I was reminded today of the young engineer who was about to leave the office one evening when he unexpectedly encountered the CEO.
“Do you know how to work this thing?” said the CEO pointing at the shredder, “My secretary has already gone home and this document is very important and very sensitive.”
“Yes”, says the young hopeful, switching on the shredder and feeding in the document.
As it disappears the boss says “Just one copy will do”.
When the Age criticises Labor things must be bad.
IF JULIA GILLARD were seeking to sanitise her government on any point of principle, it might carry some force. But the Prime Minister decided to take out her political rubbish, not because she objected to the putrefaction but because the neighbours wouldn’t stop talking about the smell.
Did something change? New evidence come to light? Ms. Gillard suspends Mr. Thomson and asks Mr. Slipper not to rush back and says …
“I want to ensure that Australians can look at this building, look at this institution and feel respect for this institution.” AFP.
I’m looking forward to that too and I hope it will happen the day after the next election.
Well no, but nearly …
and worth putting up with the advert.
And I, too, hope this has given you something to think about.
In a democracy, you’re entitled to the presumption of innocence,” Senator Conroy told Channel 9.
Reports the Sydney Morning Herald
Well not in Julia Gillard’s democracy.
Reason for action to be presumed unless proved otherwise
(a) in an application in relation to a contravention of this Part, it is alleged that a person took, or is taking, action for a particular reason or with a particular intent; and
(b) taking that action for that reason or with that intent would constitute a contravention of this Part;
it is presumed, in proceedings arising from the application, that the action was, or is being, taken for that reason or with that intent, unless the person proves otherwise.
In plainer English this means the employer is guilty of the complaint levelled by the employee unless he can prove otherwise – a reverse onus of proof. Ms. Gillard is the author of this act. Perhaps Mr. Conroy should ask Nicola the First Law Officer Roxon to explain that to him … she might have worked it out by now.