day time telly

[sjs]

I'm really not at all interested in the Celeb gossip scene, but it has got me mulling over the question of if and when an employer is entitled to know private details of an employees workplace relationships. I suppose there may be an angle with bringing the employer into disrepute, or a problem continuing to work together if the relationship breaks up, but I'm not sure I'd take kindly to the boss grilling me about a girlfriend. As long as there isn't anything illegal, or sex on company property/time, then I don't see any great issue for the employer that don't amount to the normal personnel up & downs of running a business.

I agree.
If asked a question to which the asker is not entitled to an answer, then IMO the askee is entitled to lie, if they wish.
And, judging by its news website, the good old BBC felt that this was the most important event in the world, for a day or two last week. They seem to feel the need to compete with the Express.

[rjb]

And, judging by its news website, the good old BBC felt that this was the most important event in the world, for a day or two last week. They seem to feel the need to compete with the Express

I got the distinct impression the BBC were trying to get one over ITV, at the expense of one of there presenter's. A storm in a teacup which didn't interest me in the slightest. I stopped watching the news headlines for a few days, there were more deserving newscasts out there.

[simonineaston]

Anyone here seen and enjoyed Succession? As I ploughed my way through several ep.s I was reminded yet again how cool it is not to work in any form of media and as such feel it necessary to have a) screens screwed to the walls of every single room you inhabit and b) have the ruddy things turned on what seems like 24/7!
I'll settle for obscurity and relative poverty any day, thanks! ps some funny and hugely ironic script writing in Succession, little snippets - I now know that pjs aren't, as I originally thought what you wear when you're in beddy-byes, but rather what you use to get from A to B...

[axel_knutt]

Maybe even more complex when many "celebrities" are not "employees" but "contractors". I've no idea how Schofield's employment arrangements were setup but in a general context it might be significant. Came up recently when BBC tried to muzzle Lineker from expressing his personal opinions on his personal site.

Ian

I think the whole point of contractors is that they're easier to fire when they're no longer required. Does the employer even need a reason?

or sex on company property/time,

Which PS has openly confessed occurred multiple times.

Did he. I hadn't seen that, I'm not really following it with any interest in celebs.

It happened within the team that I managed, with one party then departing and alleging constructive dismissal against the company by failing to protect them from the predations of the other party. The allegations were dismissed at tribunal, because there was ample evidence of consent and connivance (both parties lost their jobs with no compensation, and both got a serious telling-off by the court), but it created a seriously bad atmosphere for a period.

I'm not aware of the company taking any interest in the workplace relationships at ours, but then, there's no particular reason why I should be. Not quite the same thing, but there was an individual who had a sex change, and got moved from a military division to our civil division, presumably on security grounds. I don't know how high up that decision would have been made, but it didn't stop her from setting up home with another guy in the lab.

If asked a question to which the asker is not entitled to an answer, then IMO the askee is entitled to lie, if they wish.

I had a brief fling with someone at work once. I wasn't bothered, but she wanted it kept quiet, then it came out when we broke up, so that just made double the gossip value.

[Psamathe]

...
I'm not aware of the company taking any interest in the workplace relationships at ours, but then, there's no particular reason why I should be. Not quite the same thing, but there was an individual who had a sex change, and got moved from a military division to our civil division, presumably on security grounds. I don't know how high up that decision would have been made, but it didn't stop her from setting up home with another guy in the lab.
...

My company did - but the other way round. The MD suggested I should invite one of the girls in the finance group out (long way from my responsibilities and authority). A specific individual, apparently she'd been chatting to MD and came out with how she fancied me but twas too shy to ask me out ... Given I was a director, part owner and we were a plc I decided it would be a bad idea so didn't. (Without the work issue I'd certainly have invited her out).

Ian

[rjb]

axel_knutt

I had a brief fling with someone at work once. I wasn't bothered, but she wanted it kept quiet, then it came out when we broke up, so that just made double the gossip value.

One of my colleagues was in the same situation. Forever referred to as
"Wing Nuts", your almost there.

[pwa]

It becomes a bit questionable when one of the two parties is in a senior position in the company, and the other is in a junior position, reliant on the goodwill of the other for the progress of their career. Compounded by one being mature and the other being a young adult. There is a power disparity that feels wrong.

[PedallingSquares]

It appears I've had posts removed for being 'defamatory'.Unbelievable!
Obviously, unlike a certain Royal mentioned, stating what is blatantly obvious in the Schofield case isn't allowed!?

[mattheus]

Age difference is the thing - what was it Prince Andrew with his power and privilege was 40 and the young lady 17 and his name and status was destroyed. How old was schfield (mid 50s) and was the young lad 18?

can't recall anyone worrying about Prince Andrews mental health....

In the case of Prince Andrew i think for most people it was not the age difference that was important but the age of the girl (below the legal age on consent in Florida ...). Plus allegations of trafficking ...

Ian

Yes. And Schofield's bit-on-the-side was 20 when they had sex.

Quite a big pile of differences there ....

[Pebble]

Age difference is the thing - what was it Prince Andrew with his power and privilege was 40 and the young lady 17 and his name and status was destroyed. How old was schfield (mid 50s) and was the young lad 18?

can't recall anyone worrying about Prince Andrews mental health....

In the case of Prince Andrew i think for most people it was not the age difference that was important but the age of the girl (below the legal age on consent in Florida ...). Plus allegations of trafficking ...

Ian

Yes. And Schofield's bit-on-the-side was 20 when they had sex.

Quite a big pile of differences there ....

according to this news article they first met when the boy was 15 !
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/phil ... 84206.html

But even at 20.... a 60+ year old with such influence in the corporation they both work for....

[Psamathe]

In the case of Prince Andrew i think for most people it was not the age difference that was important but the age of the girl (below the legal age on consent in Florida ...). Plus allegations of trafficking ...

Ian

Yes. And Schofield's bit-on-the-side was 20 when they had sex.

Quite a big pile of differences there ....

according to this news article they first met when the boy was 15 !
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/phil ... 84206.html

But even at 20.... a 60+ year old with such influence in the corporation they both work for....

Reports I saw he was briefly introduced when Schofield opened some drama/media school - so in the context of anything happening the "15" is a bit of a "non-event".

The affair started when Schofield was in his 50's not 60's so again, stretching things. And when Schofield reached his 60, the other person was no longer aged 20.

I'm no defender of Schofield (no idea what he's like in real world nor on TV) but taking Schfield's age now and other peosons age when affair started is exaggerating the situation. Personally I have no idea about how "power dynamics" works in ITV but my impression is that other pewrson already had a job there so wanting help of powerful maybe less of a factor?

Ian

[mattheus]

In the case of Prince Andrew i think for most people it was not the age difference that was important but the age of the girl (below the legal age on consent in Florida ...). Plus allegations of trafficking ...

Ian

Yes. And Schofield's bit-on-the-side was 20 when they had sex.

Quite a big pile of differences there ....

according to this news article they first met when the boy was 15 !
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/phil ... 84206.html

But even at 20.... a 60+ year old with such influence in the corporation they both work for....

The age when they met isn't terribly important - if it was, then Cheryl Cole would have been roasted on public fires after marrying a 14yo she first met (and flirted with) on BGT.
So he was well above age of consent, and there is no intimation of sex trafficking,

Meanwhile - onto your yeahbuttery - his "influence" is only important if he used it improperly. I haven't seen evidence of that.