Don Cherry no longer with Coach's Corner

[ericdaoust]

2:30 to 4:00.

Meh.

Again, if you feel strongly about it get the message to her employer.

Life isn't fair so going around looking for comparisons is a waste of time.

[Axeman33]

Wow, Cherry does an interview with Tucker Carlson?
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/sports/nhl...3dP?li=AAggNb9

That tells me all I need to know what kind of ******* Cherry really is if you think its wise to plead your case with Tucker Carlson...

I have no idea who Tucker Carlson even is.

[PenguinHunter]

Meh.

Again, if you feel strongly about it get the message to her employer.

Life isn't fair so going around looking for comparisons is a waste of time.

I am not looking for comparisons... I just find it funny how one-sided this country works when it comes to squeaky wheels. When the squeaky wheels are only on one side of the cart...the cart just keeps going in circles and no advancement is made.

[Auston'sWilly]

Easy on the majority.... I am going to guess it was more like the recent federal election... the popular vote lost out again!

Exactly. Easy mistake to make, though - hard for them to see through all the bubble wrap and fake news.

By the way, say what you will about Tucker Carlson and I'd say he's a pompous jerk. But his point in that interview is that Canada has been consistently sliding more towards stripping away an individual's rights. That is absolutely true.
And ultimately, that's the heart of fascism. So... he's not crazy anyway.

Where he's wrong, of course, is that although Cherry can say almost anything he wants - he has that right - that doesn't mean his employer doesn't have the right to fire him for it.

[fantasyhockeygeek]

Actually, there is no legal right to free speech in Canada... never has been. I don't know why people expect that it should exist. Canada isn't the USA.

[agentzero]

There is only the constitutionally protected right to freedom of expression and since the charter applies to public institutions, it simply means the government can’t lock you up for your views, lest they break the criminal code or unduly infringe on the rights of others.

Clearly this is not the situation here. It’s like apples and oranges conflating Cherry’s situation with freedom of expression.

[Auston'sWilly]

Actually, there is no legal right to free speech in Canada... never has been. I don't know why people expect that it should exist. Canada isn't the USA.

Pardon me. He has that "fundamental freedom" as per the Canadian Charter of rights and freedoms, although it is not a legal right.

[2014olympicgold]

Pardon me. He has that "fundamental freedom" as per the Canadian Charter of rights and freedoms, although it is not a legal right.

Technically it's "freedom of expression". The Charter also says the government has the ability to set limits on what freedom of expression is...expressed(?).

Under the heading of "Fundamental Freedoms" the section states:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(d) freedom of association.

Some of the things the gov't says you can't say is hate speech, obscenities, and defamation. And legally Don Cherry didn't have hate speech, but what he said was hateful...according to James Turk. And Hateful speech can be used as grounds of firing.

[Auston'sWilly]

but what he said was hateful...according to James Turk. And Hateful speech can be used as grounds of firing.

It most certainly was not hate speech, and anyone who thinks it was clearly got too much cuddle time from mommy and daddy.

And, it's irrelevant anyway. Cherry was fired over money. Simple as that. And they were waiting for a reason to claim it wasn't about money.

[ericdaoust]

I am not looking for comparisons... I just find it funny how one-sided this country works when it comes to squeaky wheels. When the squeaky wheels are only on one side of the cart...the cart just keeps going in circles and no advancement is made.

I really don't care about The Social so it's definitely someone else's battle. However I do care about HNIC's subpar content because I watch games on that show. My guess is a lot of the people pushing back against Don Cherry fall into this category.

#FireJessAllen is trending on Twitter so I guess it's catching on after all.

[Rylant]

Guys, Sportsnet wanted cherry to leave. They could have chosen any moment to do it but chose this one. That’s it. People have said worse, including cherry and kept their jobs in media. Rogers just decided to do it here. It’s not the worst thing he’s ever said but that doesn’t matter. What matters is what the Rogers board wanted and this is what they wanted. Employers always get what they want, either with or without litigation, but outside unionized environments and a pro-reinstatement labour board, employers get what they want. They want someone out, he’s out; no matter whether the reason is a good one.

In Canada, the law states that you can fire somebody for a good reason, you can fire somebody for no reason, but you cannot fire somebody for a bad reason. So, any employer can let somebody go and pay out the legally required severance and say that it just isn't working out. The "you can't fire somebody for a bad reason" would be things like "we found out he was gay, so we fired him" or "we fired her because she is black".

It's why companies tend to be as vague as possible when dismissing somebody now. They want to protect themselves from being sued for firing somebody for a bad reason. I worked in upper management for a long time. Any time we had an employee who had a horrible attitude and we thought needed to go, we would severance them and thank them for their service and tell them it wasn't working out. If they asked why, we would say "it's nothing specific. we want to go another direction. this is a dismissal with no misconduct."

Don Cherry probably will get a nice package.

Rylant

[Wonko]

But his point in that interview is that Canada has been consistently sliding more towards stripping away an individual's rights. That is absolutely true.
And ultimately, that's the heart of fascism. So... he's not crazy anyway.

Fascism is a form of government that is a type of one-party dictatorship. Fascists are against democracy. ... Fascism puts nation and often race above the individual. It stands for a centralized government headed by a dictator. Historically, fascist governments tend to be militaristic, and racist.

Sounds a lot more like a right wing kinda thing. The US for example might be leaning that way under its current administration. At any rate it is a ridiculous stretch in the Cherry incident and just another partisan fake news media spin from Fox.

[Rylant]

It's simply not a freedom of speech, or a freedom of expression issue. That protects you from going to jail for speaking your mind, but even then there are still limits. Any kind of freedom of speech or freedom of expression does not protect you from being fired for saying something stupid. Try posting on facebook how horrible your company is and what a dick your boss is, and then claim that they can't fire you for it because of your freedoms; see how far that gets you.

Rylant

[2014olympicgold]

There's a Don Cherry protest in Downtown Toronto right now. Some signs are "Rogers cancels Cherry, we cancel Rogers", some say "Epstein didn't kill himself"...Apparently a few dozen are out there.

[forumname]

deleted due to insult

If people aren't allowed to question the government and call it what they want to call it, then what DID you do it for? The US is clearly NOT fascist, but it does share plenty of the negative qualities associated with fascism, so...