Quote:
Originally Posted by iggy_oi
As quoted from the article, they were allegedly only made aware of a fraction of the member’s transgressions. I think you’d agree it would be difficult for them to make an accurate assessment of her risk to the public if they were not made fully aware of what she had done to that point.
Why would the employer agree to this settlement knowing the risk to the public? They were allegedly the only ones who had all the information.
|
Yes, yes, there are concerns about the employer agreeing to the settlement. Could be something as simple as wanting to avoid a long out process ... who knows. But for the moment, I'm just asking about the union's role here.
I'm going to ask the same question for the third time.
Why would they specify as part of the agreement that her malpractice and inappropriate behaviour be buried? Given the nature of her work isn't this something that should be kept on the surface.
Is this common union behaviour? To ask for serious malpractice and inappropriate behaviour to be sealed and buried from the next employer?