 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 29
I think the conversation has not been heated: but it has gone off topic and within some of those off topic comments there are a few absolute misunderstandings/misinformation concerning small businesses' legal responsibilities.Originally Posted by Hawthy
FWIW I took "Gearing up" to mean exactly what you wrote - hence my reply #23 - basically if you've left it until now to "gear up" then you are way behind the business impetus.
WW
"You can stop someone from entering your business, or refuse to serve someone, as long as you don’t breach any anti-discrimination laws.""
https://www.business.gov.au/info/plan-and-start/start-your-business/what-is-customer-service/refusing-service
I suppose it would be this right here. Point taken as long as you do not breach any anti-discrimination laws. So obviously , as a photographer , you don't give one of those as your reason , you make up another reason if you really don't want to do it .
I don't work as a photographer , but in the business I work in I can have good clients and bad clients . I exercise my right not to work for the ones I feel are bad clients . I exercise my right not to take on new clients if I feel I am already too busy , so I regularly refuse service. That's my right as I do not breach any anti-discrimination laws . I also rent out an investment unit . I exercise my right to rent it to the tenants that I think will be the best tenants and I refuse to rent it to those I think will be bad tenants. None of the reasons I use breach any anti-discrimination laws there either . I own the assets ( business or investment unit) so that's my right.
Last edited by bcys1961; 31-01-2018 at 1:26am.
The name is Brad ......
OMD EM-1, OMD EM-5MkII, m.Zuiko 12-40mm Pro f2.8, m.Zuiko 40-150mm f2.8 Pro , m.Zuiko 60mm f2.8 Macro, m.Zuiko 17mm f1.8 , Lee Filters
Thanks for replying.
I think that you are missing the main point which was being made.
I am certainly not being pedantic just for the sake of academic argument, but rather being exacting and advisory because this is an open Business Forum: that underlined section of your statement, as I have had explained to me the Anti-discrimination Laws, is indeed in breach of those laws.
Hence the point - that's very poor advice.
***
Additionally, (referring to your mention in a previous comment about the possibility or no of “gay people . . . going to target those who they perceive to be non-gay friendly, just to prove a point or win some discrimination case.”
I agree with your thoughts - that the main issue to a Small Business will likely NOT be a disgruntled Gay Customer ‘wanting to win a discrimination case’; but rather an onlooker who files a complaint.
Once filed, it will be investigated and must be defended.
Hence again, that it is poor advice to simply: “make up another excuse”.
WW
Last edited by William W; 31-01-2018 at 9:36am. Reason: corrected typo
It would not be my advice to make up another excuse . As I said I voted Yes and would have no problem shooting a gay wedding if asked. I was simply pointing out what those who don't want to shoot one could do . They just need to make up an excuse that does not violate our current discrimination laws. I don't think those who want to do this need my advice . They will work it out for themselves.
However , they may not have to make up another excuse soon if our courts follow the precedent just set in the US where a cake maker was on trial for refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding.
It will be interesting to see if our courts eventually follow this logic , and if the appeal in the US is successful.
''"A wedding cake is not just a cake in a Free Speech analysis," wrote Superior Court Judge David Lampe in a decision this week. "It is an artistic expression by the person making it that is to be used traditionally as a centrepiece in the celebration of a marriage. There could not be a greater form of expressive conduct," he said.As a result, a state anti-discrimination law, which applies to all kinds of other goods and services, does not apply to the baker of the cake in question, who happens to be in Bakersfield.''
http://www.smh.com.au/world/judge-rules-wedding-cake-for-gays-violates-baker-s-free-speech-rights-20180207-p4yzo6.html
Your clarification is ... clear. Thank you.
It seems, like you, I have an interest in the outcome of that case before the USA courts.
On another note - I too returned a "YES" response in the recent Same Sex Marriage Postal Survey: not that I think that is very relevant to the thread, but I do see a small contextual relationship.
Thanks for the conversation.
WW
The supreme Court in the US have made their ruling on a case upholding a cake makers right to not make a cake for a gay couple , based on his religious beliefs . Relates tothis post we had going a few months ago .
https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-a...05-p4zjg2.html
So he disagrees with Marie Antoinette!(Any cake.)
Last edited by ameerat42; 05-06-2018 at 2:08pm.
CC, Image editing OK.
Bear in mind the papers aren't the best source of information on legal rulings. This ruling seems to have more been about the process of the initial court case than the actual legality itself.
And of course, it's not relevant to Australian law anyway.
Interesting.
My take is that although I no longer run a business, I do feel that a small business owner should be entitled to accept or reject jobs as he/she sees fit. An easy way to avoid awkward reasons is simply to quote a ridiculous price. I don't think either the photographer nor client would be happy if there was not a good working relationship, so the gay issue is secondary to me. If I don't want to supply a service then I think that should be my prerogative just as customers are entitled to shop elsewhere. You don't get service providers trying to force people to buy from them, and the same should apply in reverse.
I might not choose to do a gay wedding because I don't really relate to gays, although I have nothing against them whatsoever and I gladly voted for gay marriage. I'm not entirely comfortable with demonstrative male gays (probably because I'm old) whereas female gays aren't a problem. That's just because I like women whatever their inclination but men getting it on publicly still makes me feel slightly awkward.
In terms of children and parenting I don't think it matters - heterosexuals haven't exactly got a clean track record and the sexuality of parents is a secondary consideration - parenting ability is more important.
I would think that anyone of either persuasion who tries to force a photographer into doing their wedding would have rocks in their head as that's not likely to generate the best photos!!
"If you want to be a better photographer, stand in front of more interesting stuff.” — Jim Richardson
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
