bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
I am pretty sure Liam Fox will be shocked at his recent career change..................
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Laurence Fox launches political party
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
I am pretty sure Liam Fox will be shocked at his recent career change..................
Wafty Cranker
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2006
- Messages
- 1,110
There is an implication that safe spaces for black people excludes people of other races. That's just a normal interpretation of that statement and if so, it is Sainsbury's that are literally creating division as are the people on this thread who have defended it.
I interpreted it as you described, it seems pretty fucked up in my opinion.
Rascal
El Presidente
Exactly. He's following the exact playbook that made Katie Hopkins a household name with an army of shitty fans.
Except unlike Katie Hopkins, Laurence Fox has already been donated £5m to fund his fight and is backed by multimillionaires and billionaires.
He will take the news exposure, the infamy, the fans who are attracted to his "culture war against wokeness" and pay off the lawsuits as a start up cost.
This has already been posted -
Fox is just a front man.
That is fabulous work by Labour of Love.
Fox is a puppet for a variety of RW cranks.
Apparently Fox has mentioned at a Tory party fringe event that in a number of countries it is dreadful that holocaust denial is a crime.
What a disgusting **** this man is.
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
I interpreted it as you described, it seems pretty fucked up in my opinion.
Even Sainsbury's have backed down to the pressure, relabelling it from 'safe spaces to discuss BLM' to 'online support groups'.
Laughable and offensively patronising that any black person needs or would want a 'safe' space to discuss BLM but events like this show a lot of people up for the spineless windsocks they are.
The longstanding principle that societies shouldn't be segregated according to race goes out the window as soon as some muppet from Twitter suggests it's a good idea.
In 2018 3307 employees submitted claims to employment tribunals alleging race discrimination in the UK workplace. These were overwhelmingly from BME workersEven Sainsbury's have backed down to the pressure, relabelling it from 'safe spaces to discuss BLM' to 'online support groups'.
Laughable and offensively patronising that any black person needs or would want a 'safe' space to discuss BLM but events like this show a lot of people up for the spineless windsocks they are.
The longstanding principle that societies shouldn't be segregated according to race goes out the window as soon as some muppet from Twitter suggests it's a good idea.
The number of employees who faced race discrimination but did not issue an ET claim is unrecorded but is likely to be significantly higher.
If employers and employees believe that "safe spaces" might prevent such discrimination or allow it to be voiced and dealt within the workplace or just that it allows workers facing discrimination to better articulate their experiences then I am not sure what the problem is. Whether it references BLM is irrelevant.
Wafty Cranker
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2006
- Messages
- 1,110
In 2018 3307 employees submitted claims to employment tribunals alleging race discrimination in the UK workplace. These were overwhelmingly from BME workers
The number of employees who faced race discrimination but did not issue an ET claim is unrecorded but is likely to be significantly higher.
If employers and employees believe that "safe spaces" might prevent such discrimination or allow it to be voiced and dealt within the workplace or just that it allows workers facing discrimination to better articulate their experiences then I am not sure what the problem is. Whether it references BLM is irrelevant.
I don’t think anyone will argue with you, that in your example the outcome would be a positive one.
It’s how you go about achieving it that I don’t agree with. The solution shouldn’t be based around dividing people. Yes, it might reduce discrimination, but so would shutting your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears.
BobKowalski
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2007
- Messages
- 20,331
I don’t think anyone will argue with you, that in your example the outcome would be a positive one.
It’s how you go about achieving it that I don’t agree with. The solution shouldn’t be based around dividing people. Yes, it might reduce discrimination, but so would shutting your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears.
They are not dividing people, they are giving people the space to breathe, space that the majority take for granted and already enjoy.
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
In 2018 3307 employees submitted claims to employment tribunals alleging race discrimination in the UK workplace. These were overwhelmingly from BME workers
The number of employees who faced race discrimination but did not issue an ET claim is unrecorded but is likely to be significantly higher.
If employers and employees believe that "safe spaces" might prevent such discrimination or allow it to be voiced and dealt within the workplace or just that it allows workers facing discrimination to better articulate their experiences then I am not sure what the problem is. Whether it references BLM is irrelevant.
The 3,307 cases of racial discrimination pale in comparison to the 120,000+ total employment tribunal applications that were made in 18/19 showing that mistreatment at work isn't specific to any specific race, age or gender. https://www.morton-fraser.com/knowledge-hub/employment-tribunal-statistics
Therefore, I think it's fair to say that everyone deserves a safe space to discuss their issues confidentially with a boss or HR person whether that's racial discrimination, age discrimination or any other form of mistreatment. Thankfully that system exists now in most businesses and is available to anybody regardless of race.
What we don't need is black only spaces to discuss political movements that have nothing to do with whether somebody's been mistreated at work and a work spaces divided into these racial zones is bound to lead to more division and discrimination than it would ever solve. It's a terrible and probably illegal idea and that's thankfully why very few, if any, businesses are actually using it and why Sainsbury's have reworded their statement.
Wafty Cranker
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2006
- Messages
- 1,110
They are not dividing people, they are giving people the space to breathe, space that the majority take for granted and already enjoy.
In such an instance the solution should be based around allowing the wider space to become the area where everyone feels they have space to breath. Not creating a separate space based on race.
The 3,307 cases of racial discrimination pale in comparison to the 120,000+ total employment tribunal applications that were made in 18/19 showing that mistreatment at work isn't specific to any specific race, age or gender. https://www.morton-fraser.com/knowledge-hub/employment-tribunal-statistics
Therefore, I think it's fair to say that everyone deserves a safe space to discuss their issues confidentially with a boss or HR person whether that's racial discrimination, age discrimination or any other form of mistreatment. Thankfully that system exists now in most businesses and is available to anybody regardless of race.
What we don't need is black only spaces to discuss political movements that have nothing to do with whether somebody's been mistreated at work and a work spaces divided into these racial zones is bound to lead to more division and discrimination than it would ever solve. It's a terrible and probably illegal idea and that's thankfully why very few, if any, businesses are actually using it and why Sainsbury's have reworded their statement.