Israel Folau back

JUNKYARD DOGS

Kennel Addict
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
7,086
Reaction score
3,601
Rugby Australia reaches settlement with Folau



Rugby Australia has avoided a costly and potentially embarrassing legal trial after reaching a settlement agreement with sacked Wallaby Israel Folau.

Folau claimed he was unlawfully sacked because of his religion in May this year.

RA maintains Folau breached the professional players' code of conduct with two social media posts condemning homosexuals to Hell and labelling as "evil" the legal recognition of transgender and intersex Australians.

The parties underwent many hours of negotiations with a court-appointed mediator in court and over the phone this week and on Wednesday reached an agreement.
 

CroydonDog

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
19,531
Reaction score
16,530
Rugby Australia reaches settlement with Folau



Rugby Australia has avoided a costly and potentially embarrassing legal trial after reaching a settlement agreement with sacked Wallaby Israel Folau.

Folau claimed he was unlawfully sacked because of his religion in May this year.

RA maintains Folau breached the professional players' code of conduct with two social media posts condemning homosexuals to Hell and labelling as "evil" the legal recognition of transgender and intersex Australians.

The parties underwent many hours of negotiations with a court-appointed mediator in court and over the phone this week and on Wednesday reached an agreement.
Pretty much where it was always going to end up. Even at work, i'm noticing, with Xmas approaching (including Courts being closed), people are much more wiling to talk settlement.

For Folau is was always about the cash. For Rugby it was always about getting Folau out of their hair - they will also probably have learned something about better ways to handle these situations.
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,202
Reaction score
19,713
Pretty much where it was always going to end up. Even at work, i'm noticing, with Xmas approaching (including Courts being closed), people are much more wiling to talk settlement.

For Folau is was always about the cash. For Rugby it was always about getting Folau out of their hair - they will also probably have learned something about better ways to handle these situations.
Its disappointing really, would loved to have see the courts decide this one rather than a settlement and the laws not being clarified. Already the pro religious are claiming this as a victory when it's anything but, the law still isn't clear on this and the only way there's going to be clarity is if it went through the judicial system.

So much for folau fighting for people's freedom of belief/speech, scumbag was only ever in it for the money
 

JayBee

Kennel Legend
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
10,782
Reaction score
4,016
Its disappointing really, would loved to have see the courts decide this one rather than a settlement and the laws not being clarified. Already the pro religious are claiming this as a victory when it's anything but, the law still isn't clear on this and the only way there's going to be clarity is if it went through the judicial system.

So much for folau fighting for people's freedom of belief/speech, scumbag was only ever in it for the money
Hey mate

Just a quick one - I posted this in a thread (can't remember which one) - but just wanted some clarity -

Do we have definitive proof that he breached his contract? I have read multiple sources that suggested he had something in his contract which forbade him from putting up such things on social media - but there was also an article floating around that Rae Rae had the intention of putting it in his latest contract, only to renege on that, and became content with just a handshake agreement.

Cause for me - this is ultimately what it is all about right? We can discuss the niceties of how much of a scum bag he is. But that's not really what this is about, is it?
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,202
Reaction score
19,713
Hey mate

Just a quick one - I posted this in a thread (can't remember which one) - but just wanted some clarity -

Do we have definitive proof that he breached his contract? I have read multiple sources that suggested he had something in his contract which forbade him from putting up such things on social media - but there was also an article floating around that Rae Rae had the intention of putting it in his latest contract, only to renege on that, and became content with just a handshake agreement.

Cause for me - this is ultimately what it is all about right? We can discuss the niceties of how much of a scum bag he is. But that's not really what this is about, is it?
Well that's why it needs to go to court, because there's a whole bunch of half-truths floating around, he said, she said, etc. If it went to the courts all that would have been revealed and the legitimacy of it revealed.

I do lean towards, had the contracts been in place, then IF doesn't have a leg to stand on and would have lost the case. RA never objected to any of his other religious postings, they only objected when it came to bigotry. But as stated no one will know if any contracts are in place or which way the law would have decided, it's all conjecture and remains conjecture.

But I do believe there will likely be legal cases in the near future if this government gets it's religious discrimination bill across the line. I might be first up as I'm going to refuse service for any religious people.
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,739
Reaction score
27,949
Well that's why it needs to go to court, because there's a whole bunch of half-truths floating around, he said, she said, etc. If it went to the courts all that would have been revealed and the legitimacy of it revealed.

I do lean towards, had the contracts been in place, then IF doesn't have a leg to stand on and would have lost the case. RA never objected to any of his other religious postings, they only objected when it came to bigotry. But as stated no one will know if any contracts are in place or which way the law would have decided, it's all conjecture and remains conjecture.

But I do believe there will likely be legal cases in the near future if this government gets it's religious discrimination bill across the line. I might be first up as I'm going to refuse service for any religious people.
"I'm going to refuse service for any religious people."

But, but, but ...that's not what it's all about! It's meant to improve service to religious people! People like Eric Abetz who need to be serviced.
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,202
Reaction score
19,713
"I'm going to refuse service for any religious people."

But, but, but ...that's not what it's all about! It's meant to improve service to religious people! People like Eric Abetz who need to be serviced.
They realized Muslims would have the same rights as them. Basically they could have enabled sharia law with their stupid bigotry bill
 

hayes

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 19, 2013
Messages
1,927
Reaction score
815
Well that's why it needs to go to court, because there's a whole bunch of half-truths floating around, he said, she said, etc. If it went to the courts all that would have been revealed and the legitimacy of it revealed.

I do lean towards, had the contracts been in place, then IF doesn't have a leg to stand on and would have lost the case. RA never objected to any of his other religious postings, they only objected when it came to bigotry. But as stated no one will know if any contracts are in place or which way the law would have decided, it's all conjecture and remains conjecture.

But I do believe there will likely be legal cases in the near future if this government gets it's religious discrimination bill across the line. I might be first up as I'm going to refuse service for any religious people.
RA tried to put it in the but under the collective bargaining agreement for all players stat's their can not have any determental clauses towards a player.
 

CroydonDog

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
19,531
Reaction score
16,530
RA tried to put it in the but under the collective bargaining agreement for all players stat's their can not have any determental clauses towards a player.
I think Israel was never a fan of putting it in the butt... or is he?
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,202
Reaction score
19,713
RA tried to put it in the but under the collective bargaining agreement for all players stat's their can not have any determental clauses towards a player.
No that's conjecture.

There's simply two answers to this settlement

1. RA were completely in the wrong and chose to settle

2. RA held an independent tribunal who also found in favour of RA, hence if RA were completely in the right and sought the cheapest way out of it, it wouldn't have been 4 million more likely under a million, and settled to make the drop kick go away

As no one knows the terms of the settlement or how the court case would've played out, it's all conjecture
 

Sword

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 8, 2014
Messages
1,651
Reaction score
3,230
I think we need to be easy on poor Israel. It can’t be easy being a high profile homosexual who has yet to ‘come out ‘to himself, his family, his friends and his church.
 

Trafford10

Kennel Addict
Gilded
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
6,413
Reaction score
5,240
No that's conjecture.

There's simply two answers to this settlement

1. RA were completely in the wrong and chose to settle

2. RA held an independent tribunal who also found in favour of RA, hence if RA were completely in the right and sought the cheapest way out of it, it wouldn't have been 4 million more likely under a million, and settled to make the drop kick go away

As no one knows the terms of the settlement or how the court case would've played out, it's all conjecture
Reports (not denied by RA) settlement is $8 million.
If true that is a huge win for Folau and with the apology a vindication for Folau in his unfair dismissal claim.
 

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,580
Reports (not denied by RA) settlement is $8 million.
If true that is a huge win for Folau and with the apology a vindication for Folau in his unfair dismissal claim.
Both sides apologised as part of the settlement..... Stop misrepresenting the truth.
 

CroydonDog

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
19,531
Reaction score
16,530
Reports (not denied by RA) settlement is $8 million.
If true that is a huge win for Folau and with the apology a vindication for Folau in his unfair dismissal claim.
So far only one outlet is making this claim - The Telegraph.

All the others are merely saying "it has been reported" (by the Telegraph).

As the terms are supposed to be confidential, it is wise for RA to say nothing about the figure at all.

Although if the figure is anywhere near what the 'Crap is saying, it would be hard to hide that payment, it will show up in RA's financial statements.
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,739
Reaction score
27,949
Who/what's next with this religeous freedom bs.
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,202
Reaction score
19,713
Reports (not denied by RA) settlement is $8 million.
If true that is a huge win for Folau and with the apology a vindication for Folau in his unfair dismissal claim.
Do you know what NDA is? In any case it should come out in RA publicly available budget papers for next yr.

And in no way is it vindication of IF, it did not go to court.

As I said previously with this government trying to introduce a religious discrimination bill, this is when this will all play out in the courts. There's no doubt that a religious discrimination bill will impede on the already existing anti-discrimination bill and the FACT of the matter is religion is a choice, the things covered in the anti-discrimination laws are things you are born with, it's not a choice. Its clear cut in my books as to which one deserves to be defended and which one deserves to be thrown out.
 

JayBee

Kennel Legend
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
10,782
Reaction score
4,016
Well that's why it needs to go to court, because there's a whole bunch of half-truths floating around, he said, she said, etc. If it went to the courts all that would have been revealed and the legitimacy of it revealed.

I do lean towards, had the contracts been in place, then IF doesn't have a leg to stand on and would have lost the case. RA never objected to any of his other religious postings, they only objected when it came to bigotry. But as stated no one will know if any contracts are in place or which way the law would have decided, it's all conjecture and remains conjecture.

But I do believe there will likely be legal cases in the near future if this government gets it's religious discrimination bill across the line. I might be first up as I'm going to refuse service for any religious people.
I don't think we will never know the full truth of the collective bargaining agreements, and what was actually in IF's contract.

Had it went to court, it would have set an interesting precedent moving forward. And I am with you on the contract part - if it was in there, and he signed it, he has acknowledged this as truth, that he can no longer act on social media as he had done previously, or it would jeopardize his contract. He can still do it, no one is stopping him from spreading what he believes is truth, but as said - it would probably mean goodbye RA contract worth x million dollars.

As for your last part - let me know what business you're in... maybe we can settle our differences in court :P
 

Natboy

Banned
Premium Member
SC H2H Champion
SC Top Scorer
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Messages
8,945
Reaction score
11,608
I thought it was pretty much common knowledge that Castle tried to add the social media clause after Folau had signed the contract. Wasn’t that one of the main issues?
 
Top