Freddie Attenborough has a useful Critic piece on Clause 20 of the Employment Rights Bill, the infamous "banter bouncers" Bill.
Stop Labour’s “banter bouncers” before it’s too late
Clause 20 of the Employment Rights Bill would turn everyday conversation into a legal minefield
Across-party group of free speech-defending peers will take to the floor of the House of Lords tonight to fight back against Clause 20 — a draconian proposal that would make employers liable for “offensive” speech overheard by their staff.
Among those leading the charge are Lord Young of Acton, General Secretary of the Free Speech Union (FSU), Baroness Fox of Buckley, Baroness Deech, Lord Strathcarron, Lord Macdonald of River Glaven and Baroness Meyer.
If passed, Clause 20 would make employers liable if an employee so much as overhears a joke, comment or political opinion from a member of the public and decides to take offence. That includes remarks not directed at them, or even at anyone in particular. A single overheard comment in the “course of employment” could trigger legal risk unless the employer can prove they took “all reasonable steps” to prevent it.
Familiar perhaps, but the whole piece is well worth reading as another reminder of how extreme this government has shown itself to be. No civilised person would propose or support this move.
The implications of letting Clause 20 through unamended are as farcical as they are far-reaching.
Employers may feel obliged to roll out intrusive codes of conduct for customers, impose speech restrictions on performers, or even automate public-facing roles. Pubs might install “banter bouncers” to eavesdrop on conversations, while emergency services could soon be conducting risk assessments before sending help, in case a distressed caller says something offensive.
The implications of letting Clause 20 through unamended are as farcical as they are far-reaching.
Employers may feel obliged to roll out intrusive codes of conduct for customers, impose speech restrictions on performers, or even automate public-facing roles. Pubs might install “banter bouncers” to eavesdrop on conversations, while emergency services could soon be conducting risk assessments before sending help, in case a distressed caller says something offensive.
12 comments:
Bad for the business for employer to accomodate this, much better not to employ twats, lefties, trans and other retarded people.
"Clause 20 would make employers liable if an employee so much as overhears a joke, comment or political opinion from a member of the public and decides to take offence."
Did you hear the one about the Ukrainian rent-boys who set fire to the Prime Minister's house?...
Anon - it is bad for business, I wouldn't want to be an employer in the UK.
Sam - is it anything to do with trousering freebies?
When I was a fresher the most interesting job I was offered was as a bodyguard to a stripper. Now I could be a banter bouncer.
Roger Scruton was quoted as saying: "It's not that you wish to give offence but you are up against people who are expert at taking it."
Could employers establish a requirement for new recruits that they were tough minded and unlikely to find offence? No Greens, no Woke? Or would this be discrimination?
If Clause 20 goes through, will the Self Righteous Brothers stop going to the pub?
Penseivat
What about if a customer gets offended by another customer, overhears something, is the establishment responsible for this?
dearieme - but would you be too tolerant for a banter bouncer?
James - and he was spot on as usual.
DJ - it would fall foul of something, so being a snowflake could suddenly become a protected characteristic.
Penseivat - they will have to from the sound of it. Comedy will have to become blander and blander.
Anon - bound to happen if the law goes through. Maybe possibilities like that will scupper it, I hope so.
It almost makes me want to learn signing, Welsh, look you, the Gaelic, or one of those multitude of really incomprehensible UK regional accents / dialects.
I know a few Scottish ones and even my daughter is totally baffled when I talk to old pals.
Viz. - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YdYn0dEql5w.
Freebieing trousers mayhap?
Doonhamer - signing sounds plausible, especially with a few invented signs mingled with the genuine ones. I like the video, reminds me of this one -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cG9X6_o11ec
Post a Comment