Mason Greenwood

[newyddion]

If one of my kids, and I have brought up 4 looked to anyone famous as a role model, because they were famous or a pop singer or an actor, I would think I had failed miserably as a parent.

nah, it's just a fact. kids are impressionable and are clued in to what is going on around them.

I bet you yourself have been influenced in someway by a famous person, fashion, hairstyle, saying, catchphrase, goal celebration

 

[ForssAwakens]

nah, it's just a fact. kids are impressionable and are clued in to what is going on around them.

I bet you yourself have been influenced in someway by a famous person, fashion, hairstyle, saying, catchphrase, goal celebration

I think we’ve all done the fjortoft plane

 

[Priv]

If social media posts got around my work of me doing that to my wife, I reckon I’d be sacked

Same

 

[Millbrook]

If social media posts got around my work of me doing that to my wife, I reckon I’d be sacked

On what grounds do you think you would be sacked. I'd be interested in the views of others who agree with this as well.

I'm out of touch but would think most employers don't have a clause in the employment contract about 'bringing the employer into disrepute'. An implied term at best.

So what would the reason for dismissal be?

 

[Priv]

On what grounds do you think you would be sacked. I'd be interested in the views of others who agree with this as well.

I'm out of touch but would think most employers don't have a clause in the employment contract about 'bringing the employer into disrepute'. An implied term at best.

So what would the reason for dismissal be?

Mine does have that very clause and my previous 3 of 4 jobs did as well. Public image of the company is very important these days.

Can’t remember the exact wording but something along the lines of if your personal actions cast a negative impact or image upon the company we reserve the right to terminate your employment.

Basically used as an extension of gross misconduct

 

[newyddion]

On what grounds do you think you would be sacked. I'd be interested in the views of others who agree with this as well.

I'm out of touch but would think most employers don't have a clause in the employment contract about 'bringing the employer into disrepute'. An implied term at best.

So what would the reason for dismissal be?

Gross Misconduct? Folks not wanting to interact with him whatsoever could lead to gross negligence or serious insubordination.

 

[B_G]

Nor should he be held to a higher standard because he is a footballer. If he was a plumber nobody would be crying out for him to loose his job.

I just find the argument for Man U. to sack him a bit odd.

To be fair, if I was a plumber, I wouldn't want him working alongside me and I would leave my position if he was employed. I've left a previous role as it came to light that there was a convicted nonce in my office and I couldn't stand being around him all day.

He's in the public domain and a role model for many. I don't think it's unfair to expect higher standards.

 

[JM14]

There was enough evidence, more than enough, but the key witness, the girl he abused and battered, refused to take the stand after he breached his bail conditions and contacted her. Unfortunately, it seems that to her the fame and money is more important than being physically and mentally abused.

Without knowing a single thing about this woman, that’s an awful thing to be suggesting.

Victims of DV refuse to testify for numerous reasons and it’s understandable after going through such high levels of trauma. To suggest it’s only about the money and fame is disgusting

 

[ForssAwakens]

On what grounds do you think you would be sacked. I'd be interested in the views of others who agree with this as well.

I'm out of touch but would think most employers don't have a clause in the employment contract about 'bringing the employer into disrepute'. An implied term at best.

So what would the reason for dismissal be?

You have be professional, you still represent your company outside of work

 

[Priv]

Without knowing a single thing about this woman, that’s an awful thing to be suggesting.

Victims of DV refuse to testify for numerous reasons and it’s understandable after going through such high levels of trauma. To suggest it’s only about the money and fame is disgusting

Her father was one of the biggest issues, defending him and coercing her into forgiving him and going back to him. as he didn’t want his gravy train to end. As a father of two daughters his behaviour for me is abhorrent and he’s just as big a scumbag as greenwood is.

 

[Laughing]

You literally saying he’s be held to a higher standard here?

You find the ‘arguement’ to sack him off, despite most people probably get sacked for it anyway.

When pointed out, you have shifted the argument to whether it’s right or wrong.

Let’s take a call centre worker for example, if they videos implying rape and assault, and the employer did nothing about it, how comfortable do you think the female colleagues would be?

whilst we are on right on wrong. If you break a contract that you have signed then it is wrong, it is not right

He is being held to a higher standard, the whole thread is about man utd sacking him and how despicible they are for not doing so. There would be no interest in whether he kept his job if he was a plumber.

I never shifted the argument at all, you did, by saying you would be fired, you made the comparison, not me. I merely said if he was a plumber no one would care. As for anyone getting sacked for this, I have no idea and neither do you. I would fully expect an employer to get the employees side of this before doing anything. I don't know anything about contract law so I don't know if you could sack an employee without first proving he had done what he is accused off and I would strongly suggest that if an employee just denies it is his voice on the recording, your boss is snookered.


Your call center argument, great, so he should never work again? Is that what you are saying? Or are you saying he shouldn't be allowed to work with women? If that is the case I would suggest a male dominated profession like football would be ideal for a suspected rapist. What do you want to happen to him? Go on the dole, would that make you feel safer and happy.

You don't seem to have any opinion on how he should be dealt with beyond firing him. You want to see him punished and don't really care about a due process. Is it that you are just looking for an argument because you want someone to vent at for this mans behaviour, and probably lack of any punishment. knock yourself out.

 

[Laughing]

To be fair, if I was a plumber, I wouldn't want him working alongside me and I would leave my position if he was employed. I've left a previous role as it came to light that there was a convicted nonce in my office and I couldn't stand being around him all day.

He's in the public domain and a role model for many. I don't think it's unfair to expect higher standards.

I'll say the same to you that I said to Forss, what do you want to happen? For him to go to jail with no trial? Never be allowed to work again?

And he isn't a role model, he is a footballer. I addressed this point earlier. There is a fair argument that because of his profile, he may, normalise this behaviour.

 

[uncle_rico]

Her father was one of the biggest issues, defending him and coercing her into forgiving him and going back to him. as he didn’t want his gravy train to end. As a father of two daughters his behaviour for me is abhorrent and he’s just as big a scumbag as greenwood is.

Exactly this.

 

[The_Lizards_Jumpers]

He is being held to a higher standard, the whole thread is about man utd sacking him and how despicible they are for not doing so. There would be no interest in whether he kept his job if he was a plumber.

I never shifted the argument at all, you did, by saying you would be fired, you made the comparison, not me. I merely said if he was a plumber no one would care. As for anyone getting sacked for this, I have no idea and neither do you. I would fully expect an employer to get the employees side of this before doing anything. I don't know anything about contract law so I don't know if you could sack an employee without first proving he had done what he is accused off and I would strongly suggest that if an employee just denies it is his voice on the recording, your boss is snookered.


Your call center argument, great, so he should never work again? Is that what you are saying? Or are you saying he shouldn't be allowed to work with women? If that is the case I would suggest a male dominated profession like football would be ideal for a suspected rapist. What do you want to happen to him? Go on the dole, would that make you feel safer and happy.

You don't seem to have any opinion on how he should be dealt with beyond firing him. You want to see him punished and don't really care about a due process. Is it that you are just looking for an argument because you want someone to vent at for this mans behaviour, and probably lack of any punishment. knock yourself out.

No one is suggesting he shouldn't be allowed to work again (no one has mentioned any sort of banning order I dont think) they're merely pointing out that Man Utd shouldn't want to be associated with him, as their employee, based on the evidence that surfaced.

He's free to sign for any other club, but again they should think about their public image when making that decision. No one is talking about taking away his livelihood, just saying that a club of Utd's stature should distance themselves from a player like that, because of the message it sends to fans and the wider game.

Exactly the same as a plumber of a call centre worker would have to do if a similar recording surfaced of them, they'd have to find a employer (or even their current employer) who is willing to overlook the negative publicity / other employee uncomfortableness / customer dissatisfaction etc because they're a good plumber - that's the decision each club has to make for themselves.

 

[Laughing]

No one is suggesting he shouldn't be allowed to work again (no one has mentioned any sort of banning order I dont think) they're merely pointing out that Man Utd shouldn't want to be associated with him, as their employee, based on the evidence that surfaced.

He's free to sign for any other club, but again they should think about their public image when making that decision. No one is talking about taking away his livelihood, just saying that a club of Utd's stature should distance themselves from a player like that, because of the message it sends to fans and the wider game.

Exactly the same as a plumber of a call centre worker would have to do if a similar recording surfaced of them, they'd have to find a employer (or even their current employer) who is willing to overlook the negative publicity / other employee uncomfortableness / customer dissatisfaction etc because they're a good plumber - that's the decision each club has to make for themselves.

Hey Lizard, nicely put. Not sure that that is what everyone is saying though.

 

[ForssAwakens]

He is being held to a higher standard, the whole thread is about man utd sacking him and how despicible they are for not doing so. There would be no interest in whether he kept his job if he was a plumber.

I never shifted the argument at all, you did, by saying you would be fired, you made the comparison, not me. I merely said if he was a plumber no one would care. As for anyone getting sacked for this, I have no idea and neither do you. I would fully expect an employer to get the employees side of this before doing anything. I don't know anything about contract law so I don't know if you could sack an employee without first proving he had done what he is accused off and I would strongly suggest that if an employee just denies it is his voice on the recording, your boss is snookered.


Your call center argument, great, so he should never work again? Is that what you are saying? Or are you saying he shouldn't be allowed to work with women? If that is the case I would suggest a male dominated profession like football would be ideal for a suspected rapist. What do you want to happen to him? Go on the dole, would that make you feel safer and happy.

You don't seem to have any opinion on how he should be dealt with beyond firing him. You want to see him punished and don't really care about a due process. Is it that you are just looking for an argument because you want someone to vent at for this mans behaviour, and probably lack of any punishment. knock yourself out.

All I have said is the same thing would happen to Joe Public on their company as it to what’s happening to mason. If Joe Public video was public and on social media people would demand hes be sacked, even if he was a plumber

Here are some examples of people getting sacked

9 Times Social Media Got Someone Fired

People are always saying to watch what you post on social media, but can it really lose you your job? These nine stories prove that it can.

www.themuse.com

i never said he shouldn’t work again. He should be sacked by his current employer though, like everyone else would be.

The same standards should apply to mason as to everyone else. It’s not up to me or anyone else how he is dealt with once he’s been sacked, just the same as it wouldn’t be up to me how the plumber should crack on with his life

 

[ForssAwakens]

No one is suggesting he shouldn't be allowed to work again (no one has mentioned any sort of banning order I dont think) they're merely pointing out that Man Utd shouldn't want to be associated with him, as their employee, based on the evidence that surfaced.

He's free to sign for any other club, but again they should think about their public image when making that decision. No one is talking about taking away his livelihood, just saying that a club of Utd's stature should distance themselves from a player like that, because of the message it sends to fans and the wider game.

Exactly the same as a plumber of a call centre worker would have to do if a similar recording surfaced of them, they'd have to find a employer (or even their current employer) who is willing to overlook the negative publicity / other employee uncomfortableness / customer dissatisfaction etc because they're a good plumber - that's the decision each club has to make for themselves.

This is exactly what I have been saying

 

[1finny]

On what grounds do you think you would be sacked. I'd be interested in the views of others who agree with this as well.

I'm out of touch but would think most employers don't have a clause in the employment contract about 'bringing the employer into disrepute'. An implied term at best.

So what would the reason for dismissal be?

I’m 99% certain he won’t have been dismissed or sacked, for the very reasons already discussed. Proving ‘gross misconduct’ and the potential consequences of a tribunal would just prolong the agony.

He will have been given a pay off, and signed a settlement agreement whereby both parties have agreed a set of words.
They will be contractually bound to keep quiet and move on.

 

[Millbrook]

Thinking of the none footballer cases - being a plumber (as has been mentioned) is a difficult one if the plumber was to work in peoples houses.

Interestingly no one has mentioned the employer getting help for the individual. Compulsory counselling for example. That would involve a degree of admission that the individual had acted inappropriately.

 

[Millbrook]

All I have said is the same thing would happen to Joe Public on their company as it to what’s happening to mason. If Joe Public video was public and on social media people would demand hes be sacked, even if he was a plumber

Here are some examples of people getting sacked

9 Times Social Media Got Someone Fired

People are always saying to watch what you post on social media, but can it really lose you your job? These nine stories prove that it can.

www.themuse.com

i never said he shouldn’t work again. He should be sacked by his current employer though, like everyone else would be.

The same standards should apply to mason as to everyone else. It’s not up to me or anyone else how he is dealt with once he’s been sacked, just the same as it wouldn’t be up to me how the plumber should crack on with his life

Aren't all those examples where the individual themselves posted something inappropriate on social media. Not quite the same.