steve bettley sacked..do we have the right?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/m...de/7956824.stm

NO WE DON'T
however much we disagree with the bnp, sacking people for being a member is totaly wrong
i hope he wins his apeal and sues the cr** out of mersyside police
who the hell do they think they are

[Graham M]

*steps away from the thread*

Why not put this in this thread

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/20...l#post34690595

[Raistlin]

If he was a member of the BNP then sacking him was absolutely the right/correct thing to do.

The police have always had rules against their officers being members of the BNP if he joined the police and lied about that membership then he deserves the sack, if he joined the police and then joined the BNP despite knowing that he shouldn't then he deserves the sack.

This is not about the rights and wrongs of being a BNP party member, regardless of what certain sectors of the press might have you believe, he was sacked for breaching a very simple rule pertaining to his employment - seems like a no-brainer if it's true.

---------- Post added at 19:05 ---------- Previous post was at 19:05 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Why not put this in this thread

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/20...l#post34690595

Slightly different issue surely?

That thread's about the publishing of the list, this is about an individual who has been sacked as a result of the list being published.

merge if you want i didn't spot that thread
but i agree with ROBM it is a different issue

Originally Posted by Rob M

If he was a member of the BNP then sacking him was absolutely the right/correct thing to do.

The police have always had rules against their officers being members of the BNP if he joined the police and lied about that membership then he deserves the sack, if he joined the police and then joined the BNP despite knowing that he shouldn't then he deserves the sack.

This is not about the rights and wrongs of being a BNP party member, regardless of what certain sectors of the press might have you believe, he was sacked for breaching a very simple rule pertaining to his employment - seems like a no-brainer if it's true.

---------- Post added at 19:05 ---------- Previous post was at 19:05 ----------



Slightly different issue surely?

That thread's about the publishing of the list, this is about an individual who has been sacked as a result of the list being published.

Just the place for it...because the list being published is why this chap has lost his job...cause and effect and all in one place...

Originally Posted by Rob M

If he was a member of the BNP then sacking him was absolutely the right/correct thing to do.

The police have always had rules against their officers being members of the BNP if he joined the police and lied about that membership then he deserves the sack, if he joined the police and then joined the BNP despite knowing that he shouldn't then he deserves the sack.

This is not about the rights and wrongs of being a BNP party member, regardless of what certain sectors of the press might have you believe, he was sacked for breaching a very simple rule pertaining to his employment - seems like a no-brainer if it's true.

---------- Post added at 19:05 ---------- Previous post was at 19:05 ----------

so why do the police have right to enforce which political party you support



Slightly different issue surely?

That thread's about the publishing of the list, this is about an individual who has been sacked as a result of the list being published.

---------- Post added at 19:21 ---------- Previous post was at 19:12 ----------

I can,t bring myself to agree that the police should be allowed to dictate which political party you support as a condition of employment
And i have not seen any evidence that he was an active member
If his dismissal stands after the appeal then it should follow that ALL doctors,nurses,solicitors,barristers,ect should be sacked also

[Arthurgray50@blu]

Ii is a condition of employment that you are NOT in the BNP, if he lied, then he deserves the sack.

But everyone is entitled to a policital view, BUT not BNP.

Trouble is how many were 'enrolled' as family members to get the special price reduction and never knew anything about it?

[punky]

The thing is the rules are clear, presumably before he joined the Police, so there's not much you can do. If he felt that strongly about the BNP he should have sought alternative employment.

I disagree wholeheartedly about the ban. Like it or not as of now, the BNP is a legal political party. Whilst they remain so I think any ban is wrong. However, this isn't about "an overriding legal duty to promote race equality and retain public confidence." If it was a Muslim police officer who was a member of al Mahajiroun (which is a banned organisation) I doubt he'd been sacked even though he'd be at odds exporting an "overriding legal duty to promote race equality and retain public confidence."

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

Ii is a condition of employment that you are NOT in the BNP, if he lied, then he deserves the sack.

But everyone is entitled to a policital view, BUT not BNP.

everyone is entitled to a political view full stop.If they are going to enforce that stupid rule then they might aswell ban all muslims from the force on the grounds that some muslims blow up things

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Trouble is how many were 'enrolled' as family members to get the special price reduction and never knew anything about it?

correct,this appears to be the case for steve bettley

---------- Post added at 19:57 ---------- Previous post was at 19:55 ----------

Originally Posted by punky

The thing is the rules are clear, presumably before he joined the Police, so there's not much you can do. If he felt that strongly about the BNP he should have sought alternative employment.

I disagree wholeheartedly about the ban. Like it or not as of now, the BNP is a legal political party. Whilst they remain so I think any ban is wrong. However, this isn't about "an overriding legal duty to promote race equality and retain public confidence." If it was a Muslim police officer who was a member of al Mahajiroun (which is a banned organisation) I doubt he'd been sacked even though he'd be at odds exporting an "overriding legal duty to promote race equality and retain public confidence."

correct

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

But everyone is entitled to a political view, BUT not BNP.

Why how ever much we hate them they ARE a political party with the rights that position affords

[punky]

Its stupid we have this quasi-legal status for the BNP. Noone has actually made them illegal, but apparently, we are all supposed to act like they are. The government really needs to sort this out and either re-affirm their legality or just ban them.

[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Why how ever much we hate them they ARE a political party with the rights that position affords

being a party gives them no rights that i am aware of

police have to be impartial being part of any party that believes one group of people is better than another should preclude you from this job

this doesnt mean a police man cant vote for any party they wish but as soon as they become a member then it is and should be as it is

Originally Posted by rogermevans

being a party gives them no rights that i am aware of

police have to be impartial being part of any party that believes one group of people is better than another should preclude you from this job

this doesnt mean a police man cant vote for any party they wish but as soon as they become a member then it is and should be as it is

so does that include officers who are a member of the conservatives,labour and libdems if not then it is prejudice