Ex Chief Exec - Dave Clark

[Guest Anonymous]

^^^Well there's certainly a fiddle going on somewhere.

[Skunnered]

Ghostrider is right. DC cannot be referring to anything that's been written here because that's got nothing to do with his employment. (Of course he may want to raise separate civil actions!)

Anyway, whatever he's referring to, it must be relating to things that have gone on in the workplace, which most of us wouldn't be aware of.

So well done Brian for stirring up a hornet's nest!

And it's been fun watching all those consciences being deep-cleaned, and reading all the pleepsin justifications!

[Infiltrator]

Can I just point out that the sentiment on this forum should be nothing more than a reflection of what local people are talking about. The bulletin board is nothing more than the 21st century equivalent of the corner shop - or meeting someone on the street.

 

I don't live on the isles any more, but I heard most of the stories and facts long before reading them on here or in the press. The stories were usually delivered with more than their fair share of profanities and anger, that would have the mods on here heading for the lifeboats

 

I'd also suggest that the feelings that have led to some of the 'stronger' posts, are possibly the result of years of vented frustration aimed at the council - the CE affair is just the straw that finally broke the shetland ponies back.

[trout]

Auld Rasmie. You've been warned prior about guns and people with this thread ironically prior. Your posts are your posts - we ain't going to mod anything of yours tonight .. your posts are your posts and your posts are yours alone ... !! They won't be editable after a period of time either

 

As a response to Brian - see "new media" is quite mis-understood. Shetlink has caused the local government to cave in and pay-out 1/4 million squid to the CE * I will moderate myself * eh? I don't think so!?

 

If that is the case .. then .. well ... what does that say!?

[peerie29]

Here here infiltrator, i totally agree, Mr Clark is an easy target as he is not a Shetland man and so we wont tread on anyones toes if we speak up against him

[Brian]

Wha will moderate da moderators.

[trout]

^^ oh do enlighten rather as skirt around what you'd like to say!

[Guest Anonymous]

Auld Rasmie. You've been warned prior about guns and people with this thread ironically prior. Your posts are your posts - we ain't going to mod anything of yours tonight .. your posts are your posts and your posts are yours alone ... !! They won't be editable after a period of time either

Trout, and all Mods of Shetlink, please note this fact.

 

Anything I write on this forum is entirely my own words, my own thoughts, and although I get picked on for calling a spade a f***ing shovel, so be it.

Any comment I make can not in any way be attributed to Shetlink, simply because Shetlink does not know what I am going to say before I post it.

Does that satisfy your T&Cs?

And if DC want's to sue me for giving him a Christmas break from you lot, so be it.

Oh, BTW

New poetry coming soon... Just the bits that the UHA Bill missed. I'll bung it on my Bebo since it'll be too controversial here.

[Guest Anonymous]

Wha will moderate da moderators.

Certainly not the Shetland Communist Party

[JohanofNess]

so that makes these comments ok?

 

constant jibes over his size? suggesting he should be shot?

 

Whether they're "okay" or not is irrelevant. They have been made at a time and place and by people over which Clark's employers have no influence or jurisdiction, therefor they cannot form any part of a legal claim by Clark against his employers. If Shetlink is the only place such statements have been made Clark has no case against the council.

 

Would it be a stretch to imagine that some of the people on this very thread are employed by the council and if a link was established between them and their comments then he could mount a case for bullying?. Although he can't use Shetlink as evidence it certainly does demonstrate that a proportion of the local population can't talk about him in a reasonable manner.

 

That's a moot point I doubt anyone who is employed by the council would be dumb enough at an earlier point in their posting history to say exactly who they are then get happy with the insults about the CE at a later date.

[Ghostrider]

 

Whether they're "okay" or not is irrelevant. They have been made at a time and place and by people over which Clark's employers have no influence or jurisdiction, therefor they cannot form any part of a legal claim by Clark against his employers. If Shetlink is the only place such statements have been made Clark has no case against the council.

 

Fair point. I still have issues with the comments made towards him on this site.

 

Fair dos. Its certainly not all been fit to be heard in the kirk, that I can't deny.

[Ghostrider]

Would it be a stretch to imagine that some of the people on this very thread are employed by the council and if a link was established between them and their comments then he could mount a case for bullying?.

 

I would think he'd need to establish the identity of the anonymous user by name, and prove it was posted during that person's work hours. I would doubt what they did in their own time would be admissable, if it were then you'd suppose the reverse would also be true, and Clark's own private life would come under the magnifying glass as well. A trade off, if there's any truth in all the wild allegations that have flown around since summer, he'd be the greatest loser in.

 

As for proving an employee posted something negative towards him during work hours, he's....ummm....been his own worst enemy there, by blocking Shetlink from SIC computers. Its kinda cut down on opportunity.

[JohanofNess]

It would be a long shot for sure and chances are that they'd not likely find anyone clearly admitting to laying the boot in, that's the beauty of an internet forum as little accountability as you can get unless the mods want to say who you are

[Greenfingers]

Come on people !!!

 

Why is everyone beating themselves up over whether or not DC has been bullied on Shetlink. Aaawwww...... who cares.

Anyone earning £90K + per annum in a high profile job should be more than capable of dealing with criticism which IMHO

has been morphed into bullying.

 

Lets get back to the real issue.

Does he deserve a golden goodbye?

I think not. He has not been a safe pair of hands.He has been a disaster.

If the council has really made a decision to offer him a £250K payoff we can only hope that it is like every other "decision" they have made recently and comes Monday/Tuesday of next week they change their mind.Then we will have the usual protracted period of indecision and hopefully the reopened police investigation into the alleged abusive phonecall will reveal the real truth and DC will get what he really deserves.

 

Nothing.

[Ghostrider]

It would be a long shot for sure and chances are that they'd not likely find anyone clearly admitting to laying the boot in, that's the beauty of an internet forum as little accountability as you can get unless the mods want to say who you are

 

There of course is always the possibility that the man himself, or someone close to him, whether he knows it or not, is one of the anonymous posters on this thread. Which if they are, would open up a whole new side issue and debate of how much those contributions had influenced and led subsequent ones.

 

If he's smart, he'll leave the lid firmly on the Pandora's Box of putting r/l names to posting I.D's. He runs the risk of bringing names in to the frame that would do his case as much harm as good.