Basic details are provided to the healthcare providers only AFTER someone takes up the job. Never at application stage. That conversation happens with HR and not the line manager who does not get access to marriage status or dependency information.
Basic details are provided to the healthcare providers only AFTER someone takes up the job. Never at application stage. That conversation happens with HR and not the line manager who does not get access to marriage status or dependency information.Well, I wonder how the needs of the insurance cover and those of privacy/confidentiality can be reconciled. Clearly employers may be pressed by insurers to provide details like numbers of children, their ages and relevant med conditions.
Well expressed Purple. This is it.Marriage equality was about giving everyone the right to access the same legal contract and therefore the rights that come with it.
This proposal is about giving people the rights that come with the contract even when they choose not to enter into that contract. Conflating the two is absurd.
He has about twelve arguments. Maybe four of them are valid but it’s hard to know which four.. I listened to McDowell on an Irish Times podcast recently expecting that he would have helpful insights
Leo varadker resorted to saying " oh the law society are for the yes side" but sure of course they are onside, this will be a bonanza for them, it's like voting for Christmas. The already backlogged courts will have years of cases before them, loads of moolah
How so?The already backlogged courts will have years of cases before them, loads of moolah
No no. No no no no. No no no no. There's no limit!My head is semi melted by this, I've gone full circle from No, No to Yes, No to Yes, Yes an now back again to No. No
Am now thinking why is it such a hard decision to make, surly these things should be easy to explain and decide upon
After watching the Six One news the last couple nights debating about this I'm no nearer a decision
What's really bothering me is the Yes side seem to be saying "although not perfect it's a step in the right direction"
Is that a good enough reason to vote Yes Yes??
McDowell lost a lot of credibility when he began praising John Charles McQuaid's contribution to the Constitution...! The mind boggles.I am with Michael McDowell on this and he is saying NO NO with significant arguments.
Families, relationships, etc. are often not black and white and not everyone is in a position to marry.One that puzzles me is that given that you can marry who you like now (except maybe the dog) then if you are in a relationship should it not be formalised as a 'marriage' something like a licence for a car - have what ever car you want - but you need licence to drive. Then if you don't 'marry' you are not committed. Black and white.
I am concerned at this citizens assembly b/s - more coming up.
I don’t think there would be as much confusion if other forms of “family” relationship were acknowledged under a new article/ subsection, with their own forms of protection and without reference to marriage.One that puzzles me is that given that you can marry who you like now (except maybe the dog) then if you are in a relationship should it not be formalised as a 'marriage' something like a licence for a car - have what ever car you want - but you need licence to drive. Then if you don't 'marry' you are not committed. Black and white.
Citizens assembly are not democratically selected, they are hand picked. I heard of a guy selected based on a response he gave a pollster, that's another can of worms, how polls are conductedam concerned at this citizens assembly b/s - more coming up.
Citizens assembly are not democratically selected, they are hand picked. I heard of a guy selected based on a response he gave a pollster, that's another can of worms, how polls are conducted
What's really bothering me is the Yes side seem to be saying "although not perfect it's a step in the right direction"
Is that a good enough reason to vote Yes Yes??
Laurel and Hardy couldn't have come up with a finer mess than what's proposed.How will inheritence be dealt with I wonder? Say I pop my clogs and my daughter has been living with someone for a few years. Would they be entitled to some of the lucre by claiming they are in a durable relationship?
How will inheritence be dealt with I wonder? Say I pop my clogs and my daughter has been living with someone for a few years. Would they be entitled to some of the lucre by claiming they are in a durable relationship?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?