: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:24 pm  

Saint_Jen wrote:

I have no idea what you're talking about Damo.

You didn’t actually delete that thread
Ask your co-mods what I’m talking about!

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:25 pm  

Damo-Leeds wrote:

You didn’t actually delete that thread
Ask your co-mods what I’m talking about!

I really don't care enough to bother

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:15 pm  

gateaux wrote:

But any employer who cared in the slightest about their workforce wouldn't consider trying to stop a father being at the birth of their child if that was what the parents wanted.

Well, I'm not sure that allowing a father to do as he wants at the birth of his child is necessarily a comment upon whether an employer 'cared in the slightest'. The whole idea of a father being anywhere near his partner when she is giving birth is a very recent thing, much less an employer letting it happen. They'd probably lose in the popularity stakes if they didn't let it happen but there sure are more important times when people should be allowed to leave - like if someone has died or become sick or had an accident. To stop people from leaving at those times would indeed suggest that the employer didn't care in the slightest. Hence, where I work just now won't let parents leave to take care of their sick kids and you have to beg the senior partner for time off if your parent has died. You may or may not get paid for the time off, depending on his mood. Like I said, I work for a firm of lawyers.

I think the club should be praised for allowing players to have family as their top priority and we certainly shouldn't question the dedication of the players for not wanting to miss the birth of their child.

We should question anything we like, actually! Thankfully, this is still a free country!

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:19 pm  

Saint_Jen wrote:

Well maybe not everyone has your views.

Absolutely. But at least I'm not calling yours shite. I do have the capacity to respect the views of other people even though I don't agree with them. And I don't agree that giving birth - unless it is unusually hazardous - is any reason for in this case a well paid rugby league player playing in a crucial match to be allowed to leave during the match thus possibly making things exceptionally difficult for his team mates and deeply disappointing for the fans, many of whom will have paid hard earned cash to be there.

I'd go with the POV that we are better abandoning Wellens for this match and playing Lomax instead. At least then we won't be one man down on the bench if people start hobbling off the pitch again or get their faces smashed in.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:22 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Well, I'm not sure that allowing a father to do as he wants at the birth of his child is necessarily a comment upon whether an employer 'cared in the slightest'. The whole idea of a father being anywhere near his partner when she is giving birth is a very recent thing, much less an employer letting it happen. They'd probably lose in the popularity stakes if they didn't let it happen but there sure are more important times when people should be allowed to leave - like if someone has died or become sick or had an accident. To stop people from leaving at those times would indeed suggest that the employer didn't care in the slightest. Hence, where I work just now won't let parents leave to take care of their sick kids and you have to beg the senior partner for time off if your parent has died. You may or may not get paid for the time off, depending on his mood. Like I said, I work for a firm of lawyers.


We should question anything we like, actually! Thankfully, this is still a free country!

What exactly do you class as a very recent thing? I know for a fact that when I was born my father was allowed the time off work needed to be present and that was 25 years ago!

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:15 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Well, I'm not sure that allowing a father to do as he wants at the birth of his child is necessarily a comment upon whether an employer 'cared in the slightest'. The whole idea of a father being anywhere near his partner when she is giving birth is a very recent thing, much less an employer letting it happen. They'd probably lose in the popularity stakes if they didn't let it happen but there sure are more important times when people should be allowed to leave - like if someone has died or become sick or had an accident. To stop people from leaving at those times would indeed suggest that the employer didn't care in the slightest. Hence, where I work just now won't let parents leave to take care of their sick kids and you have to beg the senior partner for time off if your parent has died. You may or may not get paid for the time off, depending on his mood. Like I said, I work for a firm of lawyers.

Sounds more like a load of Neanderthal heartless b@stds to me. I bet you are really proud to work for this company and would be prepared to go the extra mile for them? They don't specialise in employment law by any chance do they?

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:30 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Well, I'm not sure that allowing a father to do as he wants at the birth of his child is necessarily a comment upon whether an employer 'cared in the slightest'. The whole idea of a father being anywhere near his partner when she is giving birth is a very recent thing, much less an employer letting it happen. They'd probably lose in the popularity stakes if they didn't let it happen but there sure are more important times when people should be allowed to leave - like if someone has died or become sick or had an accident. To stop people from leaving at those times would indeed suggest that the employer didn't care in the slightest. Hence, where I work just now won't let parents leave to take care of their sick kids and you have to beg the senior partner for time off if your parent has died. You may or may not get paid for the time off, depending on his mood. Like I said, I work for a firm of lawyers.

Anyone who stayed with such a company needs to get a grip of themselves and realise what priorities are in life. Lawyers are incredibly slow and ineffecient, so taking a day off to be at the birth of your child is hardly going to cause an outrage.

Work is work, it pays the bills. You give as much to it as you are prepared to in order to get a higher salary. BUT if you are the kind of person who accepts not being able to go the birth of your child because of work, you are not the kind of person who should be having children in the first place.

: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:32 am  

When Wellens kid is 5 maybe your firm could hire him and send him sweeping chimneys.

: Thu Apr 02, 2009 4:19 pm  

read the preview here http://leeds.rlfans.com/readarticle.php?article_id=1165

read the preview here http://leeds.rlfans.com/readarticle.php?article_id=1165

: Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:08 pm  

tad rhino wrote: read the preview here http://leeds.rlfans.com/readarticle.php?article_id=1165 Interesting, 2/3 of you going for a Saints win.

tad rhino wrote: read the preview here http://leeds.rlfans.com/readarticle.php?article_id=1165 Interesting, 2/3 of you going for a Saints win.