first case of blog-firing in NZ?
Noticed an article in the Herald on Sunday (not online) about Neil Law, a young Nat employed by National after the election, who was fired within days of his hiring apparently due to a tirade on his blog about his new colleagues.
His blog, which was called A (Sometimes) Considered Rant has disappeared, as has mention of the offending post on Excruciatingly Correct Behaviour (another blog run by a Nat staffer, Anna Nuzum).
The HOS article says that Nuzum's post, titled An Ill-considered Rant, basically told Neil off for slagging his new colleagues within a week of starting his job.
9 comments:
I think the fact that Anna removed her post actually makes it look worse than it should.
Thanks to wonders of google cache
"An ill-considered rant
Lesson Number One : Sometimes it's best to wait more than a week before you insult all your new colleagues...
posted by Nuzum @ 3:10 PM Comments (5)"
I don't believe anyone, even a National staffer, deserves to get into trouble at work just for *linking* to a post.
Here are the comments
Yes, well I'm not particularly good at diplomacy. And it should only be insulting to those who don't have any goals (some will go farther than I), and who can't deal with my inability to understand people like them.
Marquis | Homepage | 10.26.05 - 3:37 pm | #
On diplomacy lessons: Pots and kettles anyone?
Viscount | Homepage | 10.27.05 - 8:41 am | #
We think these things Viscount, we don't say them.
Marquis | Homepage | 10.27.05 - 12:49 pm | #
Gravatar Insulting the abilities of my new colleagues is in no way something I partake in. I used to wonder why people referred to the Young Nats as Young Prats. Mystery solved.
Anna | Homepage | 10.27.05 - 4:33 pm | #
Anna, you're every bit as bad as those two tossers and you know it.
Anonymous | 11.01.05 - 7:47 am | #
thank you comrade, the wonders of the google cache are still a mystery to me i'm afraid.
i don't think the article (don't have it in front of me) implied that Anna got in trouble. And clearly from what you posted she shouldn't have. But Law certainly did...
I wonder if they used the old irreconcilable differences clause and the erstwhile blogger got a three month payout?
For the cache just do a search on google or yahoo and click on 'cache' on the right of the website address. (From memory I think I found the above on yahoo not google)
"I wonder if they used the old irreconcilable differences clause and the erstwhile blogger got a three month payout?"
I hope he got a payout.
If he criticised MPs as well as staff then the MP ego factor is more likely to ensure people go out of their way to get him fired.
Far too often the irreconcilable differences clause just used as a cop out. But given its the Nats we are taking about this is exactly the sort of cop out National would love to give every employer in NZ the chance to thoroughly make abuse of!
I know these sorts of disputes drives Parliamentary services (the actual employer) crazy - I don't envy their position either.
that would be a Parliamentary services advantage PP - one of the main reasons i use a pseudonym is because i'd prefer that my boss didn't find out about this blog - not because i often blog about my work (i rarely do except oliquely), but more because i think it would have a chilling effect on what i write full-stop.
which is one of the reasons i get so ratty when people (especially those who have the luxury of not having to use a pseudonym) out others. those who don't use their real names have their reasons for that choice and i hate it when someone else takes that choice away from them.
good point Joe, about the payout as a cop-out - National of course doesn't want there to be any payouts at all, just the ability for the boss to say, hmmm don't like the cut of your gib today, bog-off. which does rather leave the worker somewhat vulnerable.
A guy I know got fired from his job several months ago after he updated his livejournal from work, with a post saying how much he hated his job, and expressing a desire to kill his employers and his clients...
what i find interesting is that DPF hasn't commented on this, either here or on his own blog. normally i would have expected him to...
Neill Law said his colleagues lacked ambition if they were happy to be EAs to MPs. The EAs who'd worked for the Nats for a long time got upset by that.
DPF has now blogged on this, here:
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/archives/012553.html
Post a Comment