Many thanks to those colleagues who have shared their own (similar) experiences, the expressions of support, and advice. Isn't it strange that in a supposed democracy such as Australia, there is still an automatic assumption of guilt - requiring the "accused" to prove innocence? But this is not the case in "common law" - only those in the employment of government services, who make the laws. Go figure.
This needs to be brought to the attention of Someone Who Cares. In the location of such a personage or organisation lies the first of many hurdles. What a shame my friend Steve Price moved to Melbourne ...
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Friday, June 25, 2010
Hope you're sitting down ...
... today I was officially presented with a formal letter from my employer's Stazi Unit; I am charged with making money from Warrior Librarian, and providing resources for free to my colleagues. I kid you not. Oh, and I breached copyright because I wrote stuff related to my work - so "technically" it belongs to my employer, even though I did it in my own time and on my own equipment - that I then gave away.
When you've finished laughing yourself sick (I vomited myself, but I can't say I was laughing at the time), you might be interested to know that I was told that my employer considers these allegations are as seriously as those levelled against child molesting teachers.
But perhaps what rankles the most is the fact that the allegations were made by one of my "colleagues". But together with the automatic presumption of guilt, and the requirement that I prove my innocence, comes the provision of anonymity of my accuser. Sure, I've got a fair idea who it is most likely to be, but they won't be made to face me after I've shown the charges to be without substance, frivolous, and motivated by malice.
So much for 'natural justice', transparency, and good old fashioned fairness. Indeed, this situation is contrary to common law in this country, and violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
I have 14 days to respond to the allegations. I could sum up the whole situation in just one word, but I think I'm expected to be more prolix and less expressive ...
When you've finished laughing yourself sick (I vomited myself, but I can't say I was laughing at the time), you might be interested to know that I was told that my employer considers these allegations are as seriously as those levelled against child molesting teachers.
But perhaps what rankles the most is the fact that the allegations were made by one of my "colleagues". But together with the automatic presumption of guilt, and the requirement that I prove my innocence, comes the provision of anonymity of my accuser. Sure, I've got a fair idea who it is most likely to be, but they won't be made to face me after I've shown the charges to be without substance, frivolous, and motivated by malice.
So much for 'natural justice', transparency, and good old fashioned fairness. Indeed, this situation is contrary to common law in this country, and violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
I have 14 days to respond to the allegations. I could sum up the whole situation in just one word, but I think I'm expected to be more prolix and less expressive ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)