Breaking: Mayor Tory Steps Down.

[curr3n_c1000]

How would he know he'd even get the chance? Are you suggesting that all political candidates submit to some "purity test" of your design before they can run for office? Sounds pretty Orwellian to me.

I'm not suggesting it. It's literally the opening statement in one of the policies.

https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/9208-Chapter_192_Toronto_Municipal_Code_Article_IV_Conflict_of_Interest.pdf

Do you think the mayor should follow this policy? Yes or No?

Obviously, he helped her get the MLSE job, as I've already stated in this thread. Why do you think she doesn't deserve the job, and why do you care who works for a private company like MLSE? As to whether he helped her over there to try to avoid a scandal: 1) there isn't any information that he knew he would be outed (seems more likely that her gig was simply just up at the city, and it was time to find a new gig), 2) moving her certainly didn't slow the Red Star down one bit in exposing him, and 3) whatever pull he might have over at MLSE, I doubt it goes so far as using them as his pump n dump dumping ground. I'd bet the farm that she has whatever passes for credentials for the work she's doing over at MLSE. As I said before, don't hate the player, hate the game!

Because it is about ethics. Companies can be sued if they are found not having integrity in the hiring process.

I will agree that she probably did very well in the "oral" part of the interview.

Not sure you're making any point here. The laws I was referring to were civil laws, not criminal - nothing to do with going to jail.

My point is him cheating is not even the discussion.

There are no generally applicable business ethics relating to banging side thingees. Banging tail has nothing to do with the way you conduct business. It's certainly pretty common for CEO's to have side thingees, whether subordinate employees or otherwise. I think you're pushing for a world as you would wish it to be, but you're just imagining that there are some core "business ethics" which govern Tory's behaviour.

At the City of Toronto, there is. See policy previously posted.

Are you not reading, or not understanding? You're simply wrong that a mayor is "on duty" 24/7. Some of his "off duty" behaviour might impair his ability to carry out his duties as mayor, but I'm not sure how covertly banging tail does that. You might have a point if he was championing some "fidelity law" while banging tail at the same time, but that wasn't one of his multitude of bad ideas.

Again, please see policy.

No, YOU don't know that. YOU are the one so sure of your moral/ethical/political condemnation.

Again, please see policy.

He said he didn't live up to his own standards (whatever they might be). Fair enough. Step down if you feel you must. I think he's mostly trying to avoid getting divorced, whether he REALLY feels what he did was unjustified or not. Whatever, everybody needs to look after their business in the way they think best. However, just like a court can't accept a guilty plea if there was no crime even alleged, likewise a person who says "I didn't live up to my own standards" can hardly establish the code of ethics you think is generally applicable. I think he was just mouthing the kind of thing he needed in order to set the groundwork for keeping his marriage intact and/or maybe still having some future of some kind in politics again (its the kind of thing women voters like to hear).

Tell him to adopt your standard. Then he can move his office right next to a strip club.

What do you need to understand that politicians are not elected to be our moral examples? They are elected to get things done for the greater good of the population.

What you need to understand is every employee has to uphold themselves to an ethical standards. And the standard raises the higher you go.

 

[Darts]

Come on guys be honest, deep down don't you have some admiration for the old goat? A 68 year old man messing with a 31 year old former beauty queen.

 

[Frankfooter]

Come on guys be honest, deep down don't you have some admiration for the old goat? A 68 year old man messing with a 31 year old former beauty queen.

The guy was born rich, why is that an accomplishment?

 

[Darts]

"What you need to understand is every employee has to uphold themselves to an ethical standards. And the standard raises the higher you go."

Our company has a "no hugging" policy. It is probably ultra vires, but no one has the guts to challenge it.

 

[Dutch Oven]

I'm not suggesting it. It's literally the opening statement in one of the policies.

https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/9208-Chapter_192_Toronto_Municipal_Code_Article_IV_Conflict_of_Interest.pdf

Do you think the mayor should follow this policy? Yes or No?

Of course a Mayor should avoid conflicts of interest. Show me how this relationship created one. Again, you're moving the goalposts, or rather swapping them completely for a different argument, but I don't think this one goes anywhere either. I don't see how their relationship could cause either one of them to do their jobs any differently, or at least nothing happened which required a decision that could be tainted by their relationship.

Because it is about ethics. Companies can be sued if they are found not having integrity in the hiring process.

This is just incorrect as a matter of law. If you're not an employer, it's a harmless error. If you are an employer, you really need to speak with counsel before you get yourself in trouble.

My point is him cheating is not even the discussion.


At the City of Toronto, there is. See policy previously posted.


Again, please see policy.


Again, please see policy.

You are misreading/misapplying the policy. Simple as that.

Tell him to adopt your standard. Then he can move his office right next to a strip club.

That sounds oddly judgmental for a TERB member!

What you need to understand is every employee has to uphold themselves to an ethical standards. And the standard raises the higher you go.

There is some merit in what you are saying. You're just failing to identify the code/rule that Tory broke. That's understandable, because there isn't one.

 

[ogibowt]

Come on guys be honest, deep down don't you have some admiration for the old goat? A 68 year old man messing with a 31 year old former beauty queen.

ask that question to Tory,s family

 

[Dutch Oven]

"What you need to understand is every employee has to uphold themselves to an ethical standards. And the standard raises the higher you go."

Our company has a "no hugging" policy. It is probably ultra vires, but no one has the guts to challenge it.

Private companies can establish rules for employees, particularly if the rules are set out in their employment contracts. The issues usually are whether the rule is sufficiently clear, and whether breach of the rule justifies dismissal rather than counselling, and the answer of the courts to that question is almost invariably "counselling first".

Of course, depending on the context, "hugging" can be sexual assault. Commiting a serious criminal act is something likely to justify termination and also likely to be sustained by a court.

At one time, the worst thing you could do in a workplace was steal. Now the capital offense crime is sexual harassment.

 

[curr3n_c1000]

Of course a Mayor should avoid conflicts of interest. Show me how this relationship created one. Again, you're moving the goalposts, or rather swapping them completely for a different argument, but I don't think this one goes anywhere either. I don't see how their relationship could cause either one of them to do their jobs any differently, or at least nothing happened which required a decision that could be tainted by their relationship.

Can you read? "...avoid placing themselves in situations where their private interests may be in conflict with, or be perceived to be in conflict with the interests of the City or Agency."

You are the one moving the goalpost. Read the whole policy, It categorizes his relationship as inappropriate.

This is just incorrect as a matter of law. If you're not an employer, it harmless error. If you are an employer, you really need to speak with counsel before you get yourself in trouble.

What are you even talking about? Harmless error. What error is this, I forgot to take the pill?

If you don't follow certain procedures, the process can be seen as discriminatory which can open a lawsuit.

You are misreading/misapplying the policy. Simple as that.

That sounds oddly judgmental for a TERB member!

There is some merit in what you are saying. You're just failing to identify the code/rule that Tory broke. That's understandable, because there isn't one.

There's no merit in nothing you say. You're completely out of bounds.

I posted the policy that clearly state you can't put the integrity of the city and the agency at risk by way of relationships. There's nothing to be said.

 

[explorerzip]

1. As I said in another post, I think nearly all of these international junkets are of little worth to Toronto taxpayers, but they are par for the course for ALL mayors.

You could say that for any business trip and that applies to the private sector too. I don't think there's a linear relationship between taking a business trip and seeing the benefits. It's much harder to quantify in the public sector because the city doesn't experience the benefits directly.

Why should tax-payers even have to question this? He has no integrity.

There's nothing much to question here. Either the staffer was allowef to be on the trip with him or not. We don't know if there are specific processes that the Mayor must follow in order to have a staff attend with him.

It's not just his affair. It's about the positions people held. As a Mayer of one of the biggest cities in the world, his ethics should be higher.

Yes, his ethics "should be higher" in a perfect world. You know that we don't live in that world and policies will always lag behind how people behave.

I don't remember him campaigning on running a whorehouse.

I don't know what point you were trying to make. Of course he didn't campaign on running a whorehouse. IMO he had it fairly easy the first time he ran because of the Rob and Doug circus.

I'm not suggesting it. It's literally the opening statement in one of the policies.

Many policies in the public and private sector have grey areas that can be interepreted in different ways. They don't usually explicitly forbird inter-office relationships. Maybe this incident wil cause the city to change the policies to be more explicit or not. It can't an accident that similar grey zones exist in public and private organzaions. There has to be logical and practical reasons behind it.

Companies can be sued if they are found not having integrity in the hiring process.

Theoretically, a company could be sued if they violated The Human Rights Act and didn't hire someone. Practically speaking it could be tough for someone to go through the legal process. The person making the complaint would need evidence that the discrimation happened.

What you need to understand is every employee has to uphold themselves to an ethical standards. And the standard raises the higher you go.

I honestly don't get the higher standard narrative. There should be 1 standard that everyone follows.

If this girl isn't getting special favours, how did she get a cushy MLSE job so conveniently before shit hit the fan? Are you going to tell me this is all coincidence?

Obviously, he helped her get the MLSE job, as I've already stated in this thread.

Do we have proof e.g emails, phone calls, etc that Tory helped his staffer get the job at MLSE? If not, then this is just a rumor. Even if he did help her that's not illegal in of itself. This is yet another grey area because people refer others to jobs all the time. I do know that John Tory has more influence than an average employee.

I guess someone could come forward to claim that MLSE hired Tory's staffer unfairly or violated the Human Rights Act, but they would have to prove it.

 

[curr3n_c1000]

There's nothing much to question here. Either the staffer was allowef to be on the trip with him or not. We don't know if there are specific processes that the Mayor must follow in order to have a staff attend with him.

She's not allowed. They had a relationship.

Yes, his ethics "should be higher" in a perfect world. You know that we don't live in that world and policies will always lag behind how people behave.

Doesn't have to be in a perfect world. Just in that position.

It's not asking for much. A lot of other women out here.

Many policies in the public and private sector have grey areas that can be interepreted in different ways. They don't usually explicitly forbird inter-office relationships. Maybe this incident wil cause the city to change the policies or not. It can't an accident that similar grey zones exist in public and private organzaions. There has to be logical and practical reasons behind it.

There is no grey area in this. You just reject the rules, keep it honest.

I honestly don't get the higher standard narrative. There should be 1 standard that everyone follows.

Depending on the company, there are somethings your boss can't do.

Theoretically, a company could be sued if they violated The Human Rights Act and didn't hire someone. Practically speaking it could be tough for someone to go through the legal process. The person making the complaint would need evidence that the discrimation happened.

But normally, we don't have such a high profile individual connected to such issues.

These things usually go unnoticed. But lets say you had several current Employees wanting that position. It can get rough.

 

[mitchell76]

 

[explorerzip]

She's not allowed. They had a relationship.

I'm talking about the trip they took together.

There is no grey area in this. You just reject the rules, keep it honest.

I am keeping it honest. I was referring to the policy document you linked that does not explicitly forbid an office relationship i.e. a grey area. We'll see what the integrity commisioner's interpretation of the policy is and what if any action will be taken.

Depending on the company, there are somethings your boss can't do.

Yes, as with everything in the world "it depends."

But normally, we don't have such a high profile individual connected to such issues.

I can't think of a public official that had a "relationship" with staff, but there's been plenty of inappropriate scenarios over the years.

These things usually go unnoticed. But lets say you had several current Employees wanting that position. It can get rough.

Yes, I know that discrimination and nepotism does go unnoticed. Yes, I know there might be multiple candidates vying for the same job. That still doesn't change the fact that they would need to prove that a company discriminated against them and violated the act.

 

[curr3n_c1000]

I'm talking about the trip they took together.

I am keeping it honest. I was referring to the policy document you linked that does not explicitly forbid an office relationship i.e. a grey area. We'll see what the integrity commisioner's interpretation of the policy is and what if any action will be taken.

It does explicitly forbid it. It's just not saying it in the way you're accustomed to hearing it.

It's only a grey area if he didn't admit they were in a relationship. Obviously he doesn't want to lie, so he came clean.

I don't have much faith in any investigation. These people are all friends.

Yes, as with everything in the world "it depends."

Yeah if we are talking about supervising a burger king, I guess certain rules don't apply.

If you are like a CFO, you probably will keep yourself to a different standard.

I can't think of a public official that had a "relationship" with staff, but there's been plenty of inappropriate scenarios over the years.

ok

Yes, I know that discrimination and nepotism does go unnoticed. Yes, I know there might be multiple candidates vying for the same job. That still doesn't change the fact that they would need to prove that a company discriminated against them and violated the act.

I don't know what your point is. You're being a bit trivial.

 

[explorerzip]

It does explicitly forbid it. It's just not saying it in the way you're accustomed to hearing it.

Since you apparently know me so well, what is the way that I am accustomed to hearing it? That might help to actually forward this discussion.

I don't have much faith in any investigation. These people are all friends.

Can't say that I have a lot of faith either, but that can apply to all sectors.

If you are like a CFO, you probably will keep yourself to a different standard.

Sure the CFO and finance team has to follow financial reporting standards that other departments don't follow. Yet the policy document you linked earlier should cover all city employees including the Mayor and council. Obviously, I don't have all the documents in front of me to know that with total certainty.

I don't know what your point is. You're being a bit trivial.

Perhaps I misread you. What did you mean by "These things usually go unnoticed. But lets say you had several current Employees wanting that position. It can get rough."? What specifically can get rough? If you have several current employees vying for a job that then is filled by an outsider, then it would be up to them to complain and provide evidence that the employer discriminated against them in some way.

How you know for certain that Tory helped her find the job at MLSE? I am genuinely curious and didn't hear anything about this. Perhaps you know John Tory so well that you don't need evidence to make this claim?

 

[curr3n_c1000]

Since you apparently know me so well, what is the way that I am accustomed to hearing it? That might help to actually forward this discussion.

You want to see the words sexual relations, romantic affair or something along those lines.

Can't say that I have a lot of faith either, but that can apply to all sectors.

Yes, even MLSE

Sure the CFO and finance team has to follow financial reporting standards that other departments don't follow. Yet the policy document you linked earlier should cover all city employees including the Mayor and council. Obviously, I don't have all the documents in front of me to know that with total certainty.

You don't understand. What I'm saying.

Perhaps I misread you. What did you mean by "These things usually go unnoticed. But lets say you had several current Employees wanting that position. It can get rough."? What specifically can get rough? If you have several current employees vying for a job that then is filled by an outsider, then it would be up to them to complain and provide evidence that the employer discriminated against them in some way.

How you know for certain that Tory helped her find the job at MLSE? I am genuinely curious and didn't hear anything about this. Perhaps you know John Tory so well that you don't need evidence to make this claim?

What you are not understanding is it's not about did they or didn't they do anything wrong. It's about putting the process in a questionable position.

Ask yourself a question. Is it possible Tory influenced her hiring at MSLE? The answer is yes, that's the issue. The integrity is in question.

 

[Darts]

At one time, the worst thing you could do in a workplace was steal. Now the capital offense crime is sexual harassment.

Our company has dropped the bi-annual office parties because of two liability concerns. First it was alcohol. That was followed by sexual misconduct (which could mean almost be anything).

Anyway, those office parties got out of hand. Some staff took this "bonding" thing to an extreme.

It also didn't help that we found the boss's secretary drunk and naked lying in the bathroom.

 

[explorerzip]

You want to see the words sexual relations, romantic affair or something along those lines.

Sure. Then why are those terms not explicitly stated in the city's policy? It's not by accident that it's written that way. Are those terms stated explicitly in other organizations? Would it even be helpful to put them in the policies?

Yes, even MLSE

Agreed.

Ask yourself a question. Is it possible Tory influenced her hiring at MSLE? The answer is yes, that's the issue. The integrity is in question.

Yes, it is possible that Tory influenced her hiring at MLSE. You haven't presented any proof to back up that statement though. I can't pass judgement on that specific issue unless there's evidence and we may never get it.

 

[Dutch Oven]

There's no merit in nothing you say.

I'll let your own words stand as my final response on this topic.

 

[curr3n_c1000]

Sure. Then why are those terms not explicitly stated in the city's policy? It's not by accident that it's written that way. Are those terms stated explicitly in other organizations? Would it even be helpful to put them in the policies?

It's not explicitly stated because it's not the point of the policy.

Any relationship that can be perceived as a conflict in interest is deemed inappropriate.

Yes, it is possible that Tory influenced her hiring at MLSE. You haven't presented any proof to back up that statement though. I can't pass judgement on that specific issue unless there's evidence and we may never get it.

You don't always need proof, you can have evidence that suggests.

 

[curr3n_c1000]

I'll let your own words stand as my final response on this topic.

Yeah that's your best bet.