Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Opinion

Canberra’s Leading
Relationship Lawyers

So when is a social media sackable offence not a sackable offence??

By Masquara 12 October 2013 30

Well, when the offender is a former politician.

A relatively junior public servant, Michaela Banerji, was sacked from the APS for expressing negative views about current policy on asylum seekers, yet public servant Jon Stanhope appears to be allowed complete freedom to express similar views (the journalist disguised the comments as referring to “ALP” policy, but Stanhope is clearly referring to the present day).

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
30 Responses to
So when is a social media sackable offence not a sackable offence??
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
sepi 4:28 pm 14 Oct 13

this article has one tweet. there were a few more I think in news I read.

I think it wasn’t her views as such, but that she directly took on her own boss – eg he was head of public affairs, and she was in public affairs area.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/public-servant-loses-fight-over-twitter-attack-on-government-20130812-2rsgn.html

WillowJim 2:23 pm 14 Oct 13

beejay76 said :

Hi Willow…

OK, thanks anyway. I don’t know whether she’s toned down her comments since all this happened. Her Twitter account makes what some might say are inappropriately political comments, but they’re not inflammatory or what I could harsh. I just can’t be arsed finding the comments from a year ago, because it takes too long to scroll down through her feed.

Skidd Marx 12:35 pm 14 Oct 13

The PS is so incredibly touchy when it comes to the big scary monster that is Social Media. People who are completely incompetent and impossible to get along with are seemingly impossible to sack. But make one even vaguely controversial remark on FB / Twitter and you’re gone.

davo101 12:35 pm 14 Oct 13

howeph said :

Nope – where on that link does it talk about The Administrator i.e. Stanhopes position?

Err this bit:
State-level Government is replicated by the Australian Government and the Minister responsible for Territories. An Administrator, appointed by the Governor-General, represents the Minister in the Indian Ocean Territories and resides on Christmas Island.

vet111 12:34 pm 14 Oct 13

davo101 said :

howeph said :

Hi Davo101, I think that should be:

“When you are appointed by the Governor General to represent the Monarch and not employed under the Public Service Act.”

Nope, it’s the Minister.

Nope – check the Act. It’s a Governor-General appointment, the same as the Norfolk Island Administrator, and Governors of states.

howeph 11:57 am 14 Oct 13

davo101 said :

howeph said :

Hi Davo101, I think that should be:

“When you are appointed by the Governor General to represent the Monarch and not employed under the Public Service Act.”

Nope, it’s the Minister.

Nope – where on that link does it talk about The Administrator i.e. Stanhopes position?

“Unlike the Australian states, each of which is a possession of the Crown in its own right and which therefore possesses a Governor directly representing the Queen, all Australian territories are possessions of the Crown in right of the Commonwealth of Australia and the sole direct representative of the Crown therefore remains the Commonwealth Governor-General. Unlike the states, the territories fall within the exclusive legislative and administrative competence of the Commonwealth. In respect of several territories the Governor-General is represented in the territory by an Administrator appointed to administer the territory on his or her behalf. In those territories with an Administrator, the Administrator can be considered the indirect representative of the Queen in the territory.”

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrator_(Australia)#Administrator_of_a_Territory

davo101 11:35 am 14 Oct 13

howeph said :

Hi Davo101, I think that should be:

“When you are appointed by the Governor General to represent the Monarch and not employed under the Public Service Act.”

Nope, it’s the Minister.

beejay76 10:45 am 14 Oct 13

WillowJim said :

A number of people here (beejay76, c_c) have knowledge of Banerji’s “harsh and extreme” tweets.

Can they repost them here? I have no opinion on this case, but I’m very interested in it. The trouble is that so much has been said about the matter without anyone actually bothering to post a list of the apparently many offending tweets. Not even the court decision quoted them.

Hi Willow,

I don’t claim any special knowledge about the Banerji case. The tweets were judged as ‘harsh and extreme’ by the department who were then supported by the judge.

My point wasn’t about the Banerji case, but about the fact that the OP claimed that Stanhope was receiving special treatment. There is no way saying you disagree with the Opposition’s position can be construed as ‘harsh and extreme’ criticism of the Government. The OP also claimed some sort of journalistic collusion to protect Stanhope, of which there is not one shred of evidence.

I found it to be irritatingly inflammatory, as is much of what he/she posts. I was just trying to put it back into perspective.

howeph 10:27 am 14 Oct 13

thebrownstreak69 said :

a … country still needs effective border controls, and a means of ensuring that those who present as refugees are processed as quickly as possible to ensure the genuine cases are identified and helped appropriately.

Yes, I agree.

And how exactly does progressives policies, such as those offered by the Greens, not support “effective border controls, and a means of ensuring that those who present as refugees are processed as quickly as possible to ensure the genuine cases are identified and helped appropriately”?

The policy is NOT “let them all come”.

So before you answer find out what the policy actually is. Read it. Consider it as a whole and don’t cherry pick from it when providing your considered analysis.

thebrownstreak69 said :

The thing the morons don’t understand is that …

… But it’s much easier just to generalise and throw insults, isn’t it.

Apparently so.

WillowJim 9:58 am 14 Oct 13

A number of people here (beejay76, c_c) have knowledge of Banerji’s “harsh and extreme” tweets.

Can they repost them here? I have no opinion on this case, but I’m very interested in it. The trouble is that so much has been said about the matter without anyone actually bothering to post a list of the apparently many offending tweets. Not even the court decision quoted them.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site