Arathea Posted October 12, 2007 Report Share Posted October 12, 2007 Banned from keeping animals for ten years, what rubbish it should be for LIFE.A very angry Arathea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyumpi Posted October 12, 2007 Report Share Posted October 12, 2007 Does it seem odd to anyone else that the defendant can get punted from his job for this conviction? Now I'm not for one minute taking his side in this case - he doesn't even have a side to take. Anyone allowing an animal that is in their care to get into this sort of condition probably deserves to have a fairly illegal act visited upon them (and I have no love of horses...) This isn't a case of it just slipped your mind to feed them or you couldn't get to them for several days because of weather, this is sustained serious cruelty.Anyway, the (probably off-topic) point I wanted to make was how far can an employer go in this sort of circumstance? The Times said that he had lost his job as he had brought his employers name into disrepute. I don't see how their reputation is directly affected by his actions and I'm sure that an employment lawyer would have a field day with this one.At what point does your private life become the business of your employer and what level of crime should allow them to take this sort of sanction against you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted October 12, 2007 Report Share Posted October 12, 2007 ^^^ It does seem a little "odd", even if the outcome is well deserved, that this person was sacked from the particular job they had, as a direct result of the court case, or it would in your average large town or city. Leaving aside any small print clauses in their contract of employment that covers a criminal conviction as grounds for managerial dismissal. The fact Shetland is what it is, a small place where largely "everyone knows everyone", must have factored in to the decision. *If* higher management knew this, and were aware that he, as the public face of their company was recognisable as the same individual who had committed these crimes, to a significant number of their potential customers, a significant number of whom were likely to take their trade elsewhere rather than associate with this individual or anything he was involved with in any small way, thus causing them lost trade, I can understand why they have gone the route they have. It becomes a simple decision that the reputation of the person who is the "face" of their company to the general public has been tarnished, a fact which can only discourage trade with them, and has only one solution, replacement of said face. It would be an interesting one if it were to be appealed and lawyers were fighting it out though. I have neither sympathy or support for the guy, he deserves all that comes his way, and then some, and that's as much due to how he's handled the issue after the fact, as the issue itself, he seems to have a talent for compounding errors. I'm more concerned about how far an employer can "use" a conviction, entirely unconnected in any way with the employment you have with them, as grounds for dismissal. Complete demotion to an out of sight out of mind post, humping boxes round the store or sweeping floors, might have been a "safer" route for an employer to take. Who knows though, maybe that was offered, and rejected, leaving dismissal the only avenue. The dole is more than he deserves anyway, at under a tenner a day he'll still eat better than his animals did last winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Styles Posted October 13, 2007 Report Share Posted October 13, 2007 Dont know if this has any connection, but a friend of mine was phoned by the Hydro saying he would have to give them another cheque for goods he had bought at the shop as the cheque had been missplaced. He has the goods and a recite, so I told him to tell them to piss off as I dont think its his fault they lost it? So he would get the goods free. I thought nothing more off it until I spoke to two other people it has happened to! So a pile of cheques must have got lost or somthing, sounds like a right balls up by the hydro. Dont know if the folk have to legally give them another cheque, I wouldent have thought so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lita340 Posted October 13, 2007 Report Share Posted October 13, 2007 all i can say in reply to that one is supposidly shop got closed two weeks ago and all staff sent home. told they would be phoned when they were to come in. more than just your mate being asked for this as something is going on with money. staff all told to come in and only one was sacked on the spot..... investigation etc.... take outta that as you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faerie queen Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 Hydro Electric were right in sacking this man. Animal cruelty ain't on. What he has done is awful and many animals have suffered at his hands.To be honest.. I couldn't think of a better scenario than going into the Hydro and throwing Shetland pony manure over him!! Luckily he has left and will be lucky to be employed anywhere... His best prospects maybe the abbatoir... At least they are dead.. and not nearly!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepshagger Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 I widna want him near onything I wis gaen ta aet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lita340 Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 well people like that should not be allowed to keep chickens lit a lone ponies and i feel strongly enough that i would write to the sherriff clark and let them know that a months grace for this excuse for a human being is not on. He made those poor animals suffer and just because there is a possibility that he "could" manage the ones that is left is not an option in my book. The sherriff clark needs to hear the opinion of true shetland pony owners how much work they do to keep them looking healthy and loved..... so come on why don't we all put pen to paper and let the sherriff clark who by the way is not a shetlander how the shetland pony society feels. It would not do any harm but left unsaid we could be here again with the last of his ponies next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Styles Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 I was watching scotlands great game against the Ukraine at Posers through the day, he was working there at the bar. Hear he was blubbing like the wetty he is at the court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 ^^^ Redder dee dan me, hit widda pitten me aff a me beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lita340 Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 i rest my case HYDRO could not have him working there because of it???? but hey posers can!!!! mmmmmmm something not ringing true is there???? well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lola Boomboom Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 I suppose a man who can't feed a horse could be considered unfit for selling electrical appliances, but I think his employers have been a trifle hasty on the issue of dismissal and would have been better to take the usual route of following procedure with the verbal/written/dismissal tactic for whatever petty misdemeanour they could pin on him.What worries me here is the small-town lynch-mob mentality that makes its own law, and everyone is happy to turn a blind eye to injustices that are not connected to the case. For sure, he shouldn't keep animals again, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have a right to be employed again! Animal cruelty/neglect is rife in Shetland and the apathy is on a par with the alcohol problem. 20 years ago, brutalised working-dogs tethered in dark sheds was the norm. Gargling hard-liquor rather than economising for winter feed was fairly common too. Probably still is. Take a good look around before marching on posers with the pitch-forks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 ^^^ Yes, we're well aware, and most who play that game get treated accordingly by their peers at a very localised level and within the industry in general. The tale that's been recounted in the media concerning this guy is on a whole other level though than some chancer with an excessive thirst usually operates on. Plus, his behaviour after the fact has as much to do with the negativity against him, IMHO, as the actual event itself. An apology, some sign of regret or remorse, a plausible excuse even, would, IMHO, have helped cut him a bit of slack with some folks. I'm not advocating vigilantes descend of Posers or anywhere else, nor am I advocating no one employs him. I'm simply stating, that as a matter of personal choice, my choice is not to be a patron of any business that pays his wages. What anyone else does is their business. Some months ago there was a whole thread on here devoted to numerous people stating they would no longer be future patrons of Osla's after an individual associated with that business was found guilty of criminal charges, my personal opinion of this individual is such that I feel the same way towards any business which chooses to employ him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sludgegulper Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Mmmm, i can see a lot of negative statements on here concerning "hydro man" but nothing concerning the other person who was in court the same day. Is it a case that if you neglect ponies you will catch all the wrath of people but if you neglect sheep, cattle & dogs it doesn't really matter as that's ok.Just my observation that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
humptygrumpty Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Mmmm, i can see a lot of negative statements on here concerning "hydro man" but nothing concerning the other person who was in court the same day. Is it a case that if you neglect ponies you will catch all the wrath of people but if you neglect sheep, cattle & dogs it doesn't really matter as that's ok.Just my observation that's all. The reason for that is probably quite simple , the "other" person is basically a bit "slow" and a complete recluse , and had he had the help of members of his family , who could see what was happening , and did sausage all to help him , he maybe wouldnt have found himself mixed up in this nor mixed up with that devious little parasite. Im not defending what he did but but that he got involved through his vulnerability. The other lado knew exactly what he was doing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts