Ian 77 Redux wrote:
True but you'd be OK sacking said employee for being found guilty of racially abusing someone in the way Suarez was. The only reason Suarez is being supported is because he's a good player and is a valuable asset. If Suarez was a crap youth team player they'd have terminated his contract weeks ago.
You're probably quite right but there's nothing to say that the company may view it as a final written with rehabilitation/learning (whatever you want to call it) to prevent the issue arising again. After all, any good union representative will tell you that disciplinary procedures are there primarily to rehabilitate not punish. That being the case why wouldn't you treat it as such? Whether Liverpool choose to do so or not is where the ethical question lies not in whether they are entitled to manage it that way.
Roddy B wrote:
I'm fairly certain the case wouldn't have even gone to court if it was a 'real court', largely down to lack of evidence and witnesses. People ignore that, though, and continue to laud a disciplinary procedure that has a 99% guilty rate.
I'm not having a pop at you Roddy so please don't take it that way but this misconception that keeps getting peddled by Liverpool fans is what's clouding matters for them.
The incident was an internal disciplinary matter not an incident of criminal law. Therefore it is not subject to the same rules, regulations and interpretations. This makes any argument that isn't made under the FA's own rules and regulations irrelevant and redundant (unless the FA were breaking the law, which they weren't). People may not agree with that but that's what it is (and I'd love to hear a successful argument that says employment law should follow the same intensive processes that criminal law does).
To understand employment law you must understand that
for a company to apply a disciplinary sanction is has to have a reasonable belief that the incident occurred i.e. you are not required to prove the exact incident just to hold
a reasonable belief that it did. In law you have to prove the incident happened
beyond a reasonable doubt i.e. if there's a reasonable doubt the party is innocent then they are deemed to be innocent of the charges.
That is a fundamental difference in thought processes. Bearing that in mind and reading the evidence presented in the report (and I have read it, not just the summary) it reads to me like there was a reasonable belief that some form of racial abuse took place, therefore Suarez should have a penalty sanction applied to him.
To give an example of how that difference works: Employee A is alleged to have assaulted employee B in work (there are no witnesses present and no CCTV, effectively one person's word against another's). In employment law you only have to have a reasonable belief that this took place to discipline Employee A. In this instance the employer may weigh up the balance of probabilities (e.g. has either employee got previous on their file) that this has occurred and makes a decision based on that. In criminal law Employee A is not guilty if there is a reasonable doubt that this took place (one word against another, hence it is one of the reasons why rape convictions are so low). That balance of probabilities concept is critical because that's what causing the difficulties in people understanding. The FA listened to the evidence, weighed it up and thought there was enough evidence there to suggest the incident occurred. Asking them to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt on a word of mouth incident is not an uncommon tactic used in disciplinary hearings by employees who have breached disciplinary guidelines because it helps to divert away from and cloud what actually happened.
I'm happy for anybody to post what I've said wherever if it helps to make things clearer because since the incident happened blogs have been cluttered with armchair lawyers who are referring to judicial processes which are not considered in such matters. Sorry for being pedantic but hopefully it will help defuse some of that bitterness which has no right to be there.
.....Think Harry is doing one last deal before he's shipped off to do porridge.... 
I wonder how many more Everton lads will make the move to London ahead of Moyes ?
