to unfair dismissal protection.

    Unlawful termination is when an employee is dismissed by their employer for a reasons that includes a person’s religion.

    Both provision have been in the Act since its promulgation in 2009.

    The RA Code of Conduct for Players, BTW, is a poorly worded, inconsistent, aspirational wish list that may not even legally apply to conduct off the field – note the presence of the phrase in the social media clause ‘expectations and requirements of you as a player’ and the absence of the phrase ‘at all times’. How RA came to decide that Folua’s conduct breached such a shoddy document is a mystery.

  109. Iampeter

    But he was sacked for posting an uncontroversial Christian viewpoint

    No he wasn’t. And that still wouldn’t be censorship if he was.

    Folau’s case was based on the FW Act’s definition of unlawful dismissal

    Yes, which is not a real breach of contract lawsuit and is something that those of us who are actually right wing oppose. Just like we oppose 18C.
    Turns out that conservatives don’t. They just never really understood the subject at all.

    You’re joking!!!! My dad used to say “verbal agreements aren’t worth the paper they’re written on!”

    Then I recommend you do some googling and reading on verbal contracts if you’re interested in discovering how wrong you are.

  110. Pingback: Friday hawt chicks & links – We care about your privacy edition. – Adam Piggott

  111. cohenite

    No he wasn’t.

    And you must be taking the piss; or be as dumb as piss.

  112. jupes

    Another day another left wing thread at the Cat.

    RA is not Christian-hating. This is a shamefully dishonest and obviously false statement.

    I’m the only one in this thread arguing against things like 18C.

    Verbal agreement is as good as signing.

    Going by the number of rakes the fuckwit keeps stepping on, I suspect Peter is related to M0nty.

  113. feelthebern

    To create a legal precedent, there needs to be a court ruling.
    The Folau case was settled out of court.
    Zero legal precedent.
    This exact same situation could happen tomorrow.

  114. cohenite

    But he was sacked for posting an uncontroversial Christian viewpoint
    No he wasn’t. And that still wouldn’t be censorship if he was.

    I’m going to repeat this because the trolls are not just talking shit they are literally rolling in it. Izzy was fired exactly for his religious beliefs; nothing else. The troll should have FAIR WORK ACT 2009 – SECT 772 (f) nailed to its idiot pointy head.

  115. Iampeter

    You are confusing unfair dismissal with unlawful termination, two separate provisions under the fair Work Act 2009.

    You’re right Des. Someone actually explained that to me a while back but I still forgot anyway.
    Really appreciate you proving me wrong 😛 /sarc

    In any case, the point is that he was not fired for being a Christian, he was fired because he refused to follow instructions repeatedly and unfair dismissal, unlawful termination and similar leftist regulations should all be opposed by right wingers for the same reason as 18C.

  116. Iampeter

    I’m going to repeat this because the trolls are not just talking shit they are literally rolling in it. Izzy was fired exactly for his religious beliefs; nothing else.

    Just to clarify because the leftists dominating this thread really aren’t getting it.
    Folau was OBVIOUSLY not fired for being a Christian.
    But even if he was, those of us who are right wing, would still support RA’s right to do so even if we disagreed with it personally.
    That’s what supporting free speech, property rights and individual rights requires.

  117. The BigBlueCat

    You see it’s a central tenet of religious freedom that you don’t get to decide who calls themselves “Christian”. The self-professed believer does.

    But the Anglican Church (as do other Christian churches) does get to decide who are members based on certain characteristics. The Guardian reports:

    For a man renowned for his civility, the language was blunt. During his annual speech to the Anglican Church’s Sydney synod, Archbishop Glenn Davies told supporters of same-sex marriage to “please leave us”.

    “My own view is that if people wish to change the doctrine of our church, they should start a new church or join a church more aligned to their views,” he said. “But do not ruin the Anglican Church by abandoning the plain teaching of scripture.”

    He is absolutely right. Your problem is in deciding if the doctrine of sin and salvation is compatible with what you call “the central tenet of religious freedom”. Those Christians who declare that homosexual behaviour including SSM isn’t sin are certainly free to hold those views, but they would be wrong in thinking that those views are supported by the Bible or by other Christians.

  118. Leigh Lowe

    feelthebern

    #3253869, posted on December 6, 2019 at 4:30 pm

    To create a legal precedent, there needs to be a court ruling.
    The Folau case was settled out of court.
    Zero legal precedent.
    This exact same situation could happen tomorrow.

    Yeah, that is true, but I think it might just be a tiny handbrake on the SJW Human Resource “professionals” around the country the next time they want to hatchet someone on a whim over something which has sfa to do with their job.
    When the Vicar gets rissoled and disappears without trace (and she will), a few CEOs might just reflect on that one before pulling a gung-ho sacking.

  119. Davey Boy

    Just a reminder, the Newscorp deputy editor Claire Harvey wrote an article in the Daily Terrorgraph stating that anyone who supports Izzy is a hardcore homophobe (paywalled)
    And they want us to pay to read it, lol.

  120. The BigBlueCat

    Folau was OBVIOUSLY not fired for being a Christian.

    That’s probably true – but he was fired for expressing his deeply-held Christian religious convictions. It’s not that far from being fired for being a Christian, albeit one who expresses his beliefs openly. The question is why should his job be put in peril for lawfully expressing his beliefs? Because that is what happened. As others have pointed out, the RA Code of Conduct itself is poorly written and leaves a lot to subjective interpretation to make it ineffective.

  121. Leigh Lowe

    Again I ask.
    If RA was on solid legal ground, surely it is an act of gross incompetence and recklessness by Ray Castle to piss away millions of RA money when they were on a sure fire winner.

  122. Davey Boy

    ISRAEL FOLAU HAS HELPED EXPOSE THE HARDCORE HOMOPHOBES
    RENDEZVIEW: This “silent majority” who gave Israel Folau money is likely the same white, privileged middle-class group who cry oppression for trying to express their religion. How dare they call themselves Christians, writes Claire Harvey.

  123. duaf

    All seems accurate to me; and reinforced perhaps by his former team-mates (the quiet ones) lining up to support him. Would have made the rugby Australia guys look even more stupid … maybe only surpassed by rugby league who let all sorts of others with questionable backgrounds keep playing. This defies belief, except of course in modern Australia.

  124. The BigBlueCat

    Davey Boy
    #3253891, posted on December 6, 2019 at 5:03 pm
    ISRAEL FOLAU HAS HELPED EXPOSE THE HARDCORE HOMOPHOBES
    RENDEZVIEW: This “silent majority” who gave Israel Folau money is likely the same white, privileged middle-class group who cry oppression for trying to express their religion. How dare they call themselves Christians, writes Claire Harvey.

    Who the hell is Claire Harvey? And Christians by-and-large aren’t homophobes (in that they don’t fear homosexuals) – but clearly, they have a message for them they want them to accept. Claire Harvey sounds like an intolerant leftist attacking a group on the basis of identity rather than understanding what individuals in that group actually believe and how they behave.

  125. Dr Faustus

    Izzy was fired exactly for his religious beliefs; nothing else.
    [cohenite:]

    Folau was OBVIOUSLY not fired for being a Christian.
    [someone else]

    There are a whole bunch of things that Folau was OBVIOUSLY not sacked for – including ‘being a Christian’. However, Rugby Australia explains the circumstances of his sacking quite clearly:

    “The Social Media Post reflected Mr Folau’s genuinely held religious beliefs, and Mr Folau did not intend to harm or offend any person when he uploaded the Social Media Post.

    Folau’s RA contract remains cancelled. So, unless the Goth is lying, the objective fact is that:

    – posting “genuinely held religious beliefs” (which, in Folau’s case, happen to be Christian);
    – expressed without any intention to “harm or offend any person“,

    represents a high-level breach of RA’s code of conduct, warranting dismissal.

    Which fits comfortably within cohenite’s observation.

  126. Dr Faustus

    The moist and lovely Mz Castle has dissed suggestions that RA will be paying away $8 mill to Folau and buggering its budget. No problem with the legal and ethical aspects of RA’s case, not at all: it was all about: “We needed to give the game cost certainty.”

    Castle confirmed that Rugby Australia has insurance that will cover an undisclosed percentage of the Folau settlement.

    “We do have an insurance policy in place, yes,” she said.

    Asked how much of the payout it covered, Castle said: “I can’t discuss that.

    In her place, I wouldn’t be discussing that either.

  127. dover_beach

    Indeed, Dr Faustus.

  128. “If you screw arse-holes, drink too much and do evil things, you will go to hell.”

    “If you keep screwing around with the environment, burn fossil fuels and do evil things to the environment (like using plastic), you me and the rest of the planet will end up in hell”.

    The ugly bugger at Qantas holds one of those views.
    Izzy holds the other.

  129. dover_beach

    RA folded because Folau held all the cards. We mustn’t get too complacent though as politicized homosexuality will be combing through the thickets to see what can be done to prevent any such imbroglio occuring again. This is only the end of the beginning. Keep your weapons of choice close to hand. More is to be done.

  130. Leigh Lowe

    duaf

    #3253894, posted on December 6, 2019 at 5:06 pm

    All seems accurate to me; and reinforced perhaps by his former team-mates (the quiet ones) lining up to support him. Would have made the rugby Australia guys look even more stupid … 

    Apparently there was a conga line of current and ex RA players ready to testify about what a fuckwit Ray Castle was and some of the meddling in team matters from thise with no brief to do so.

  131. Tel

    I remember the days when conservatives were all for the rights of employers and captains of industry to bang their fists on the table while screaming: ‘You’ll never work in this city again!’

    Those days are in the past, and bullying, if it happens, takes on a more subtle form.

    Lol, there’s nothing remotely connecting Rugby Australia with any “captains of industry” … if it wasn’t for millions every year in government grants Rugby Australia would be broke. They operate as an appendage of government, always looking for the next batch of grant money. Don’t even start calling that a business.

    The real problem with the Folau case is it’s solved nothing. We have no idea how the courts will decide the fundamental questions his case posed. There will be another Israel Folau, of that we can be certain.

    Settlement cases don’t create precedent and we don’t know exactly what argument Folau’s lawyers used. I would push for simple breach of contract … the Code of Conduct does not support sacking Folau because the CoC demanded inclusiveness all round (implying that Christians still get to express the beliefs) and instead the CoC was deployed selectively … the management didn’t follow it themselves, they had their chosen hobby horse promotions where the CoC required them to be even handed. After they booted out Folau they pulled strings to make it difficult for him to work elsewhere and that kind of thing has NEVER been supported on the Cat or anywhere else.

    It shows that individual employees do have quite reasonable recourse to the courts in this country. Folau did not need a union to represent him, and he didn’t require special intervention from any powerful political figure. That’s how rule of law is supposed to operate.

  132. Some History

    The Castle reassurances over the last year of a “strong position” were all just wonky bravado. Word is that Poncharse Pirate has been walking funny the last few days and if he wasn’t already bald, would have ripped out what hair he had left.

    Australia reacts to Israel Folau settlement with Rugby Australia
    Australian commentators have amplified calls for Rugby Australia boss Raelene Castle to fall on her sword for the “costly debacle” with Israel Folau.

    RTWT

    https://www.news.com.au/sport/sports-life/australia-reacts-to-israel-folau-settlement-with-rugby-australia/news-story/18b5f344ec602b647facb9dab0b11069

  133. Leigh Lowe

    Woman on Rita Panahi’s show on Sky nails it.
    All RA had to say was that they acknowledge Folau’s right to an opinion but that many RA staff and players do not agree with him.
    The end.
    And when the Toxic Leprechaun has a hissy-fit, gently but firmly remind him that sponsors do not have a seat at the table in employment matters.
    Message Qaintarse through the (ahem) back door that withdrawal of sponsorship for simply complying with employment law would not be taken lying down.

  134. Tel

    “If you screw arse-holes, drink too much and do evil things, you will go to hell.”

    “If you keep screwing around with the environment, burn fossil fuels and do evil things to the environment (like using plastic), you me and the rest of the planet will end up in hell”.

    The ugly bugger at Qantas holds one of those views.
    Izzy holds the other.

    I agree Global Warming is a religion, and so is Christianity. I don’t believe either of them. Folau can believe in Hell if he wants, but there’s no tangible evidence for it. Thing is, we must allow religious people to put forward their views in a peaceful manner … because without that we cannot make progress deciding what is true.

  135. Leigh Lowe

    Some History

    #3253936, posted on December 6, 2019 at 6:19 pm

    The Castle reassurances over the last year of a “strong position” were all just wonky bravado. 

    Not just over the last year.
    Even after the settlement, The Vicar of Rugby went the full Gillard-Retard by declaring “ut was the right thung to do”.
    What a fucking dumb bint.

  136. cohenite

    Just to clarify because the leftists dominating this thread really aren’t getting it.
    Folau was OBVIOUSLY not fired for being a Christian.
    But even if he was, those of us who are right wing, would still support RA’s right to do so even if we disagreed with it personally.
    That’s what supporting free speech, property rights and individual rights requires.

    This is a mess and I’m giving it too much attention but there was no breach of conduct; the Code did not apply to what Izzy did because it was not part of his contract. Even if it did it would still be illegal per S.772. Now I too don’t give a fig about Izzy’s religious views except for his right to have them and that Christianity underpins the values of our society and that those values are under threat by another religion, RoP, and commies but that’s another argument.

    There was no breach of contract. Izzy posted views inconsistent with the woke mission statement of RU and it’s sponsors, or at least one sponsor and the msm.

    He was fired because he was not woke and he was loud about it. The RU had no case, just like JCU had no case against Peter Ridd; they just didn’t like his unwoke, anti-alarmist views.

    This was a test of wokeness and PC, nothing more and nothing less. It’s gratifying that our society still has enough push-back against this shit. RU folded on the basis of a commercial decision: namely if they went to court their wokeness was going to be exposed by the witnesses who would have been called. And they had no legal basis for firing Izzy.

  137. Leigh Lowe

    RU folded on the basis of a commercial decision: namely if they went to court their wokeness was going to be exposed by the witnesses who would have been called. And they had no legal basis for firing Izzy.

    The court case wasn’t going to simply hear how The Vicar fucked up the Folau matter. There was going to be evidence of a pattern of fuck-ups internally and also of external interference (guess who?)
    Also the phrase “commercial decision” has been misused over the last few days. It has been presented as RA holding a winning hand but just wanted to “move on”.
    Bullshit.
    Finally an adult lawyer read them their tea-leaves and told them they were totally and irrevocably fucked.
    The only “commercial decision” was:-
    1. Do we pay $8 meg to Folau.now? Or
    2. Do we spend $1 – $2 meg on legals and pay him $8 meg plus his costs in 12 months time?

  138. Nob

    Did he have different contract terms and conditions to other players?

    If not, would any other player, say from a different religion, have been treated the same?

  139. Chris M

    Rugby Australia apologised and agreed with Israel that the gayz will indeed go to hell.

    Well they been doubly warned. Even Qantas is distancing itself.

  140. cohenite

    Also the phrase “commercial decision” has been misused over the last few days. It has been presented as RA holding a winning hand but just wanted to “move on”.

    Yeah I should have clarified that. The commercial decision was not wanting their woke sponsor’s interference being exposed. So it was a woke commercial decision; they didn’t want wokeness to be exposed and lose.

  141. Chris M

    I agree Global Warming is a religion, and so is Christianity.

    And Atheism. Actually true Christianity is a relationship not a religion. No-one was persecuted more by religious people than Jesus.

    I don’t believe either of them. Folau can believe in Hell if he wants, but there’s no tangible evidence for it.

    You would hope. If you were to research you would find but sadly the hands over ears and eyes seem to be the go for now.

  142. Tel

    And Atheism. Actually true Christianity is a relationship not a religion. No-one was persecuted more by religious people than Jesus.

    Atheism is the efficiency you get by not wasting your time on unprovable belief systems.

    It’s not intended as a statement of fact, merely the absence of facts.

  143. Leigh Lowe

    Nob

    #3253950, posted on December 6, 2019 at 6:51 pm

    Did he have different contract terms and conditions to other players?

    Who knows.
    All are equal, but high profile players can more easily strike out restrictive clauses than a fringe player on the list.

    If not, would any other player, say from a different religion, have been treated the same?

    I think I know where you are going and I suspect the answer is “no”.
    In fact, some NRL players belong to the Middle Eastern Presbyterians and some have made outrageous statements at times, no doubt under similar contractual clauses and codes of conduct.
    Zero consequence.

  144. 8th Dan

    The Folau kerfuffle is sooo yesterday … but C.L and a few others try to maintain the rage.

    Fact Check folks:

    It was never about freedom of speech or freedom of religion. I was only ever about a plain vanilla breach of contract.

    Suck it up. Move on.

    PS. In my opinion any settlement payment to Folau above zero dollars was excessive.

  145. Romeo Whiskey:

    In saying that while I believe that RA are complete clowns and should all go, the “Free Speech” issue here is blended with a commercial decision.

    The guts of it is that someone from Football Royalty thought they were untouchable. They tried to push the boundaries of what they could do, and instead of the scalp they were expecting, they were handed their own head on a platter with a delicious serving of hubris.

  146. mh

    I don’t tend to take too much of an interest in the technicalities of the legal contract arguments, but there are certain people on the Cat who’s judgement I trust – contributors like Roger, Cohenite and Dr Faustus amongst others – so I did form an opinion. From this I was expecting the result which occurred this week, unlike the morons in the MSM like Peter FitzSimons who’s arguments were based on the feelz.

  147. Bar Beach Swimmer

    Leigh Lowe
    #3253757, posted on December 6, 2019 at 2:18 pm

    +1000

  148. mh

    8th Dan
    #3253988, posted on December 6, 2019 at 7:30 pm
    The Folau kerfuffle is sooo yesterday … but C.L and a few others try to maintain the rage.

    Rae, you want us to move on because your team lost. Dry those tears, Princess.

  149. cohenite

    Dickless turns up and acts like a dick.

  150. Bar Beach Swimmer

    What do the left wing of the Anglican church and the Uniting church have to do with Christianity?

    Nothing

  151. Leigh Lowe

    File this under “U” for unintended consequences.
    Izzy runs a GoFundMe campaign.
    Got close to $2 meg before the SJWs shut it down.
    Remember, GoFundMe simply facilitate collection of money.
    Then the ACL set up a fund.
    Many (like me) increased the amount they were going to contribute out of anger at the GoFundMe shit.
    End result?
    Izzy gets more cash via a totally secure channel, and the ACL gets a massive increase in it’s mailing list for nothing.
    And it is a high quality list. People who will put their hands in their pockets for a good cause.

  152. Roger

    8th Dan is a fitting rival for m0nty in wrongology.

  153. dover_beach

    Roger, he is 8th Dan in wrongology.

  154. Lee

    Fact Check folks:

    It was never about freedom of speech or freedom of religion.

    Sure, maintain the fiction that it wasn’t.

    It was only ever about a plain vanilla breach of contract.

    If the contract was a “breach of contract”, then tell us why RA folded like a house of cards?

    It has been claimed that there was no such clause – hence RA’s been stymied.

  155. Leigh Lowe

    The guts of it is that someone from Football Royalty thought they were untouchable. They tried to push the boundaries of what they could do, and instead of the scalp they were expecting, they were handed their own head on a platter with a delicious serving of hubris.

    Exactly Winston.
    The arseholes probably knew that Folau had a better than 50:50 chance of winning but thought they would exhaust his resources before it got to the end.
    The ACL appeal was a game changer.
    A lot of money flowed in (which could ONLY be spent on the legal fight) and also a demonstration that there was an army of people out there who weren’t drinking the RA Kool-Ade.
    That is the power of money in litigation.
    In this case it was the big stick which cowed the cow.
    Hilarious that most of us will get almost all of the money back, having served it’s purpose.
    Best interest free loan I have ever made.

  156. Leigh Lowe

    If the contract was a “breach of contract”, then tell us why RA folded like a house of cards?

    Yes.
    If Folau was in breach and legally done like a dinner, surely it is gross incompetence and recklessness for the Vicar to pay out millions.

  157. Roger

    Roger, he is 8th Dan in wrongology.

    I’ll pay that, dover.

  158. classical_hero

    JC must be doing a roaring trade after all this.

  159. Caveman

    You don’t go to court to prove a point, you go there to win a case.

    Falaou won , safety, B.A.R , injection +1 infinity.

  160. Dr Faustus

    If Folau was in breach and legally done like a dinner, surely it is gross incompetence and recklessness for the Vicar to pay out millions.

    This is one of the reasons why RA might worry whether their insurance policy is actually standing behind them. Insurers tend to not want to pay out when policy-holders fuck up with the basics.

    Actually, not at all. It’s a sort of unwritten/written rule.

  161. Leigh Lowe

    This is one of the reasons why RA might worry whether their insurance policy is actually standing behind them. Insurers tend to not want to pay out when policy-holders fuck up with the basics.

    Yeah.
    There is a distinction between accidents and wilful negligence or deliberate destructive acts.
    She hasn’t left a scented candle going near the polyester curtains.
    She has splashed petrol all over the living room while smoking a Stuyvo.
    Yesterday the Vicar said “insurance may cover it”.
    After her previous duplicitous statements that can be taken as a “no thanks” from the insurers.

  162. mh

    No way should the insurers pay out!

    Can’t wait for the next episode of Fail Army.

  163. Crossie

    They other magnificent thing about the ACL appeal was not just the money. It was the depth of anger and resolve exhibited by tens of thousands of Australians (as distinct from a couple of dozen slacktivists on Twatter).
    That was the real shock for the Toxic Leprechaun, the Vicar and Bandana Man.

    But Andrew Webster still doesn’t understand that, his accusation of Folau’s audacity to ask the public to fund his looming legal stoush with RA shows a journo who has nothing in common with the average person. Nongs like him think they are so above the rest of us because someone pays them to write drivel.

  164. Porter

    “We do have an insurance policy in place, yes,” she said.

    Qantas will pick up the tab in return for keeping its interference off the front pages. In fact, if Castle didn’t screw Joyce for the cash, she is even dumber than everyone knows that she is.

  165. Tel

    It was never about freedom of speech or freedom of religion.

    What garbage.

  166. Tel

    If the contract was a “breach of contract”, then tell us why RA folded like a house of cards?

    Because someone pointed out that they were the party in breach.

    But they were also trying to stifle freedom of speech, and they were using government grant money to help achieve that.

  167. Nob

    Leigh Lowe
    #3253972, posted on December 6, 2019 at 7:18 pm

    “If not, would any other player, say from a different religion, have been treated the same?”

    I think I know where you are going and I suspect the answer is “no”.
    In fact, some NRL players belong to the Middle Eastern Presbyterians and some have made outrageous statements at times, no doubt under similar contractual clauses and codes of conduct.
    Zero consequence.

    If that’s the case, unfair dismissal would have strong legs.
    Which is “where I was going”.

    I know, from the point of view of an employer having been subjected to such a claim.

  168. Iampeter

    Lol, there’s nothing remotely connecting Rugby Australia with any “captains of industry” …

    Except the fundamentals and principles. But not thinking in fundamentals and principles is the whole criticism of such comments. When you think in random non-essentials you can take a socialist position on one issue and a capitalist position on another issue and never even realize it. Makes things much easier, doesn’t it.

    Thing is, we must allow religious people to put forward their views in a peaceful manner … because without that we cannot make progress deciding what is true.

    Firing someone doesn’t prevent this.
    On the other hand, if we can’t fire people, then we DON’T have the freedom to put forward our views peacefully.
    So, you’ve got it backwards.
    Everyone here supporting Folau instead of RA is arguing AGAINST freedom of speech, freedom of religion, individual rights, capitalism, etc.
    Instead you’ve taken the side of your tribe, like the identity politics playing leftists that most of today’s conservatives are.

    This is what happens when you don’t think in terms of fundamentals or even know what the fundamentals are.

  169. Dr Faustus

    On the other hand, if we can’t fire people, then we DON’T have the freedom to put forward our views peacefully.
    So, you’ve got it backwards.
    Everyone here supporting Folau instead of RA is arguing AGAINST freedom of speech, freedom of religion, individual rights, capitalism, etc.

    Nothing to stop RA firing Folau – in fact they did, and he remains fired.
    It just blew a huge hole in RA’s core purpose and cost them a large fortune and massive reputational damage because of the inept way it was done.

    And hollowed out their policy of diversity.

    Unfortunately, that’s just the way the market sorts out individual rights and freedoms when stupidity and intransigence takes over from common sense.

    [Incidentally, is it tough work being a parody troll? Or do you have a formula to work to?]

  170. Iampeter

    Nothing to stop RA firing Folau – in fact they did, and he remains fired.
    It just blew a huge hole in RA’s core purpose and cost them a large fortune and massive reputational damage because of the inept way it was done.

    Oh OK, I guess I also needed to specify “can’t fire people without legal consequences then we don’t have freedom, etc, etc.”

    This shouldn’t need to be clarified…

    Unfortunately, that’s just the way the market sorts out individual rights and freedoms when stupidity and intransigence takes over from common sense.

    No, it’s not. FWA is not “the market.” It’s leftist legislation that those of us who are right wing oppose.
    The market does not include “unfair termination” anymore than it includes “hurt feelings” as reasons to sue anybody.

    I can’t believe this needs clarifying at Australia’s leading Right Wing blog, full of people who claim to oppose things like 18C.

    Incidentally, is it tough work being a parody troll? Or do you have a formula to work to?

    Are you kidding? Given your current post I have to ask whether you are being a slimy and dishonest troll, or whether you simply haven’t the slightest clue about what you’re saying.

    Because this is the Cat I’m sure it’s both.

  171. Leigh Lowe

    Reports this morning that Folau visited the Lamborghini car yard yesterday.
    Hope he goes for some appropriate rego plates :-
    KER-CHING
    CASH-COW
    RA-PAYDAY

  172. feelthebern

    LOL.
    The tele had a pic of him & the missus at sydney airport flying out.

  173. Dr Faustus

    No, it’s not. FWA is not “the market.” It’s leftist legislation that those of us who are right wing oppose. is not “the market.” It’s leftist legislation that those of us who are right wing oppose.

    The settlement was done under compulsory mediation rules of the Federal Court. The Vicar of Rugby herself claims the settlement was a commercial decision to save RA the cost and trouble of winning its cast iron case in court.

    As a rock-ribbed Right Winger you are duty bound to view that as a market operation.

  174. PS. In my opinion any settlement payment to Folau above zero dollars was excessive.

    In your opinion, Ben Batterham is a murderer…

    because you are a low IQ imbecile.

  175. No, it’s not. FWA is not “the market.” It’s leftist legislation that those of us who are right wing oppose.
    The market does not include “unfair termination” anymore than it includes “hurt feelings” as reasons to sue anybody.

    Peter’s solution to not living under a free market is what?

    Ignore the legal system, until a contracting party sues you?

    Hiding under a rock for fifty years?

    Being paid from contracts in such an environment, but then calling everyone else a commie?

    Fuck off Peter. You support s18C, you’re an inauthentic left wing shill.

  176. Iampeter

    The settlement was done under compulsory mediation rules of the Federal Court. The Vicar of Rugby herself claims the settlement was a commercial decision to save RA the cost and trouble of winning its cast iron case in court.
    As a rock-ribbed Right Winger you are duty bound to view that as a market operation.

    Is this a serious response or are you just trolling?
    If you think taking someone to Fair Work is “market operation” because a Court is involved, then you must also think things like the Racial Discrimination Act and 18C are “market operation.” They involve courts too!

    This is why you think I’m trolling. You have absolutely no clue whatsoever.

  177. 8th Dan

    PS. In my opinion any settlement payment to Folau above zero dollars was excessive.

    In your opinion, Ben Batterham is a murderer…

    Correct.

  178. You are a glutton for punishment Grigory, a police state loving misanthrope to boot with the legal prowess of legal aid staffed by interns flogging the jury with warm lettuces.

  179. Peter decides to “fight socialism!” by hiding a rock under 50 years.

    That way his purity ring becomes untainted.

  180. mh

    Iampeter, you told us only two weeks ago that you used to be a total moron.

    Although you may have different views now, with honest self assessment and reasoning you should deduce that if you weren’t the smartest guy in the room back then, chances are you still aren’t.

  181. Juan

    You see it’s a central tenet of religious freedom that you don’t get to decide who calls themselves “Christian”. The self-professed believer does.

    But the Anglican Church (as do other Christian churches) does get to decide who are members based on certain characteristics. The Guardian reports:

    For a man renowned for his civility, the language was blunt. During his annual speech to the Anglican Church’s Sydney synod, Archbishop Glenn Davies told supporters of same-sex marriage to “please leave us”.

    How do you reconcile “Anglican Church […] does get to decide who are members,” with Archbishop Davies’ “polite” request to dissenters to leave the church?

    The truth is the liberals within the Anglican Church of Australia aren’t going anywhere; nor can the conservatives force them out.

    The forthcoming election of a new Primate is a curate’s egg for church conservatives, with a choice between Archbishop Kaye Goldsworthy, Australia’s first woman Archbishop and Metropolitan, who has personally voiced support for marriage equality; and the more middle-of-the-road Archbishop Geoffrey Smith:

    Elections often give a clear picture of what sort of church will emerge. But this election has a curious field of candidates.

    The Primate is elected traditionally from the “metropolitans” – the archbishops of the mainland capitals.

    Sydney is out, because Glenn Davies will retire in 2020. The election will be in August.

    Melbourne’s Archbishop is Freier, who has announced he will continue in that role; he’s just stepping down as Primate.

    Brisbane is Phillip Aspinall, a progressive, who has already been Primate (2004-2014). He is unlikely to get the job twice.

    Perth is Kaye Goldsworthy, the Anglican Communion’s first female Archbishop, and one of the first women priests in Australia. She is on the progressive wing of the Anglican Church and is likely to be a candidate. But the Left does not have the numbers nationally.

    That leaves Geoffrey Smith of Adelaide. He is regarded as very “middle”, with a concern to build unity. He believes in a “mixed economy” church, which is Anglican jargon for a church containing both traditionalists and progressives.

  182. Juan

    Your problem is in deciding if the doctrine of sin and salvation is compatible with what you call “the central tenet of religious freedom”

    The standard definition of religious freedom is the ‘freedom to hold and manifest’ religious beliefs.

    So, if someone believes Jesus loves gays, and 1 Timothy 1:8-10 refers only to male prostitutes held in non-consensual sex-slavery, and they call themselves ‘Christian’; they are doing nothing more than manifesting their religious beliefs.

  183. Juan

    Lol, there’s nothing remotely connecting Rugby Australia with any “captains of industry”

    Well, if you had said ‘Raelene Castle is hardly a captain of industry,’ I might have been inclined to agree with you (I also said “employers” generally) but what you actually said is patently untrue.

    In the states in which it’s most popular, rugby is very well connected to captains of industry. That’s one of the reasons it survives and prospers as a niche sport.

  184. So, if someone believes Jesus loves gays, and 1 Timothy 1:8-10 refers only to male prostitutes held in non-consensual sex-slavery, and they call themselves ‘Christian’; they are doing nothing more than manifesting their religious beliefs.

    Enough of your University of Newcastle Grad Dip in Theology. We know it is a course that teachers have to do in the Catholic system, but we all know it is taught by Marxist “nuns”.

    Although I have seen people try to say the bible refers to topics diverse as Australia and nuclear weapons…if you read into it “enough”.

  185. 8th Dan

    Janet Albrechtson (spit)/the Oz (spit x 2) still muttering about freedom of speech, freedom of religion, Clyde bad, Castle bad … etcetera, etcetera. Flogging a dead horse.

    Good column in The Roar.

  186. Leigh Lowe

    PS. In my opinion any settlement payment to Folau above zero dollars was excessive.

    The logical extension of that would be that any settlement above zero is a measure of the incompetence of the Vicar.
    Why pay out millions when you are on a winner?

  187. Rev. Castle sacked the highest Super Rugby tryscorer 100 days before the 2019 RWC.

    Australia lost a high scoring quarter final to England. Australia didn’t even rank in the top 4.

    Castle ought to go. She’s plainly incompetent.

  188. Juan

    Although I have seen people try to say the bible refers to topics diverse as Australia and nuclear weapons…if you read into it “enough”.

    The Bible has been interpreted as supporting a range of positions, by both conservatives and liberals.

    We should hardly be surprised. The proliferation of denominations is similarly a product of different interpretations of the same text.

    Religious freedom means you can interpret it your way, while others can interpret it their way; and it’s far better if the room in between is occupied with debate, not denunciation.

  189. cohenite

    Dickless is busy waving around his pencil dick reading credentials.

    If you think taking someone to Fair Work is “market operation” because a Court is involved, then you must also think things like the Racial Discrimination Act and 18C are “market operation.” They involve courts too!

    The FWA may be an abomination but comparing it to the RDA is a stretch. Izzy had a contract with RUA and they breached it by firing him for non-contractual reasons which also contravened the FWA. He was entitled to go to court or are you saying all courts are non persona grata.

    You really are twisting what is essentially a straight-forward fuck-up by RUA on the basis of wokeness. Castle should now be fired herself and RUA placed in liquidation.

  190. Old School Conservative

    Tel
    #3254265, posted on December 7, 2019 at 6:57 am
    If the contract was a “breach of contract”, then tell us why RA folded like a house of cards?

    Because someone pointed out that they were the party in breach.

    FWIW, I heard on the rugby grapevine that RA has been getting very high level legal advice pro bono from the rugby community.
    it seems that advice was just as you describe – get out while the going’s good.

  191. 8th Dan

    I heard on the rugby grapevine that RA has been getting very high level legal advice pro bono from the rugby community

    Nah. Rugby Australia had Herbert Smith Freehills, Folau had Macpherson Kelley.

  192. candy

    I still think the chappie from Qantas and the SMH fellow in the bandana bullied her and made decisions and statements for her to read out. She was used. Their own beliefs meant they could not at all accept Folau’s so they wanted him out. They simply could not accept his fundamentalist beliefs. Peter F. seems to actually hate him. It all overrode the legal nature of the contract and the complexities. They simply wanted him and his evangelistic views out and not be accepted anywhere else.

  193. Infidel Tiger

    So much butt hurt at Izzy’s stonking victory over the forces of darkness.

    It’s the total and flawless victory that keeps on giving.

  194. Old School Conservative

    Nah. Rugby Australia had Herbert Smith Freehills, Folau had Macpherson Kelley.

    I am quite aware that formal arrangements will have been made.
    But when has the rugby blazer brigade not used their mates/old school tie network/business associates?
    I’ll bet (like Fitzy) they got solicited and unsolicited opinions from significant legal eagles.

  195. Old School Conservative

    Candy, you may be on track there and it raises the question – why pay Castle $760,000 p.a. to simply do what the board and sponsors want?
    A waste of money.

  196. dover_beach

    1 Timothy 1:8-10 refers only to male prostitutes held in non-consensual sex-slavery,

    LOL.

  197. Tel

    In the states in which it’s most popular, rugby is very well connected to captains of industry. That’s one of the reasons it survives and prospers as a niche sport.

    So they can give back the government grants then?

  198. old bloke

    feelthebern
    #3254334, posted on December 7, 2019 at 9:18 am

    LOL.
    The tele had a pic of him & the missus at sydney airport flying out.

    Flying Qantas?

  199. Iampeter

    The FWA may be an abomination but comparing it to the RDA is a stretch. Izzy had a contract with RUA and they breached it by firing him for non-contractual reasons which also contravened the FWA.

    RA didn’t breach anything and that’s why Folau didn’t sue them for breach of contract.
    He dragged them to Fair Work instead.

    But again, this incorrect talking point misses the bigger issue which is the political illiteracy of conservatives suggesting that Folau’s freedom of speech and religion were violated, when it is the exact OTHER WAY around.
    RA are the victim here, not Folau.

    So much butt hurt at Izzy’s stonking victory over the forces of darkness.
    It’s the total and flawless victory that keeps on giving.

    The only ones butt hurt are Folau and his supporters, celebrating an employer getting a good leftist shakedown.

  200. dover_beach

    Folau has enraged all the right people and in their age they have dropped their mask.

  201. Dr Faustus

    RA didn’t breach anything and that’s why Folau didn’t sue them for breach of contract.
    He dragged them to Fair Work instead.

    But, but, but – basis of Folau’s claim in the Federal Court, the claim that Mx Castle settled at mediation, was for breach of contract. In fact multiple breaches of contract.

    I would certainly expect a Hard Right, free market operator such as yourself to have an absolute stonker for the primacy of contracts and to be rigid in asking for their enforcement. After all, binding arrangements between men, enforced by a court of law, are the foundation of capitalism.

    I’m starting to think you might not be quite what you seem.

  202. Iampeter

    But, but, but – basis of Folau’s claim in the Federal Court, the claim that Mx Castle settled at mediation, was for breach of contract. In fact multiple breaches of contract.

    It’s a “breach of contract” as per the gibberish regulations of Fair Work. These regulations intentionally use proper legal language to give themselves the appearance of legitimacy.
    It’s not an ACTUAL breach of contract, which wouldn’t require you going to Fair Work in the first place.

    I can only imagine how much you celebrated Bolt getting owned by 18C for all the same reasons…

    I would certainly expect a Hard Right, free market operator such as yourself to have an absolute stonker for the primacy of contracts and to be rigid in asking for their enforcement.

    It could still be a bad ruling and wouldn’t say anything about a persons politics anyway. You don’t really know what the difference between left wing or right wing is or where to even begin.

    I’m starting to think you might not be quite what you seem.

    That’s because you are a politically illiterate leftist on a right wing blog for some reason.

  203. Stimpson J. Cat

    The Bible has been interpreted as supporting a range of positions, by both conservatives and liberals.

    The Missionary Position am I right?
    Everyone loves that one.

  204. Dr Faustus

    It’s a “breach of contract” as per the gibberish regulations of Fair Work. These regulations intentionally use proper legal language to give themselves the appearance of legitimacy.
    It’s not an ACTUAL breach of contract, which wouldn’t require you going to Fair Work in the first place.

    The ACTUAL statement of claim lays out the relevant terms in Folau’s contract with RA and points to the specific actions taken by RA to breach them. No gibberish Fair Work regulations involved in that.

    And, perhaps being picky-picky, the claim Mx Castle chose to settle was in front of the Federal Court – not the Fair Work Commission.

    I’m afraid it’s starting to sound like you are not very right, as well as not very Right.

  205. a reader

    You’re very generous Dr Faustus!

  206. Pingback: The week in reactivity. – Dark Brightness

  207. Iampeter

    The ACTUAL statement of claim lays out the relevant terms in Folau’s contract with RA and points to the specific actions taken by RA to breach them. No gibberish Fair Work regulations involved in that.

    And, perhaps being picky-picky, the claim Mx Castle chose to settle was in front of the Federal Court – not the Fair Work Commission.

    This has been explained a few times. The Fair Work Commission still uses the Courts, just like the Human Rights Commission does. If Folau had a real breach of contract then he would’ve just brought a lawsuit. Instead he lodged a Fair Work complaint, claiming “unlawful termination,” which also uses terms like “breach of contract” but is not the same thing.

    I’m afraid it’s starting to sound like you are not very right, as well as not very Right.

    This has also been explained a few times. Whatever your position is on the technical legal question can’t tell you anything about right wing or left wing. You are politically illiterate, like the rest of the conservative movement.

    This is because you clueless leftists that thought RA could violate free speech and religious freedom by firing Folau for any reason, when instead it was RA’s rights that were actually violated.
    You guys are ignorant, patronizing twats who don’t understand anything about politics so evade the question entirely by focusing on non-essential technical legal questions, which you ALSO get wrong.

  208. Juan

    In the states in which it’s most popular, rugby is very well connected to captains of industry. That’s one of the reasons it survives and prospers as a niche sport.

    So they can give back the government grants then?

    I’m sure, if they were withdrawn, rugby would be better placed than most other sports to find private sector benefactors to make up the shortfall.

    But if you really wanted to stop government (i.e. taxpayers’) money flowing into rugby, you would also have to have to cut government grants to the elite private schools ⁠— the famed nurseries of rugby talent.

    Many of these top schools have coaching and sports science facilities which would be the envy of multi-million-dollar professional sports organisations.

    The Scots College, for example, boasted of Fast bowling lessons from Brett Lee. Premier League sports scientists. A hypoxic chamber that can simulate training at up to 3000 metres above sea level.

    The Scots’ Director of Rugby is Brian Smith, a former Director of Rugby (i.e. head coach) of London Irish RFC and candidate for the Ireland head coach position, England attack coach, and more recently a candidate to assist Michael Cheika as the Wallabies’ attack coach.

    While Scots doesn’t disclose the Director of Rugby’s salary, coaches’ salaries in England’s rugby premiership start at £200,000 per annum and rise steeply from there for the most sought-after coaches.

    All of this is paid for in part with your tax dollars; more than $7 million per annum to Scots alone, to be precise.

  209. 8th Dan

    Interesting piece from Nein Sports too

    Folau just agreed to a settlement with Rugby Australia, believed to be worth about $2.5 million

    Maybe someone in or close to Rugby Australia has leaked the actual settlement amount.

  210. mh

    8th Dan
    #3253988, posted on December 6, 2019 at 7:30 pm
    The Folau kerfuffle is sooo yesterday …

    😆

  211. 8th Dan

    The Folau kerfuffle is sooo yesterday …

    As I said. But there is still some interest in it … as you have just demonstrated.

  212. candy

    Joe Hildebrand really rambles in that column. He’s always interesting though. Can’t find his point but it seems he thinks it was just about greed on Folau’s part?

  213. Leigh Lowe

    Infidel Tiger

    #3254523, posted on December 7, 2019 at 12:55 pm

    So much butt hurt at Izzy’s stonking victory over the forces of darkness.

    It’s the total and flawless victory that keeps on giving.

    Enjoyable day reading the bile spewed out by the grate and the good of sports j’ism.
    The Rugger writer in the Oz declared it a management triumph for the Vicar.
    Why, she even negotiated a figure less than the RA board authorised.
    Fuck me, it is only news if she went over the board limit.
    This is like the 18 year old who gets pissed, totals dad’s Merc, then proudly announces that he has beaten the repair shop quote down from $50k to $48k.

  214. a reader

    I couldn’t be arsed to watch Sports Sunday or whatever it’s called but I can’t imagine Liz Ellis would have had anything polite to say. I mean she was the one leading the way to get his wife out of netball.

Comments are closed.