This is going to be the BEST thing you heard all day. A job centre in England refused to display an advertisement asking for a “reliable worker” because they risk being sued by unreliable workers for being discriminatory. Have you ever heard anything more ridiculous?!

The ad said the following:

Domestic cleaner required immediately for local hospital. A variety of different shifts available. Must be fluent in written and spoken English for Health & Safety reasons. Previous experience preferred. If you have a current CRB, it would be an advantage but not necessary. Training will be provided. Must be reliable and hard working

I wonder why they didn’t go after the part where they wanted fluent written and spoken English.. Isn’t that discriminating against 75% of the British population?! And I presume “Health & Safety” has now magically become a proper noun – because of the capital letters?

So the job centre refused to display the ad because they didn’t want to be discriminatory. Does this mean that soon I sue a law firm or hospital for discrimination because I don’t hold a law degree or any medical qualifications? Of course not! What a giant load of rubbish.

The person who banned this job should be in line waiting to find a new one because it seems that they are too incompetent to do their present one.

But it doesn’t really surprise me. I mean, this is coming from a country with a government that is allowing hoards of foreign people to come and be workers when a huge percentage of the population is just sitting on it’s bum, in a council house, drinking lager on a sofa watching daytime TV with a pack of cigarettes surrounded by a whole bunch of babies and collecting welfare cheques. There’s just no incentive for anyone to do anything..

But if you think about it, what percentage of the “unreliable” people would actually have the energy to go out and find a lawyer to fight a case for them because of the wording in this ad being discriminatory? Probably not very many, since they’re unreliable and lazy!

Bah.

Kerry Robertson and Mark McDougall have their lives ruined by social services who take their newborn baby from them

I did a post in November about the young couple from Fife, Scotland – Kerry Robertson, 17 and Mark McDougall, 25. For those of you who can’t be bothered to click, I’ll do a quick summary:

- Miss Robertson and her fiance wanted to get married prior to the birth of their baby, but in September 2009, 2 days before their wedding, the council made them cancel their wedding – claiming that Miss Robertson who was 5 months pregnant at the time,“did not understand the implications of getting married” – because she has learning difficulties…

- So the couple didn’t get married, and by November when she was 7 months pregnant, social services said that they would take her baby away from her at birth because she was “not clever enough” to raise the child.

- After being threatened, the couple fled. They took whatever money they had saved and fled Scotland to raise their child elsewhere. An anonymous person had been helping them pay for their housing, and their family and friends had donated clothes, baby furniture etc.

Last Friday, in a hospital in Ireland, Kerry Robertson gave birth to her little boy, Ben – who they had picked out the name for back in November. Four days later, Irish social services came in and took the little boy away from them. The midwives who had been helping Miss Robertson had to leave the room because they were so distressed at seeing the young mother having her baby taken away from her.

According to Family Law, Fife social services are well within their rights to go after the couple IF they believe that the child is SERIOUSLY at risk by staying where he is.

I cannot see why they want to ruin these poor young peoples’ lives. It’s utter lunacy. All this poor girl wanted was to do was get married and raise her baby in a loving family environment, with her loved ones and friends nearby for support. But no, these bloody social services paper-pushing idiots are not letting her. They keep saying “learning difficulties”, “learning difficulties” .. well, bloody what kind of learning difficulties?! She was going to school (which shows that she has discipline and patience), and even her boyfriend didn’t know she had any “learning difficulties” until after they had begun dating.

The social services really need to get their arses in gear and stop harassing this couple. If she has learning difficulties then HELP her to raise her baby and go after the parents who are neglecting and abusing their children. It doesn’t make sense. Watch, they’re going to sterilize and CRB check everyone who wants to have a baby next. And then implant chips in everyone. And burn all of our books.

And apparently, according to the father, the social services had the wrong name and wrong date of birth on the “baby removal order” – which essentially makes this kidnapping. And what happens to all those underage parents who think that it’s fine to go on a 24 hr booze binge and leave their kids at home? Sh*t all happens – they have another baby and get more benefits.

I hope she gets baby Ben back and gets a whole lot of compensation from the council.