Two biscuits costs Qantas cleaner his job
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
QF Quoll,
I generally agree.
What I'm saying here is (at the risk of thread drift) that the bagging of a couple of biccies is, in isolation, hardly grounds for summary termination. But I think there is an issue, with bags being left unattended (which, from what has been previously posted in this thread, what happened). It has been raised as a defence (probably to show that there has been an abuse of process by the employer) and is an angle that should be explored.
If it is shown that someone could have tampered with, or deposited something in, the cleaner's bag, then irrespective of the biccies, that is in itself a problem which needs addressing.
That is, if it's deemed necessary to try to ensure that punters' bags could not have been tampered with when they are airside (by having security cameras and in a secure area, etc.), then surely the same standard applies to workers' bags.
I generally agree.
What I'm saying here is (at the risk of thread drift) that the bagging of a couple of biccies is, in isolation, hardly grounds for summary termination. But I think there is an issue, with bags being left unattended (which, from what has been previously posted in this thread, what happened). It has been raised as a defence (probably to show that there has been an abuse of process by the employer) and is an angle that should be explored.
If it is shown that someone could have tampered with, or deposited something in, the cleaner's bag, then irrespective of the biccies, that is in itself a problem which needs addressing.
That is, if it's deemed necessary to try to ensure that punters' bags could not have been tampered with when they are airside (by having security cameras and in a secure area, etc.), then surely the same standard applies to workers' bags.
Evertonian
It's seems bizarre that this guy (without all the info) was sacked for 2 biscuits yet in todays paper, there's a QF FA on charges of child pornography & chatting up an undercover Police officer in a internet chat room still employed. Granted, this didn't happen on company time, but I just find it bizarre.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there's a QF FA on charges of child pornography & chatting up an undercover Police officer in a internet chat room still employed. Granted, this didn't happen on company time, but I just find it bizarre.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Not Warren again, Buster??
--------------------------------------------------------------
Not Warren again, Buster??
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
casper,one of the great things about our society in Australia is that even when charged with a crime you are innocent until proven guilty...unlike some other countries.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Close to space
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buster Hyman what the hell is wron with you? An eye for an eye? Come on an Oreo is nowhere near as good as a Monte Carlo. For two Oreos they could have a bite of a Monte.
But to be serrious this is just crazy talk. I used to work the ramps and we would eat stuff and take things that were being thrown out all the time. Nothing wrong with that. Wonder what Qantas would do if a homless dude was found taking a sandwich out of one of their bins. I can just see them putting in gun turrets as I type.
But to be serrious this is just crazy talk. I used to work the ramps and we would eat stuff and take things that were being thrown out all the time. Nothing wrong with that. Wonder what Qantas would do if a homless dude was found taking a sandwich out of one of their bins. I can just see them putting in gun turrets as I type.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helldog…
What I find crazy is all the sanctimonious executioners here calling for or condoning the sacking of someone over something so trivial when they have probably done exactly the same at some point...
What I find crazy is all the sanctimonious executioners here calling for or condoning the sacking of someone over something so trivial when they have probably done exactly the same at some point...
Guest
Posts: n/a
lowerlobe,
In your first post in this thread you stated:
"You are all right when you say that theft is wrong and should not be condoned."
Most have agreed with that statement, however, in this day and age not many would think it was possible to sack someone for such a "Little' theft. It is patently obvious that there is more behind this and it will no doubt be revealed in the fullness of time.
Prospector
In your first post in this thread you stated:
"You are all right when you say that theft is wrong and should not be condoned."
Most have agreed with that statement, however, in this day and age not many would think it was possible to sack someone for such a "Little' theft. It is patently obvious that there is more behind this and it will no doubt be revealed in the fullness of time.
Prospector
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prospector...
That’s right I don’t condone stealing however there has to be some difference between petty theft( even if I don’t believe taking waste is stealing) and theft on a more grand scale...
My point was that there would be virtually no one that has not done the same as the cleaner however there are a lot here saying he should be dealt with harshly for the trivial removal of two biscuits.
If this is the end result of an investigation and the person involved has a prior history then that is another matter but after working for the company for a number of years I have seen other examples of ham fisted behaviour by security guards running rough shod over employees all in the name of preventing theft while the management has been operating on a far larger scale with impunity.
That’s right I don’t condone stealing however there has to be some difference between petty theft( even if I don’t believe taking waste is stealing) and theft on a more grand scale...
My point was that there would be virtually no one that has not done the same as the cleaner however there are a lot here saying he should be dealt with harshly for the trivial removal of two biscuits.
If this is the end result of an investigation and the person involved has a prior history then that is another matter but after working for the company for a number of years I have seen other examples of ham fisted behaviour by security guards running rough shod over employees all in the name of preventing theft while the management has been operating on a far larger scale with impunity.
Maybe Qantas are going to use him as an example?
Yes it may cost the company money to fire him and go through the paperwork, but the end result is that more employees are scared of being sacked over somthing they see a trivial. This would effect theft in other areas such as torches and Batteries or whatever else you can nick of the plane, things that are cheep as individual items but when stolen by 2000+ crew and cleaners becomes a hefty bill.
I'm not saying that the individual case is fair, but what is?
Yes it may cost the company money to fire him and go through the paperwork, but the end result is that more employees are scared of being sacked over somthing they see a trivial. This would effect theft in other areas such as torches and Batteries or whatever else you can nick of the plane, things that are cheep as individual items but when stolen by 2000+ crew and cleaners becomes a hefty bill.
I'm not saying that the individual case is fair, but what is?
You don't get to "make an example" of someone these days. There has to be more to this than meets the eye as others have speculated, otherwise "natural justice" and "procedural fairness" theories will have him reinstated.
On a slightly different note, I wonder how many applications for an ASIC have been knocked back on the grounds of criminal offences? I wonder when these will turn up in either the AAT or Supreme court?
I suspect that a court might rule that it is illegal to remove someone's livelihood by retrospective legislation of this nature.
I think I understand that this concept is going to be challenged in the Victorian Supreme court in a case involving the banning of a teacher from teaching on the grounds of an affair with an underage girl 20 years ago - and long before he even thought of becoming a teacher.
On a slightly different note, I wonder how many applications for an ASIC have been knocked back on the grounds of criminal offences? I wonder when these will turn up in either the AAT or Supreme court?
I suspect that a court might rule that it is illegal to remove someone's livelihood by retrospective legislation of this nature.
I think I understand that this concept is going to be challenged in the Victorian Supreme court in a case involving the banning of a teacher from teaching on the grounds of an affair with an underage girl 20 years ago - and long before he even thought of becoming a teacher.
