Now I've seen it all...

**Virago** · 27th June 2012, 22:57

Apparently you can threaten to kill your boss - and his children - and can't be sacked on the spot for it.

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-sto...ts-6232-compo/

Employment Relations Authority member Robin Arthur said "...a fair and reasonable employer needed to launch a disciplinary process which gave Mr McClung an opportunity to explain himself, and possibly apologise, and consider what to do with an open mind. Failure to do this meant dismissing Mr McClung on the spur of the moment was unjustified."

**Berries** · 27th June 2012, 23:10

I guess the downside for Joshua McClung of taking this case to the ERA is that anyone wanting fencing done won't touch him with a barge pole. Is a lifelong and international reputation as a dick worth six grand?

Probably not.

**Big Dave** · 27th June 2012, 23:22

The Law is an Ass dontchaknow.

**onearmedbandit** · 27th June 2012, 23:31

Fucking disgusting.

**EJK** · 27th June 2012, 23:35

Yeah can't fire on the spot but how about transferring him to ward 21?

**unstuck** · 28th June 2012, 06:58

PG claims are a common thing down this way it seems. I know one employer that has had maybe 5/6 claims against him in the last few years. At least 2 of those were 10 grand payouts.

**Edbear** · 28th June 2012, 07:13

As the employer, he should counter by having the guy charged with threatening to kill.

**Tigadee** · 28th June 2012, 08:30

The employer should have called the police on the spot after the clear death threat to have McDung arrested and/or removed off the boss's premises.

**oneofsix** · 28th June 2012, 08:38

Originally Posted by Tigadee

The employer should have called the police on the spot after the clear death threat to have McDung arrested and/or removed off the boss's premises.

Agreed, but can you see how this is different from employment law? Interestingly enough the police probably would have ended up covering much of the same ground the employment court judge mentioned, was the threat real, was it heat of the moment with no real intent, was the offender ready to back down etc. All the stuff the employment process is meant to cover.

If the employer real felt him and his family were being really threatened do you think he would have just fired the guy, making him more angry? If I felt the threat was real I would have been calling the cops or taking other steps to ensure my and my families protection.

**Tigadee** · 28th June 2012, 09:39

Witnesses too, would be important. If there are others to corroborate the employer's POV that the death threat seemed genuine, then he has sufficient cause to call the police to take action. The supervisor is certainly a witness, and the threatening text messages would also back the employer too, I would've thought.

**avgas** · 28th June 2012, 10:48

Joshua McClung is a dick.

Google search keywords : DO NOT HIRE Joshua McClung, DO NOT HIRE HIM!

That ought to make things harder for him in future.

**caseye** · 28th June 2012, 12:21

The employer should have an ABSOLUTE RIGHT to immediately fire the prick.
Naturally if he had any brains he'd ring the Police and alert them to the threats made and implore them to go and gather his family in case they were targeted.
Oh wait up, we live in NZ.
First the fucker has to actually make good on his threat before they can act.
Oh and as if that isn't enough someone has! to have been hurt before he can even be arrested and charged with anything.
We're too soft these days.

**onearmedbandit** · 28th June 2012, 12:25

Yup I'm currently dealing with someone who has made threats against my 5yr old daughter and me, threats to kill. There is a protection order against him from my ex-wife covering her and my daughter, but to him that means nothing. Went to the police this morning, they were quite good actually. Gave us the option of having him arrested right now or given a warning.

**mashman** · 28th June 2012, 12:39

Personal threat, fine, probably just someone under stress mouthing off, so I can see why the option for disciplinary action could be a first point of call... threatening someone's family smacks of absolute malice and whilst I'd hmmmmm sacking him for a personal attack, he'd be lucky to get away with just being sacked for the family threat. I guess we don't know the pressure he was under, not that it justifies the family threat, but financial pressure can push people to doing and saying things they ordinarily wouldn't do. I've got a solution for that lying around here somewhere

.