Kurtley Beale

[rugbysmartarse]

There is always a chance the second text was sent by someone outside of the team or management. A friend, former ayer, former team manager/coach.... If that's the case there's no way for the aru to do anything about it

 

[louie]

Terry J this is taken from http://www.qld.gov.au/law/your-rights/workplace-rights/harassment-and-bullying/

Workplace harassment

Workplace Harassment is sometimes called bullying, but they are one and the same thing.
According to the Prevention of Workplace Harassment Code of Practice 2004 (PDF, 271 KB (Kurtley Beale)), workplace harassment is when someone repeatedly does or says something to you that:

• is unwelcome and is not invited
• offends, intimidates, humiliates or threatens you
• would offend, intimidate, humiliate or threaten most people if it happened to them.

You can be harassed by:

• your employer
• your co-worker
• a group of your co-workers
• someone who works for you
• a client or customer
• a member of the public.

Behaviours that may be a part of workplace harassment include where someone regularly:

• insults you loudly, especially when others are around to hear
• threatens to punish you for no reason
• emails you, leaves you messages by phone or other electronic means that are offensive or intimidating
• sabotages your work (e.g. by giving you wrong information on purpose)
• excludes you from workplace meetings or social get togethers
• spreads false rumours about you
• humiliates you through gestures, sarcasm, criticism and insults, especially in front of others.
  
  

I'm not saying KB (Kurtley Beale) should have been sacked by this, seeing as it was one off maybe he shouldn't have, But it was a form of Harassment.

 

[Quick Hands]

There is always a chance the second text was sent by someone outside of the team or management. A friend, former ayer, former team manager/coach.. If that's the case there's no way for the aru to do anything about it

What we do know is that the evidence tells us that KB (Kurtley Beale) didn't send the text, unfortunately there are some posters (not you) who want to continue to assert that he did but he got off on some technicality.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Unless I've read this wrong I fail to see how sending the first not the second one is showing remorse? That was only shown once he was essentially "caught".

Anyway, remorse would have been shown if after the assault charge, assaulting his captain, then drinking whilst on a alcohol ban, by staying out of trouble.

Sending second text message would show not addressed behaviour after being caught by accidentally and stupidly sending to Di Patston. Remember he did not attend to send first text message to her. That does not condone behaviour but all about gravity of offences and clearly if repeated shows less evidence of one off dumb thing done but repeated and consistent behaviour.

Workplace is equally not so cut and dry as you could be counselled on one off inappropriate behaviour and more likely to have a chance of not being sacked depending on nature of offence, but if repeated behaviour then more likely to be sacked as adds to gravity of situation.

Courts have same view....

 

[Quick Hands]

Terry J this is taken from http://www.qld.gov.au/law/your-rights/workplace-rights/harassment-and-bullying/

Workplace harassment

Workplace Harassment is sometimes called bullying, but they are one and the same thing.
According to the Prevention of Workplace Harassment Code of Practice 2004 (PDF, 271 KB (Kurtley Beale)), workplace harassment is when someone repeatedly does or says something to you

Absolutely correct, for something to constitute bullying or harassment, it has to involved repeated behaviour. If the behaviour is not repeated, it's not bullying or harassment.

If something is a one off, it may well be offensive, insulting or inappropriate, but it's not bullying or harassment.

No doubt some on this thread will term this a mere technicality and continue.

In fact, I strongly doubt that anyone would be sacked on the basis of one inappropriate text message, particularly when they' apologised almost immediately and the recipient of the message had accepted the apology and moved on. In any unionised workplace, the employer would find themselves defending an unfair dismissal case before Fair Work Aust.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Absolutely correct, for something to constitute bullying or harassment, it has to involved repeated behaviour. If the behaviour is not repeated, it's not bullying or harassment.

If something is a one off, it may well be offensive, insulting or inappropriate, but it's not bullying or harassment.

No doubt some on this thread will term this a mere technicality and continue.

In fact, I strongly doubt that anyone would be sacked on the basis of one inappropriate text message, particularly when they' apologised almost immediately and the recipient of the message had accepted th apology and moved on. In any unionised workplace, the employer would find themselves defending an unfair dismissal case before Fair Work Aust.

Finally some voices of reason....

 

[Muglair]

This is like Cluedo or one of those poorly plotted cop shows.

There is the accused found guilty of one charge and who has "got off". We have the bad cop/dumb cop who is sure of his guilt and continues to pursue him. There are those who think they know where the whole investigation is heading and saying nothing. Then there is the detective searching for the truth, stumbling into obstacles, trying to interrogate those who he thinks know what happened and chasing down red herrings.

The problem for the Moderators is what happens if Columbo stumbles across the body before the ARU or the much maligned Rebecca Wilson tell us where it is.

 

[Muglair]

RUPA is a union and 100% of the employees are members

 

[gel]

Never before has an internet alias been more aptly chosen.

 

[Muglair]

Muglair? A favourite term of my grandfather's. Now that you have raised the subject I have searched for a definition:

flashily dressed young man of brash and vulgar behaviour

Unfortunately I have never in my life been accused of being flashily dressed. I would have to admit to have been on occasions brash and vulgar. I probably admitted as much in a post a couple of pages ago when the subject of twenty year olds and maturity was raised.

Looking forward to your return post on the aptness of gel.


A gel (coined by 19th-century Scottish chemist Thomas Graham, by clipping from gelatine) is a solid, jelly-like material that can have properties ranging from soft and weak to hard and tough.

 

[louie]

The site i quoting from before was from 2004. According to https://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/sex-discrimination/guides/sexual-harassment the discrimination act as of 2012 states
Sexual harassment can take many different forms – it can be obvious or indirect, physical or verbal, repeated or one-off and perpetrated by males and females against people of the same or opposite sex.

however it's all done know. I hope MC can change this teams culture. KB (Kurtley Beale) will either piss off to NRL or he'll fuck up again and we can have another 150+ pages about it.

Weather KB (Kurtley Beale) should have been sacked or not, I find some peoples attempts at justifying of this kind of attitude towards women deeply disturbing.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Absolutely correct, for something to constitute bullying or harassment, it has to involved repeated behaviour. If the behaviour is not repeated, it's not bullying or harassment.

If something is a one off, it may well be offensive, insulting or inappropriate, but it's not bullying or harassment.

No doubt some on this thread will term this a mere technicality and continue.

In fact, I strongly doubt that anyone would be sacked on the basis of one inappropriate text message, particularly when they' apologised almost immediately and the recipient of the message had accepted the apology and moved on. In any unionised workplace, the employer would find themselves defending an unfair dismissal case before Fair Work Aust.

The Act goes on to say that the harassment can be by a group of co-workers. If the second text was indeed sent by another Wallaby, would that constitute repeated acts by a group of co-workers, I wonder? It would be helpful if the origin of the second text could be identified, regardless of whether it was from someone inside or outside the camp.

 

[Dctarget]

Weather KB (Kurtley Beale) should have been sacked or not, I find some peoples attempts at justifying of this kind of attitude towards women deeply disturbing.

i feel like he's been weathered enough!

 

[TahDan]

You need to learn a few things about workplace health and safety and that the outcome in harassment cases is not based on an argument along the lines of "yeah, sure I'm a dickhead, but so is she and so she deserved it."

What about my post wasn't clear? I understand all that, but it seems people like yourself don't quite comprehend that a GOOD management structure wouldn't have produced the circus we've seen over this.

 

[No4918]

Absolutely correct, for something to constitute bullying or harassment, it has to involved repeated behaviour. If the behaviour is not repeated, it's not bullying or harassment.

If something is a one off, it may well be offensive, insulting or inappropriate, but it's not bullying or harassment.

No doubt some on this thread will term this a mere technicality and continue.

In fact, I strongly doubt that anyone would be sacked on the basis of one inappropriate text message, particularly when they' apologised almost immediately and the recipient of the message had accepted the apology and moved on. In any unionised workplace, the employer would find themselves defending an unfair dismissal case before Fair Work Aust.

He was found guilty of sending an offensive text. Not sure why people are still debating this point.

If this incident happened in isolation, then yeah, maybe the punishment fits. It has not happened in isolation. Beale has had several discipline issues, including; being accused of assualting a relative, settled out of court the matter of assaulting a security guard, assualting a captian and team mate. All are criminal offences. Then he broke an alcohol ban and missed a team bus several days before a Lions test.

I don't care what people think about this last matter anymore and there are obviously differing opinions. I do not understand how people cannot look at the bigger picture of repeated behaviour. Anyone with that disciplinary record should be shown the door.

 

[TahDan]

Weather KB (Kurtley Beale) should have been sacked or not, I find some peoples attempts at justifying of this kind of attitude towards women deeply disturbing.

I think this sort of sentiment is simply reductive and incorrect. The very fact of people suggesting the situation isn't simplistic and black and white is being interpreted by people like yourself as "sexism is fine". That's a straw man and its frankly not what's happening in almost all cases here.

Was Beale wrong? Yes. Was it dealt with? Yes. In fact it was dealt with twice. Now, did it need to cost the whole Wallabies management their jobs? Not even remotely. THAT's why this is being looked at as being more complex than simply a harassment case.

 

[Slim 293]

He was found guilty of sending an offensive text. Not sure why people are still debating this point.

But............

Management structures..............

Bill Pulver.............

The second text was more offensive............

Rebecca Wilson wrote an article............

Di Patston's qualifications.............

He didn't mean to send it to her (this one is my favourite).............

But but but.........

 

[Train Without a Station]

Absolutely correct, for something to constitute bullying or harassment, it has to involved repeated behaviour. If the behaviour is not repeated, it's not bullying or harassment.

If something is a one off, it may well be offensive, insulting or inappropriate, but it's not bullying or harassment.

No doubt some on this thread will term this a mere technicality and continue.

In fact, I strongly doubt that anyone would be sacked on the basis of one inappropriate text message, particularly when they' apologised almost immediately and the recipient of the message had accepted the apology and moved on. In any unionised workplace, the employer would find themselves defending an unfair dismissal case before Fair Work Aust.

QH. Yes, the masses are calling for blood.

But the fact is his defenders are portraying it as, poor old Kurtley being picked on because he's unpopular.

When this is in fact not the case.

People are unhappy because a player with a track record of repeated infringements, who was already supposedly on his last chance, has been yes again slapped on the wrist on the dubious basis that one text was supposedly less offensive than the other.

Kurtley is unpopular with many, not because they just don't like the look of him. He's unpopular because he has a history of poor, disruptive behaviour off the field, and lacking professionalism in his attitude at times.

Many thought he should have been dealt with by the ARU when he failed to adhere to the strict guidelines put in place by the Melbourne rebels after assaulting his captain when intoxicated whilst recovering from injury.

These incidents do not occur in a vacuum. On the basis of the sole text as the only blemish on a career, surely it would be unfair to end a player's career over it if he had been very contrite and there was adequate punishment. This is not the case.

All we know that his behaviour will only be maintained for a short period, much like his form, and his work ethic that ensures his performance. We know this because that's how his whole career has gone.

Then there's the fact that Beale is just not good enough a player to compromise your integrity over. At his best he is a fullback that is weak under the high ball, a 12 that is weak in the tackle and contact, or a 10 that lacks the organisation and vision. And that's at his best.

 

[brokendown]

The Act goes on to say that the harassment can be by a group of co-workers. If the second text was indeed sent by another Wallaby, would that constitute repeated acts by a group of co-workers, I wonder? It would be helpful if the origin of the second text could be identified, regardless of whether it was from someone inside or outside the camp.

the second text was sent from the grassy knoll

dinkum

 

[louie]

He didn't mean to send it to her (this one is my favourite).....

My favorite too

But judge i wasn't aiming to hit that person with my car, just the person next to them.