Share
18,317 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 403
clock Created with Sketch.
01/12/21
11:34
Share
Originally posted by Scott th Ratbag
↑
yes its about PH.... because parliament is a workplace where there is a significant power imbalance with MP's feeling powerful, more so than most business BODs. there is also the entitlement issue, a sense that they can do whatever without exposure to consequences (impunity).
PH should stand for the best practices in the land as they represent government control and provision of services. Setting the best example is the goal PH should aspire to and strive to fulfil..... how could MPs impose regulation on any company if MPs aren't obliged to fulfil the regulations they impose?
Instead PH/MPs have been carved out of the requirements for every other business or authority in the land. How can this be BBs.
Banks, media, industrial offices and many other workplaces have indeed done such reviews of their workplace to ascertain the level of sexual issues so as to be sure they were compliant. many have found examples where their own management were non-compliant and so there have been some high profile legal actions against CEOs and BOD member.... even legal practices and the judiciary have been assessed in the same manner.
this is OH&S stuff.... if there is a broken fire exit businesses are obligated under laws to repair or replace dangerous work conditions.
if you think sexual misconduct is not dangerous, ask a woman who has been sexually harassed/abused.
Expand
All im saying is lets take a look at context and scale, how does it compare to the police force, catholic church, journalists or law firms etc...how bad is it if 26% of men are saying they've been harrassed...is it not much more than storm in a teacup and a similar representation to the rest of Australia's numbers considering the circumstances ?
The police know about laws and break them, the church knows about morals but doesnt use them....