Archive for June, 2013

What is the ultimate goal for the republican party?

Not asking about short-term goals here like “impeach Obama” or “destroy socialism”. I want to hear the long term goal that would reflect a republican’s ideal world.

To have a GRAND OLD (KEG) PARTY. So they can drown their sorrows in suds.

Ronald Reagan was the right man for 1980. In terms of restoring many time-honored, all-American values, Reagan was the right guy in so many ways–after the nightmares of Vietnam, Watergate, runaway inflation under Carter, and the 444 days of humiliation for our American hostages in Tehran. Reagan, more through his attitude and personality and humble, patriotic pride, really restored a lot of good things–but intangible things–to our nation. He deserves a lot of credit. Like most Democrats, I was opposed to most of his policies. But he was a good man, and a great American in terms of his virtues.

Now the problem is–many many Republicans fell too much in love with Ronnie and his philosophical pronouncements. They never got over him. I have Republican friends who are still wistful and nostalgic for Ronnie…because once he was gone, the magic was gone. And they never got it back. Certainly not with Bush Sr. and Bush Jr.!!

The bigger problem, policy wise, is that Reagan’s world view and his unshakeable conservative values are simply not working in this day and age. Reagan and his followers worshipped at the alter of the fat cats and their large corporations. And, though conservative Republicans will deny it all day long, a lot of the economic worries we are facing right now can be traced to too much deregulation, & too much corporate greed, which usually results in rigging the system to favor the wealthy. And consequently, disenfranchising lots of other innocent middle class people.

My question is: what brand of beer will be in their kegs????

23 comments - What do you think?
Posted by mark - June 30, 2013 at 9:39 pm

Categories: Conservative Ideals   Tags: , , ,

Max Weber-the Life and Work of a Social Theorist (1864-1920)

Max Weber-The Life and Work of a Social Theorist (1864-1920)
Max Weber is a German political economist and sociologist. Weber is considered as one of the leading figures in a new generation of historical political economists in the Germany of the 1890s. Max Weber was born in April 21, 1864, in Erfurt, Prussia. After early studies in the history of commercial law, Weber established himself as one of the leading figures in a new generation of historical political economists in the Germany of the 1890s.
In 1895 Weber “became a full professor in political economy at Freiburg, and then, in the following year, at Heidelberg” (Max Weber, n.d.).
A personal breakdown in 1898 led to his with¬drawal from academic teaching, but did little to impair the flow of his writing, the range of which was enormous. Its unifying focus was a concern with the mutual relationship between legal, political and cultural formations on the one hand, and economic activity on the other. His concern with these issues became increas¬ingly theoretical, involving a systematization of the major categories of social and political life, both universally and as definitive of the specific character of modern western civilization.
Weber made his initial reputation in Ger¬many with a study of the impact of capitalist organization on the agricultural estates east of the Elbe, and its implications for the continued dominance of the Junkers over Germany’s political life. It is for a much wider study, however, of the origins of capitalism itself, that he is best known “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”, 1904-1985. The uninten¬ded consequence of this ethic, which was enforced by the social and psychological pres¬sures on the believer to prove his salvation, was the accumulation of wealth for investment.
The crucial ques¬tion about his thesis is whether the employment of wage labour that made unlimited accumu¬lation possible in principle, also made it inevitable in practice; whether, that is, the Protestant ethic should be seen as providing a necessary motivation for capitalist accumu¬lation, or rather a legitimation for it in the face of prevalent values favouring conspicuous con¬sumption on the part of a leisured class.
Weber was only comparatively late in his life that he came to think of his work as ‘sociology’, and it is as one of the ‘founding fathers’ of sociology that he is now known. “These characteristic features of German politics during this period are focused in the personality of Max Weber, Germany’s most outstanding political theorist during this epoch” (Mayer, 1957, p.13. Introductory).
The issue is probably impossible to resolve conclu¬sively, since all later examples of capitalist take-off have been influenced by the impact of the original one. The theoretical importance of Weber’s work, however, lies in the challenge it offers to reductionist attempts to treat ideas as simply the reflection of material interests, rather than as mutually interacting with them, or to provide an account of social change without reference to the motivation of the social agents involved, even though the consequences may not be what they intend.
“The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism” (1904-1905) was only the first of a number of works on the economic ethic of the major world religions; the purpose of these was not, as has been claimed, to prove the capitalist spirit thesis by showing its absence elsewhere, but rather to elucidate the distinctive character of modern western rationalism (Weber, 1958). According to Weber, “instrumental rationality” was a universal character¬istic of social action, only in the modern West had the goal-maximizing calculation of the most efficient means to given ends become gene¬ralized.
Weber believed that social hierarchy was inevitable, and that its analysis lay in the relationship to be found between the analytically distinct dimen¬sions of status, property and political or organizational power. Different societies could be distinguished by the predominance of one dimension over the others. If in early capitalism this was property, in advanced capitalism it was organizational power. It was the imperatives of the latter that determined the subordination of the worker at the workplace, not those of property, and such subordination would therefore continue under a system of social ownership.
In Weberian political sociology, alongside the ‘tradi¬tional’ and ‘rational’ principles of legitimacy was a third principle, the ‘charismatic’. This indicated an authority deriving from die person of the leader himself and the compelling power of his message, rather than from tradition or the rules governing a particular office. It was a specifically innovative, non-routinized force in social life.
Crucial therefore to asserting control over bureaucratic administration and securing innovation in face of its conservative tenden¬cies, was to ensure scope for the charismatic principle in the political process. Weber believed this could be provided by the circum¬stances of mass electoral politics. He observed how elections under universal suffrage were becoming a form of plebiscite for or against the party leaders, and were increasing their scope for determining policy over the heads of the individual parliamentary representatives and the party following.
“The Protestant morality that he had come to accept as inescapable destiny came under attack from the youth movement, from avant-garde literary circles such as the one centred on the poet Stefan George, from Neoromantics influenced by Nietzsche and Freud, and from Slavic cultural ideals, exemplified in Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky (Max Weber, n.d.).
Underlying Weber’s conception of democ¬racy as a procedure for producing political leadership lay a basic philosophical assumption that political principles or values could not be grounded in reason or in the historical process, but were matters of subjective commitment and assertion. In their work Hilton and Turner write: ‘Weber and the Austrian School are not obliged to deny the reality of institutions or the idea that actors may act under institutional constraints, or that this constraint may be experienced as an external compulsive force or imperative. Nor need they hold to a social contract or design theory of institutions” (Hilton and Turner, 1989, p.43).
He defined bureaucracy as a system of administration embodying the following characteristics: hier¬archy (each official has a clearly defined competence and is answerable to a superior); impersonality (the work is conducted according to set rules, without arbitrariness or favouritism, and a written record is kept of every transaction); continuity (the office constitutes a full-time salaried occupation, with security of tenure and the prospect of regular advancement); expertise (officials are selected on merit, are trained for their function, and control access to the knowledge stored in the files).
In 1914, Weber finished “Economy and society”. Central feature of Weber’s critique of socialism was that the attempt to replace the ‘anarchy’ of the market and achieve greater equality through social planning would entail an enormous expansion of bureaucratic power, and hence of unfreedom and economic stagnation. Swedberg describes that Weber singles out three levels: “economic phenomena, economically relevant phenomena and economically conditioned phenomena” He writes: “The first of these categories covers economic phenomena in a strict sense, such as economic events and economic institutions; and Weber has little to say about this category except that it includes phenomena ‘the economic aspects of which constitute their primary cultural significance for us'” (Swedberg 1998, p. 18-19)
Sociological theory has been interested in bureaucracy as a social category, representative of the new middle class, and distinct from both capital and labour. As Max Weber put it: “The individual bureaucrat cannot squirm out of the apparatus into which he has been harnessed. (…) He is only a small cog in a ceaselessly moving mechanism which prescribes to him an essentially fixed route of march” (Weber, 1958). This is often referred to as Weber’s iron cage. It is possible t conclude that “Weber’s greatest merit as a thinker was that he brought the social sciences in Germany, hitherto preoccupied largely with national problems, into direct critical confrontation with the international giants of 19th-century European thought Marx and Nietzsche” (Max Weber, n.d.).
Produced by ProfEssays ( www.professays.com ) – professional custom essay writing service: custom essays, custom term papers, custom academic papers, custom admission essays, custom research papers, compositions, book reports, case study. No plagiarism, high quality, prompt delivery.

Andrew Sandon
http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/max-weberthe-life-and-work-of-a-social-theorist-18641920-75492.html

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by mark - June 28, 2013 at 9:15 pm

Categories: Founding Fathers   Tags:

Sex and the Law

Throughout history, people have tried to control our bodies and restrict our relationships. The policing of sexuality continues today. Some pharmacists are refusing to dispense birth control, legal marriage for gays and lesbians is not yet a reality, and anti-choice activists are working to overturn Roe v. Wade. Now's the time to be a sexual and reproductive rights activist!

www.speakingofsexpodcast.org

Duration : 7 min 13 sec

Read more…

15 comments - What do you think?
Posted by mark - June 27, 2013 at 8:45 pm

Categories: Constitutional Law   Tags:

Chain Reaction

After researching much of the information regarding the Informant system, I believe this is at the heart of much of the corruption that we are seeing in our society. In our justice systems and in our communities. I believe this system is enslaving large portions of society. I also believe that there are many of us that were and are blissfully unaware of what is happening and will remain so until it is too late.

There is a chain reaction that is happening in society that if left unchecked has the potential to infect and destroy the very core of society that we have all known and depended on. That is of course the snitching infection. I call it that, because there is no other way to describe some of the events that I have read about while doing research into the Informant system.

While researching this phenomenon I have come across people who one minute seemed like average decent persons, and the next minute after being caught up in the Snitching/Informant system were willing to sell their very mothers down the drain to keep themselves free. This is not going to be the case for every Informant, but it’s the case with too many that are a part of this system.

Once let loose back into society many will continue with a life of crime. others will continue with what I call the game.

The Game

The game is one of set up’s and betrayal where the Informant will try to set someone up for a fall. They will choose a target and the unsuspecting target will get caught up in a scheme of some kind, eventually be arrested, they do not necessarily have to have committed a crime, and then the informant will testify against the person they entrapped, or other informants will. Once this new person is caught up in the game, should they be turned informant then the cycle continues once again.

I don’t know how many Informants are a part of this game that is ongoing in society, but I suspect that the many are, and all of them once they decide to become informants are owned by the system, and their handlers. That means anytime the government wants or needs a favor guess who they will call upon? Do you begin to see the makings of a corrupt society? Remember they can call upon these informants years later after these informants have been let loose. Many of these Informants will also go onto have careers, and even become contributing members of society, but they are still owned by the state. A lot of these Informant deals are kept off the records, meaning that the person is owned by a handler, but there might not be an official record of it, but when that handler needs a favor, that Informant will be called upon, and will risk exposure if they do not comply.

[quote]For example, unlike a classic plea bargain, informant deals lack finality because an informant’s obligations are ongoing. Written co-operation agreements often extend a defendant’s obligations into perpetuity, while informal, unwritten agreements last as long as the police or prosecutor wishes to use that informant.[/quote]

To understand how the game works, we will review three case studies. These are just a few of the many that I came across when reading the stories on the wall. It’s a continued pattern of set up on unsuspecting pigeons, and hardened Informants who will do what they need to do to stay out of jail.

http://www.november.org/thewall/wall/wall.html

Before we review the case studies I am going to again remind you of some statistics.

http://www.aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file744_30623.pdf

[quote] as many as fifty percent of African American males in some cities – are in contact with the criminal justice system and therefore potentially under pressure to snitch. By relying heavily on snitching, particularly in drug-related cases, law enforcement officials create large numbers of informants who remain at large in the community, engaging in criminal activities while under pressure to provide information about others. These snitches are a communal liability: they increase crime and threaten social organization, interpersonal relationships, and socio-legal norms in their home communities, even as they are tolerated or under-punished by law enforcement because they are useful.[/quote]

[quote]The uncoordinated, widespread use of informants in the United States by thousands of different police departments and various federal agencies does not of course, amount to the focused, purposeful political mission of the Stasi. But if anywhere near eight percent of the male population in inner city communities is snitching, that figure meets or surpasses Stasi level of between one and ten percent of the total population as informers.[/quote]

http://november.org/stayinfo/breaking08/HoffmanCase.html

[quote]If things had gone according to plan, you never would have heard of 23-year-old Rachel Hoffman. She would have just been another confidential informant, one of more than an estimated 100,000 in the United States who work with police to send someone else to jail.[/quote]

These figures do not include people who are informers via work, school, or community group programs. When we take into consideration numbers such as that, we are looking at an epidemic that is worst than what happened in East Germany. Keep in mind that in addition to all this, there will also be 800,000 Terrorism Liaison Officers added to the Informant population in the United States. These figures should wake up America and other cities to the dangers of what is happening in various societies.

The Game

To understand the game you might want to picture it in the sense of how a disease spreads, you start with on carrier and that person infects one person right after another. Some of those carriers will go on to infect others. Some will be dormant and not infect anyone. You might also want to think of the movie lifeforce, where one has the constant need to feed on one person after another, then those victims need to feed on others. You can have a very sick and infested city in a short space of time if such an infection goes unchecked.

The game is one of the Informant being placed primarily back in society, but this could also happen in jail, where an informant via lies, deceit, entrapment or some other methods set’s up another person to take a fall. That person then come in contact with the criminal justice system, they can then choose to become informants themselves, or refusing to do so, will spend lengthy spaces of time in prison. This game is primarily enacted via drugs, but that’s not the extent of it. Shoplifting is another example. I see this used with the teenaged informants, setting up their friends to steal from the stores, so that they in turn can become snitches.

Theft, drugs, stolen cars, any crime that someone can make a deal with police to become informants, they can be released back into society and are a danger to the rest of society. This is not to say that all Informants are horrible people, many just did not want to be in jail, some others are a true danger to society, nearly all are under pressure by the government to produce other Informants, and that obligation is never ending, some are allowed to lay dormant, till they can be of use.

http://november.org/stayinfo/breaking08/FL-Hoffman6.html

[quote]In Hoffman’s case, it was the work of another informer that led to her own work for the police.

On April 15, an informer told Tallahassee police that Hoffman had sold marijuana in the past but hadn’t done so recently, according to police records.

At the time, Hoffman, 23, was in a pretrial drug diversion program because of charges of possession of marijuana and resisting arrest in February 2007. To stay in the program, she had to stay out of trouble.

Two days after police got the informer’s tip, a Tallahassee police officer stopped Hoffman as she was getting into her car
[/quote]

http://www.mapinc.org/images/Hoffman.jpg

Rachael Hoffman then went on to become an Informant. She first tried to set up a close friend and when that failed, the close friend helped her find the dealers who she tried to buy drugs from on behalf of the police. The sting went wrong and she was killed. Had this gone successfully, those drug dealers if they agreed to become informants might have been released back into society as Informants and the cycle would have continued. It’s a frightening cycle that has become more widespread than can be imagined.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/snitch/

Case number 2.

Joey Settembrino was a young 18 year old, just about to go off to college.

He was set up by an Informant. The Informant was a close friend of his. He use to spend his weekends at the Informants house.

[quote]He was a very good friend. I had known the guy for many years. We had gone out every weekend, fishing on his boat, hydrosliding, skiing. I was very shocked; it was very unexpected. It’s not something you expect from friends.[/quote]

In an Informants society, it’s what you expect from just about everyone and it makes people suspicious and closed off. This is what happened in East Germany once the population became aware of what was happening. In America many Americans are not aware that these types of games are being played. In these cases the targets were encouraged and did get into illegal activities, however that is not always the case, and many times innocent people who had nothing to do with illegal activities are still caught up in these games and convicted on the testimony of Informants.

[quote]He wanted me to go back to the house where I got the acid from and get something else. They wanted me to wear a wire and they wanted me to go back there … to buy some other type of drug, no matter what it was, whatever he had in the house, so they could set him up. Just a chain reaction, one gets to one, one gets the other and they just keep going. I told him that I couldn’t do that, that I didn’t get the drugs from that house. At that time I was really confused. I was shocked, and I told him that I couldn’t do anything for him. But he kept trying, he kept threatening, talking about a lot of time. “You’re going to do 25 years. You’re going to be in prison your whole life.” … He really tried to scare me. But I told him I couldn’t do anything for him … . [Eventually] they went back to the house in which I got it from, they arrested the other guy, my friend [who I bought the acid from]. And he’s now doing a 10-year sentence along with me.
[/quote]

Joey said it best. This is like a chain reaction that just keeps going and going. One get’s one, then another and another and another. Those in turn get others and the cycle continues. Remember it’s not just drugs, and it’s not just the guilty that are being caught up in this game. If we review cases of Gang Stalking, we hear of men who thought that a woman had entered their life for the sole purpose of setting them up to look like a rapist or something else.

There are stories of targets being framed or other set up’s, and there are targets that do turn informant and then go back into society and try to harm other targets. This is happening in ever sector of society. Rachel, Joey and even Clarence were all going off to college, or had finished college when they were caught up in these stings.

Joey refused to become a snitch and thus spent 10 years in jail. His friend that set him up, who had been caught for drugs himself, was back on the streets, selling drugs, and setting up at least 11 or 12 others in the first year that Joey was in jail.

[quote]
Do you know why they wanted you?

I’ve asked that question, I’ve asked myself that a thousand times, “Why me? Why did he set me up?” …
[/quote]

In this game that is happening, I would say that they want just about everyone. They will get some people via community programs to be Informants, some via their places of employment, or community programs. Now the people who are informants via community programs and other legit means might not play the game of setting people up directly, but they are still part of the game, and they still work hand in hand with these others that are playing by a different set of rules. Many might not be aware of who they are working hand in hand with. At the end of the day, they all work for the state, government and all the orders come from the same sources.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/snitch/cases/aaron.html

Clearance is in jail because he introduced two parties that wanted to buy or sell drugs to each other. He had never been involved with drugs before, but one day his cousin called him up and asked him if he could find someone to buy drugs from. He said he knew some people and thought that they might be involved in dealing, he would check into it.

Clearances case is interesting because all the other parties who turned Informant received less time than he did. He does not know why his cousin and the others turned against him and lied, or why the prosecutor seemed intent on punishing him because he would not snitch and become an Informant.

[quote]What was it like having your friends testify against you?

Well, we’re sitting in the courtroom. These guys that I knew all my life came up, and they said [stuff] about me that wasn’t true, and they hurt me. It really truly hurt me, Robert and James really hurt me ’cause James is my first cousin. I looked up to him all my life. Robert was supposed to be my best friend at the time. We grew up together from playing Pop ball all the way up to high school ball together, and I couldn’t believe that they would sit there, in front of me … and say the things that they said about me … . [The] only thing I could say was it wasn’t true. But nobody believed me … . You had to have a fall guy, and I was that person.
[/quote]

It should be noted that the others involved all had prior drug convictions. Which means if they were out on the street and able to set him up, they were likely already Informants. He doesn’t know why they turned on him, but it’s possible that this might have been the idea from the get go. The assumption being that he would turn snitch and then be in a prime candidate on the college campus, a pawn to be used to set up other pawns, because that is how the game works.

[quote]Why did he do it?

Well, I had a opportunity to talk to James one time … . He said, “Man, I’m sorry, man.” I say, “James, why you do me like that?” He say, “Because I had no choice.” I said, “What you mean you have no choice in the matter?” He say “Because Miss Griffin say she didn’t want Bob to try your case.” She say if [he] didn’t cooperate and do what she told him to do, that she was going to hurt him worse in his case … . He say, “Well, the prosecutor Miss Griffin said if I don’t do it she going to put me in prison for the rest of my life … . I got to do what I got to do.”
[/quote]

He stats that the prosecutor pulled his cousin aside and when his cousin went back on the stand, his cousin lied. This is not the first time scenarios like this have happened, it can only be imagined what these prosecutors or handlers have on these Informants to make them sell out their own friends, and family.

[quote]And the real drug dealers are out —

On the street now. And probably doing the same thing they were doing before they went in. I just don’t understand.
[/quote]

He also does not understand, but if you review enough of these cases, you start to see a pattern and you start to understand, this is how the game works, and yes they are probably back on on the street looking for the next pigeon to set up, and try to turn them into informants.

It reminds me of something a forum member once told me. This guy said that he was set up because he met this woman online, who he dated only to discover that she was married. Her husband got mad and that’s why he thought he was set up.

The person on my forum pointed out that he had met the woman via some co-workers who introduced him to the website where he located this woman. The person on my forum suggested that he was probably profiled and set up by the co-workers who sent him to the site, knowing he would met this woman. The idea is that these games and set up’s take place long before the victim is aware that they are part of a game.

The Global outlook.

Targets of Gang Stalking complain that even when they leave countries such as the U.K., Canada, U.S. that the stalking continues. That is understandable we have seen muli-governmental corporation in other investigations.

What is not understandable and the most frightening sector of this is that various targets have moved to a variety of countries and they all report the same thing, Informants that are able to follow them 24/7.

This suggest that these Informant networks are getting global in nature. They are popping up in areas that are unexpected, and if this trend continues we will have a global surveillance society.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/04/israelandthepalestinians.middleeast1/print

[quote]Middle East: Israel’s secret police pressuring sick Gazans to spy for them, says report· Treatment only offered to would-be informants
· Patients allowed to cross the border drops sharply[/quote]

The same situation is happening in Iraq where they previously had family structures that might have prevented Informant networks from spreading as rapidly. The country will be rebuilt and the Informant structure will be a part of it.

Why would a global surveillance society be necessary?

I will not speculate. I will however say that based on research many societies in history that had a dictator, tyrant, or despot who came to power and who wanted to pull off an unpopular agenda’s such as Hitlers Germany, or Stasi East Germany, employed an army of Informants. It’s the most effective way that a society can control, monitor and subdue the inhabitants.

Since history has shown us that these informant networks are often needed to move forward tyrannical agendas, then can it be assumed that if we could slow down or stop the chain reaction of the Informant movement, we might be able to stop some of the corruption that we are seeing in many areas of society?

Stopping the Chain Reaction.

To stop the Informant infection people need to be aware that there is a lethal chain reaction happening in many parts of society. They need the understanding of how the game is played, and awareness of how far spread and how far reaching it is.

In America prison system reform could go a long way towards fixing the system that has become corrupt. Then prosecutors would not be as dependent on the testimonies of Informants and the power could start to shift back.

The family structure. Communities with less stable family structures are more vulnerable to this system.

People need to be aware that these entrapment’s are happening at every level of society, ever profession in society, thus why it goes all the way up to the top.

If people are unaware, they will not realise the various ways that people can become entrapped, including using someone that you are in a personal association with, or who you just “accidentally” meet. Someone you have a business relationship with.

Some people they will use their own greed and stupidity against them. Other will be a deliberate trap, others will be framed and will have committed no crime. Not being aware of how this system works, many will quietly accept off the record deals, and thus become indebted to the state, able to be used at will. Remember this is happening at all levels of society. Rich, poor, black, white, male, female.

If you have a parent, grandparent that was a snitch, Informant, they might try to go after the next generation.

Your friends, family, co-workers, anyone that is an Informant not by choice but by force, can be a liability to an innocent person.

The problem is more widespread that many realise, and what’s even worst is the silence that surrounds this problem in society. Till it’s talked about, discussed, and exposed it will continue to infect society, and have far reaching and unimaginable consequences, not just for those caught up in the game, but for the many unsuspecting victims, targets, or pigeons yet to come. This is not just happening at local levels. Targets have moved to various countries around the globe and encounter the same type of surveillance network.

We must stop this chain reaction. Awareness and exposure are key.

Happy Holidays.

gangstalking
http://www.articlesbase.com/news-and-society-articles/chain-reaction-695386.html

4 comments - What do you think?
Posted by mark -  at 8:45 pm

Categories: Government Reform   Tags: , , , , , , ,

Understanding The Law… Employment Law

The following Q&A’s have been provided to help you better understand Employment Law.

Q. Following the introduction of Workchoices earlier this year although I work for a company having less than 100 employees do I still have any remedies left?

A. Yes. You are entitled to bring an action against your employer where there has either been a breach of an express or implied term of your contract of employment.

Q. Although the company for whom I am working is not meeting budget the area in which I work has exceeded budget but I am being put under increasing pressure to improve output?

A. All employers have managerial prerogative but where this is unreasonably exceeded and this has been raised with them, this can constitute a breach of your contract of employment. The particular circumstances which apply are extremely important in assessing the extent to which an employee has an available remedy.

Q. I approached my employer asking could I take leave without pay and they asked me to resign on the basis that when I returned all I had to do was reapply for my old position and it would be given back to me. I did this and on my return I put in my job application and other applicants were successful and I was refused. Can my employer do this?

A. No, as any employer who does this is contractually bound to fulfil the terms and conditions of the verbal contract entered into with their employee and if they fail to do so it is enforceable.

Q. My boss came to me and asked me to admit someone to our computer network without the property authorisation. I refused to comply and ever since I have been singled out by him and serially abused, ignored and made to feel unwelcome. Is there anything I can do?

A. Yes. It appears that you are being harassed and bullied and as a result you can seek redress from your employer.

Q. I have been working with the same company for in excess of 10 years and recently a new manager was appointed to my department. He has been riding everyone but particularly myself as it appears he wishes to make changes and bring in his own supporters. I am under stress and my health has deteriorated as a result. What should I do?

A. If you are under-performing then you should address the performance issues as quickly as possible otherwise the manager may terminate your services for any of a number of reasons including poor performance or operational considerations. If it be that you are being ridden and performance-managed in an endeavour to either get you to resign or be terminated then there are a range of things you can do. They include everything from unfair dismissal to suing for breach of contract, including breach of implied terms, which are extremely important in this context. Bullying and harassment should not be forgotten and if there is any hint of some form of actionable discrimination then this should be pursued also.

Q. I was recently fired for serious and wilful misconduct because my employer thought I had taken stock without paying or accounting for it. What should I do?

A. If you have been summarily dismissed and your employer has refused to allow you to explain the situation either thoroughly or at all then you are entitled to take action against him/her either for unfair dismissal if available or breach of contract.

Q. Recently I applied for a job and after the second interview was told by the recruitment agency that I had it. Subsequently I received a telephone call stating that they needed to carry out a criminal record check and I advised them of a minor transgression which had been dealt with by the court not leading to conviction. After this things got out of control and the agency told me that my application was unacceptable to their client and I should look elsewhere for employment. What should I do in the circumstances?

A. Obviously the agency offered you a job which you accepted and they badly handled the matter when explaining this to their client such that the problem is theirs, not yours. In these circumstances you are entitled to take action but the question becomes whether this will prove to be cost effective and will the amount to be obtained either as compensation or damages be sufficient in the circumstances.

Q. I am currently working for a very intense person who is overbearing and difficult who constantly threatens and swears at everyone yelling at them and standing over them unfairly pushing them to do as much work as possible. What should I do in the circumstances?

A. Given the type of work environment it is obvious you have a right to proceed against your employer for bullying and harassment. Not only are you able to do this under the general law but if it is having an impact on you there may be issues associated with the Occupational Health and Safety Act as well.

Q. I work for a government department and believe they are trying to get rid of me saying that my size interferes with my ability to carry out my work. I feel uncomfortable, as I believe I am being set up and the union is also involved. What can I do in these circumstances?

A. As you know with all government departments there are fixed procedures which need to be followed and if they are not issues such as the lack of procedural fairness will arise. In all of these cases it is important to find out what your employer is planning and should they invite you to attend a meeting to discuss your future then make a request of them that you be allowed to bring a support person with you, preferably your solicitor. Normally this would be agreed to and it is a far better way to proceed as your employer will have at least two people in the room when you are interviewed. Government departments normally follow a very lengthy process before an employee’s services are terminated.

Q. I was formerly employed by a company which has gone into liquidation owing me approximately $12,000 in unpaid wages. Is there anything I can do about this?

A. The best thing you can do would be to approach GEERS and see whether you are entitled to some form of compensation from them. Of course they will require proof of your entitlements and the best way to do this is to furnish them with whatever pay slips you currently hold. If you have lost or destroyed these documents then you will need to approach GEERS as to what other forms of proof they will accept to validate your entitlements.

Q. Since the Federal Government introduced Workchoices I am really confused as to whether there are remedies apart from the Workchoices legislation?

A. Most people are aware that provided you are working for a constitutional corporation the landscape for unfair dismissal claims has changed markedly. If you work for a company which has less than 100 employees then unfair dismissal is no longer an option for you whereas where you are working for a company with more than 100 employees then you are entitled to bring an action for unfair dismissal or unlawful termination provided you are a full time employee. In addition claims which can be made include breach of contract, breach of the Trade Practices Act, misrepresentation and anti-discrimination.

Q. I am having a number of issues with my boss at work due to his behaviour as he frequently swears, writes threatening emails, bullies, sets unreasonable deadlines and is trying to performance-manage me out of the operation. What can I do?

A. Obviously if you have been with your employer for some years and provided your earlier performance is in contra-distinction to what he is now saying then you would have a number of legal remedies available to you. It is essential in cases like this to make sure that you do everything possible to acquit at work to avoid criticism. Remember you can retain a solicitor to intercede with your employer and if this does not work then pursue your legal remedies.

Q. I was hired by an accountancy firm and terminated without notice without any reason given for my dismissal. Do I have any right of recourse?

A. Yes. Generally speaking the courts take an extremely poor view of someone being terminated without just cause and where no reason has been supplied. Obviously you need to see a lawyer to make sure your position is fully protected.

Q. This year I went to an office function and become a little untidy. Whilst I was taking photographs a girl lent over in front of me and I took a shot of her cleavage. After sobering up I suddenly realised there could be issues and I discovered that one of the persons to whom I had sent all the photographs including the one of the girl, had circulated this to everybody in the office. What should I do?

A. The first thing is to go and apologise to the girl and make sure there is no ill will between you. Next you should explain to your employer what your circumstances are and apologise to them for any inconvenience or problems that might result. Provided this works there should be no complaints of sexual harassment and the matter should die a natural death. If the matter escalates then you may be in trouble for serious and wilful misconduct and your services terminated.

Q. Recently I was retrenched and given one month’s pay in lieu of notice together with my current month’s salary. Unfortunately I was not paid for my annual leave or my current bonus which it vested and my unvested bonus which is now due and payable. What should I do?

A. You are entitled to take action to recover these outstanding monies, the only issue may be in regard to the current bonus which was not vested at the time your services were terminated.

Q. Approximately two years ago I joined a car dealership which is rather old-fashioned in the manner in which it transacts business between the finance and sales departments. An insurance provider suggested to the management that I was not doing my job properly and as a result I have been reprimanded being held responsible for the poor performance of my area which is ludicrous as the sales for this year in my area are the same as last year when the market was booming. What should I do?

A. As both departments have not been integrated it is hard to see how you could be blamed for this situation, particularly as the downturn was in new car sales and not insurance products which are performing in line with the previous year. It seems that your department must be more effective this year than last as you must be converting more deals this year to maintain last year’s figures. Irrespective you need someone to intercede on your behalf with your employer to cogently put your point of view and if they are unaccepting of this and your services terminated then you should proceed against them for unfair dismissal and look at what reasonable prospects you may have of proceeding against the insurer for defamation.

Q. I have been with the company as a permanent-casual in excess of 10 years and am wondering whether or not I can make an application to become a permanent employee?

A. Yes. Any employed person who has been working continuously and systematically for an employer for either 6 or 12 months is a deemed permanent employee and all that has to be done is to make application to the employer to convert your status. If anything negative transpires approach a lawyer to enforce your rights.

Nominate A Lawyer
http://www.articlesbase.com/law-articles/understanding-the-law-employment-law-118006.html

20 comments - What do you think?
Posted by mark - June 20, 2013 at 4:25 pm

Categories: Constitutional Law   Tags:

How to integrate critical thinking in school curriculum ?

I am thinking of starting a nonprofit organization to promote social welfare by getting critical thinking incorporated in the public school system. Is there any teachers or principles that have knowledge on this subject? Also, how to go about challenging the legal curriculum requirements?

the five W"S should help

1 comment - What do you think?
Posted by mark - June 16, 2013 at 12:05 pm

Categories: Critical Thinking   Tags:

Next Page »