Choreographer Rosie Kay forced to resign from her own company

I made a small donation. However having heard from the other side , I'm now not as persuaded that some of their points don't have merit. As Keflavik said

The dancers may or may not be massive snowflakes, I'm not hugely well disposed towards them on the face of it, but they do have employment rights

If an employer invites employees to their home they need to be aware the employer/ employee relationship doesn't fall away.

In some cases it will be purely social- particularly if only 1 or 2 employees are present. Here the whole team was and the point of this gathering was to encourage team building.

To go back to that... unless of course you are saying that any cohort that collaborates will automatically be believed over a single individual @Lovelyricepudding?

Because that way lies madness - as we are seeing!

Let me say that again

I am ONLY considering the things that they ALL agree were actually said and actually done

Or carry on nitpicking. Your choice!

It is only if you take their uncorroborated word as gospel that she comes out of this in any way other than bemused and hard done by!

There was one letter but six dancers. So presumably they provide corroboration between them.

It wasn't a Christmas party

It's completely irrelevant whether or not it was a Christmas party. It was socialising related to their employment.

She seems to have had a perfectly ordinary view of who they were and what her jobs was - to nurture them into the competitive world of dance.

They, on the other hand, seem to live in a totally different universe. A universe that includes not being able to treat peopel according to their experience, when expereince makes a huge difference in their understanding of what is required of them and of their performance.

As I said upthread. Covid seems to have meant they had little external critique. So, like many students in all sorts of classrooms, they rank themselves within their cohort and don't really consider the wider world, the yardstick by which they will be measured once they have left their schooling.

They are as green, untested, unrealistic and opinionated as she said. They are also acting as Borg... and for some inexplicable reason actual adults, ones with a lot of life experience, don't seem to know how to set them straight!

It was not a Christmas party

What on earth is that supposed to mean? Keflavik Airport referred to "Christmas parties" as an earlier poster had referred to "work Christmas parties"

There isn't a shred of doubt that work related social gatherings offsite are "work places" for the purposes of employees' and employers' conduct.

The moral of this story becomes clearer and clearer. If you have a group of people whom you have employed for a particular project, and the behaviour of some of them means that project is at risk of becoming impossible, the proper course of action is to cancel the project. If this means they are then not employed, because they are redundant, well, perhaps you can later employ on some other project the ones among them who were not finding it impossible to work cooperatively or to work to instruction.

Interesting how Ms Kay is being put on the defensive. DARVO in action.

I'm sure I read somewhere that she said she couldn't remember everything that had happened and that a lot of alcohol had been consumed. Yes @KimikosNightmare

But only in a later missive by the dancers. They say she said this and that, but she hasn't said the same. So far, if you only go by what both parties say happened, you come the the conclusion that the dancers are being weird. It is only if you take their uncorroborated word as gospel that she comes out of this in any way other than bemused and hard done by!

Given their interpretation of other things they all agree she did say it is entirely possible that they think 'loud and lairy' means 'blacked out'. That's how oddly, extremely they have interpreted her words. And again that is only going by what they all say actually happened and was said.

We do need to work out whether her house, complete with her child's deeply offensive bedroom, is their work environment or not. I would say not:

Well you'd be wrong. There is absolutely no doubt that office parties outwith work premises are "work places" from point of view of employees" and employers' conduct.

I'm sure I read somewhere that she said she couldn't remember everything that had happened and that a lot of alcohol had been consumed.

I'm not sure that the fact bosses getting drunk at office parties is a good comparison- that's generally a bad thing- and it's usually quite easy to get away from a drunk at an office party. It's not quite the same in a small group in someone's house.

We do need to work out whether her house, complete with her child's deeply offensive bedroom, is their work environment or not

In employment law, a Christmas party off the premises still counts as work. The dancers may or may not be massive snowflakes, I'm not hugely well disposed towards them on the face of it, but they do have employment rights. I don't know if she infringed them or not, I wasn't there, but I don't think asking the question is itself totally off-bounds.

Is loud and lairy not code for we all got pissed? The open letter claims she blacked out as well I think. Look I wasn't there, I don't know which version is right, but I can see that it is possible that holding a work event at home blurred the line between an acceptable and unacceptable tone of debate. I don't think that line of argument is completely without merit is all, it's worth looking into. And I am generally GC.

it is

It is another of those examples of putting a bad interpretation on something and to hell with having actual evidence, isn't it?

We do need to work out whether her house, complete with her child's deeply offensive bedroom, is their work environment or not. I would say not: unless they were working in it which I rather assume they were not, since they are dancers and need a certain sort of floor and space to work on and in that's not a workplace. So if she got drunk over the meal, for which I don't think we have evidence, she was not unprofessionally getting drunk at work, any more than someone getting drunk with fellow workers at a pub would be. (Unless they work at that pub.)

Stupid to trust these tiny-minded idiots, certainly; but then, what is the use of a dance company if some of its members cannot be trusted? It isn't a coherent group at that point, is is a disparate rabble.

Where did it say she was drunk?

You’ve never worked in the city or journalism then... I even got ratted at a works do when I worked for the church..

Because she was their boss. Getting pissed with underlings is not hugely professional.

Yes! A group of young adults, whose chosen career involves them being in close contact with the sweaty, thinly clad, appropriately guarded bodies of others falling apart at the sound of their tutor and boss talking about body parts they will endlessly not apologise for brushing whilst dancing. Doesn't sound feasible to me.

As one who once was grabbed by the crotch by a male cheerleader who, on realising the error, had 2 choices, drop me from 7 feet up or deal with it and get me to the floor safely. That a 17 year old boy back in the late 70s could make the right choice without flinching and apologise afterwards instead of scuttling off embarrassed just illustrates that this isn't new and is smething that many performers have to cope with.

But then again, the word of women have long been deemed literal violence, haven't they @CatherinaJTV