by Suff » 27 Jul 2016, 18:57
Kaz, WM and I are from the "slipipery slope" viewpoint. I don't care if I like her or if I like what she said, unless she has a clause in her contract which either states that all her private statements must be in line with the organisation, or, that all her statements, private or public, must be approved by the organisation, then this is wrong. I don't care if she's paid twoppence or 20m a year, it does not matter and it does not change a thing, it's still wrong.
You see this is where I differ from a lot of people. I don't have a monetary based bias about who can say what and what the implications are. If someone is paid £20k a year and does something wrong then they suffer for it. If someone is paid £200k per year and does something wrong, it is not more wrong, it is the same and both should be censured for it. Granted the size of the censure will vary with the level of responsibility, but they are both censured.
What a lot of British people don't realise is that virtually no employer in the mainland EU would try this. The Works Councils would be down on them like a ton of bricks and the governments would stand behind them.
When all the Brexit is over and done with, the rest of the EU will heave a sigh of relief that the "Anglo Saxon" disease is safely isolated on their little group of islands. Because this stuff is where they have been putting up with us for decades. Never mind the fact that we've been putting up with 10 times as much as they have, in this instance they have more of the right of it than we do.
Labour goes on and on about "workers rights", but Labourites are fast enough to pull the plug if they think that it will damage them....
So whilst I shrug my shoulders, put up with it and adjust my own life to avoid it; I don't accept it as right. I just accept it is.
There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand Binary and those who do not.
She's paid 80k pa to promote the UK, and should have kept her mouth shut.
