Share
12,097 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 242
clock Created with Sketch.
14/05/23
14:32
Share
Originally posted by pintohoo:
↑
''Her deportment, drinking and choice of companion are her own business. What's it got to do with taxpayers?'' there's a thing called 'duty of care' ---------- she was allowed to enter her place of work, intoxicated, she and companion - also an employee, spent time in the place of employment - with security knowing they were there - and whatever events unfolded - including security finding her naked on a couch - they did nothing from memory bar covering her with a blanket if you can't see a duty of care issue there - then, one shouldn't be driving or voting that the employer settled out of court rapidly ------------ to me sounds like a very smart move for gods sake ----------- Australia is dying, people are homeless, caravan parks are full of permanents, food banks are running out of food and people are talking about this blip in our history whilst people in millions are suffering why??????? -- 2 Liberal Party people working for a Liberal party that is dead and decaying ------------ their silly behaviour and the followup rubbish is taking up oxygen whilst Australians are suffering ---------- no bloody wonder why the Liberals have been given the boot
Expand
Pinto, I don't see how I or Brittany's supervisors had a duty of care or should pay her out. Her supervisors have no say over her alcohol intake. Her supervisors didn't put her on the couch with no knickers. Her supervisors didn't ask her to attend parliament in the small hours. The Liberals, not taxpayers are responsible for employing a person with these characteristics. But I see no duty of care on behalf of the Commonwealth. bacci