A Montague man seeking more than $300,000 in compensation from the P.E.I. government has only been awarded $8,000.
John MacTavish of Montague had already proven to the courts that he was a victim of political discrimination. He had already been offered more than $59,000 plus legal costs in compensation.
MacTavish, a former asphalt raker with the Department of Transportation and Public Works, described those offers as "insulting." He pushed for a quick ruling in the Supreme Court of Prince Edward Island, a ruling which both sides agreed would be binding.
Justice Gordon Campbell issued his decision on Monday.
MacTavish says the ruling will financially finish him. He has more than $100,000 in legal and accounting bills mounting daily.
"I'm financially finished again," said MacTavish, who declared bankruptcy in 2005.
"They can basically do what they want, and ruin somebody's life, and turn it all upside down - get you to cry in a courtroom in front of 12 or 14 people and it's only going to cost them $8,000."
MacTavish was the lone holdout in a series of political discrimination cases dating back to when former Premier Pat Binns took office in 1996.
Hundreds of similar cases have been settled, some for as little as $1,450.
MacTavish refused a series of settlement offers, calling the offers "insulting."
In his decision, Justice Campbell said MacTavish mitigated his losses, adding that he earned "considerably more in every year after the discrimination than he did before." He described an independent report that pinpointed MacTavish's total wage losses at $127,000 as "grossly exaggerated."
Justice Campbell writes: ". . . it is my conclusion that MacTavish did not suffer any loss of wages or income as a result of the discrimination."
The Supreme Court justice argued MacTavish should be awarded damages for hurt and humiliation. He referenced Mickey Burge, a well-known Tory, who received $197,588 in 1997. The former beer hauler successfully argued that his connection to the Conservatives was at the root of why he was fired.
Burge received $2,000 for hurt and humiliation, in addition to lost wages.
The justice also referenced Steve Dowling, a golf shop supervisor, who was awarded $5,000 for hurt and humiliation in 2007.
His position was reorganized after he ran unsuccessfully for the Liberal party.
"There is no question that MacTavish's life has been greatly affected since the discrimination. As with Burge and Dowling, his case has been in the public eye and unresolved for a very long time and he has endured some public ridicule for pursuing his claim," Justice Campbell writes in his 19-page decision.
"General damages in human rights cases are not intended to punish the wrongdoer. They reflect a recognition by society that one has been harmed by the actions of another… We must be realistic and consider whether any award bears a reasonable relationship to other awards for similar discrimination."
The Supreme Court has not ruled on legal costs.
Both MacTavish and the province have 30 days to strike a deal, or that will also have to be settled before the courts but MacTavish's legal bills continue to mount.
He now owes more than $100,000.
Part of that bill includes $316,000 in legal costs for the group of 14, of which MacTavish is a member.
Those 14 former provincial government workers took the government to court before 13 of them settled their political discrimination cases.
MacTavish, 43, said he doesn't know where he's going to turn now.
He expects he'll be forced to file for bankruptcy and go on social assistance to care for his family, including his wife and two adult children who still live at home.
"It's disheartening," he said.
"I had a lot of faith in the justice system until today. I don't think justice was served."
'I'm financially finished again'
'I'm financially finished again'
- Published on June 23rd, 2009
- Published on June 15th, 2010
-
Wayne Thibodeau
Man fired because of political beliefs wanted more than $300,000 in compensation he got $8,000
A Montague man seeking more than $300,000 in compensation from the P.E.I. government has only been awarded $8,000.
John MacTavish of Montague had already proven to the courts that he was a victim of political discrimination. He had already been offered more than $59,000 plus legal costs in compensation.
MacTavish, a former asphalt raker with the Department of Transportation and Public Works, described those offers as "insulting." He pushed for a quick ruling in the Supreme Court of Prince Edward Island, a ruling which both sides agreed would be binding.
- Number of views : 220
- Rate
- Top of the page
Comments
-
- CJ
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:43:03
Boo-hoo, its more money than he deserves. You got the job because of politics, you lost the job because of politics, what do you expect. Sounds to me like you'd rather sit home and let honest taxpayers pay your way than going out and getting another job. Finally justice that worked.
-
- Montague resident
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:41:26
I guess he should have taken the $59,000 now!!! I can not get over the gall he had going on compass and stating he was going to quit his job.. That should be reason #1 for not receiving social assistance and the then maybe he will realize the stress of the rest of the residents of PEI on paying bills and having to work like the rest of us.. I can not believe that he thinks he is entitled to sue the gov't for a job that he took from someone else... It all comes down to greed and stupidity...
-
- Shelly
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:40:55
Guess he should have taken the first offer huh?
-
- Lloyd
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:39:55
As the song goes, You gotta know when to hold em and know when to fold em. ...
-
- Trevor
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:36:15
This is about a legal principle in Canada. This practice is not acceptable. To end it here is clearly going to take a ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada - which is where I hope this man can take it next. This is too importantto let die. It may be years before we can shine the light again on this practice and make it known to the rest of Canada - or indeed the world. This is the kind of thing we deplore and condemn when it occurs in other countries. I am not afraid to stand up (and indeed post (under my real name) that this practice is WRONG, and I do not care who got what from the practice in the past. It Must End now.
I call upon our Member of Parliament to intervene to ensure this case receives govt funding to bring it to the Supreme Court. (In cases of important constitutional principle this is often done).
This practice vilates our Charter of Rights and though our provincial Supreme Court may be willing to turn a blind eye, a more objective judicial body will surely rule entirely in his favour.
Don't worry - ot won't come out of OUR pockets - it will be paid by the rest of the country and their transfer payments to us. -
- We're Still Gonna Pay
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:35:27
People, we are still gonna pay this guy whether it be through court settlement or welfare and I guess it's looking like welfare! Bankruptcy takes 7 years to go away. Not sure if you can file again in the midst of having one hanging so closely over your head! Good Luck!!!
-
- Sylvester
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:34:47
you can not work and still get $8000? tell me more
-
- NOT A
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:33:14
There are 3 types of people on this Island the givers--those people who work and pay taxes and the takers--those who work any form of Government and pay taxes[back into their own system] AND then this guy who obviously thinks the system owes him a standard of living---The lowest of the low,If he quits his job he should be made pick garbage from the streets!!!
-
- barb
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:32:39
If you go bacck and read the other stories about this issue it states that he was not looking for a specific figure and that he would accept whatever Justice Gordon Campbell determined.
WELL THAN ACCEPT IT YOU FOOL!!!!!
AND GET ON WITH YOUR LIFE AND GET A JOB LIKE THE REST OF US.... -
- come
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:32:02
he already claimed bankruptcy once, how would he get credit to rack up more bills, how many times can 1 person file for bankruptcy ?
-
- ed
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:31:52
Go on welfare and claim bankruptcy ?
Ever think of getting off your backside and get a job. -
- Maddie
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:31:35
John:
If you had received what you were seeking, would you have been prepared to share it with the person you displaced when you were hired? You live by the sword you die by the sword I rest my case ! -
- Confused On Priorities
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:30:30
Wow...finally some justice for hardworking taxpayers....he got greedy and got burned...his choice.
Nuff said. -
- That's
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:29:49
That's greed for you!
-
- PETR
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:29:23
I now have some Faith in the Justice system! It's about time this kind of nonsense stopped!
-
- Quiet
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:28:26
This fellow still plays the victim - now he is a victim of the legal system. I think it is time he accept that he is wqrong and that greed does not always pay off.
I also think he needs to hold his lawyers accountable for some of this as Hooley was obviously advising him to keep going.
And on Compass last night, this fellow says he is now going to quit his job. Now that makes a lot of sense doesn't it. If he quits his job he should be denied Social Assistance.
I feel for his family in this whole thing as they will suffer from it all.
In the long run, it was good to see that there is no free ride for poltical appointees in some circles.
Now, it will be interesting to see what the Ghiz Liberals do for him. -
- NOTTA
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:28:06
I feel for this guy and esp his family.
you dont have to agree with him but there sure are a lot of judges out there in their glass houses.
Kudos to those who try and make points and dare to be different. Whether we agree or not. He held his beliefs . -
- wog
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:27:49
Funny things is...for those few dissenters stating we endorse patronage...isn't that was Mr. MacTavish himself do when he accepted that position in the first place? He himself could have taken a stand against patronage and refused the job in the first place. He knew how the system worked.
Bottom line, he was offered a walk, but he swung for the fences in court...and struck out.
Get a job. -
- B
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:27:46
So he lives at home with his wife and 2 adults who are his kids and he has to support them all by himself? Why doesn't the wife and his adult kids get jobs to help out paying the bills. If they all had jobs it wouldn't be that tough. Now he wants us to pay off his debt with our tax dollars. Looks like lazyness runs in the family.
-
- JRM
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:24:55
He had already been offered more than $59,000 plus legal costs in compensation.
Well that's what he gets for being greedy, should of took it when it was offered. -
- AJ
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:24:00
I'll say it again- what a waste of a life. Time to get on with it John. Eight thousand for shedding some tears in the court room is pretty good and generous vs. the other precedents quoted. You made more money after and choose to sue for damages that did not exist- have you ever questioned the legal advice you were given. You declared bankruptcy when you were earning higher wages- sorry John, there is something else besides discrimination causing your problems. When you say you will now be forced to go on social assistance i wonder what you are doing now for a living- i sure hope you aren't going to quit a job to do this.
I think a far better idea would be to go out and donate the $8,000 to social agencies that have provided support to you over the years and tell your lawyer you are not going to pay his bill or that of the inflated accounting expert who could not pull a con on the justice. Keep your job if you have one, get on with life.
I cannot help wonder if this case was argued more for the benefit of lawyers. I cannot believe that $59,000 was rejected or the well known concept of damage mitigation was totally ignored by the lawyers. This is pathetic. -
- QUITE THE JURY
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:23:18
Good job some of you people weren't required as Jury, I doubt MacTavish would have gotten anything!
Islanders are certainly a different group! Their Goverment can tax them to death, take their monies for whatever excuse they choose to use and it's OK coz the Goverment did it! They can play the Patronage Card till the cows come home and it's just Jim Dandy! They can fire a Tory coz the Grits are in and hire one of their loyal padres and it's A OK !
But a man who goes to court to complain and try to receive the wages he should have earned if Patronage hadn't been practiced and Islanders attack him incessantly!
Who could understand such logic???? -
- john
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:20:37
He should become a fisherman......he's got the whining part covered and soon will be looking for government help.
-
- Matt
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:20:37
HAHA!! This guy cried because he got canned when the new government. I would guess that he got the job because he was a Liberal. Now he is going to cry again and say he can work because of only getting $8000. Try being like most Islanders and work for a living.
-
- disgusted
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:20:33
Get a job and a life John!! To say you are going to go on social assistance or file for bankruptcy be like a grown man and not a lazy one and get out and find a job and support your wife and children. You were offered over 59,000 a while ago and refused to take it so too bad!! You are not the only one that lost their job so suck it up and move on with your life!!!!! It is people like you that just want to have an excuse not to work. And to be looking for money for being humilated, you did it to yourself.
-
- frank
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:18:52
This guy appears determined to get money out of taxpayers. The courts have awarded him only $8,000, so I guess his plan is to get the rest through welfare.
I would have to question the lawyers in this case. Did they honestly think there was any chance this guy would get over $300,000? I can't imagine how any competent lawyer would think that. They should have convinced him to take the $59,000 when it was offered. That was a very generous offer for a 10 week, 8 year seasonal job. -
- Nate
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:18:02
So who'll hire him now? He's a guy that has two adult children that still live at home and wants to go on social assistance again. If I was an astute employer I would certainly take a look at this guy's track record noticing that he's been on social assistance most of his life and wants to keep doing so.
It would be difficult for me as an employer to hire this individual due to the fact that he's not only been screwing the taxpayer over; He'll also be trying to screw me over when it comes time to either lay him off or fire him.
It's a sad day when you can't hire an individual based on his track record and the fact that he's in it to screw everyone and play the victim.
To Mr. MacTavish: It's time to man up and pay your debt back to society. Your social status has been reduced to zero by your peers. Good luck sir on your future endevours. -
- happy
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:17:23
I feel Mctavish received far more then he should have and I hope he reads these comments and realizes that whatever public support he may have been shown in the beginning is long over.
Why does he think the only thing to do is quit his job and live off the system? Funny thing he has been telling people before this ruling that he hated his job and was quitting, I assume planning on living on his settlement! Now he is going to go on welfare, nice. What about his son who works with him will he quit to?
I agree that getting your job by politics is an outdated practice but alot of people still phone their member before and after an election with their list of demands, so until that stops Trevor, you may have to continue to be disgusted -
- So much
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:14:29
The anger and vitriole in the comments here paints a sad, ugly picture of Islanders in general. The glee that so many of you have at the misfortune of another is disgusting. And I'll just bet that a lot of you go to church too. The anger being shown is an indicator of a sickness on this Island and I for one don't want to catch it. Did you know that governments go by the premise that for every person who comments there are 5 others who have the same opinion but say nothing? All of you just told the government that they can indeed practice patronage without consequences of any significance. Congratulations. I can't be proud to be from PEI so I'll be leaving as will many others who look at this and know they can't raise their children here.
-
- Old Tory
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:12:08
Hundreds of Tories have been replaced by the Ghiz regime and you don't hear a squeak about it. You can be certain, however, when this bunch is turfed after one term and their cronies get replaced by Tories, the human rights cases will start all over again. These liberal lawyers, who abuse the legal system for their own gain, should be disbarred by the law society. There is no way the taxpayers of PEI should pay the lawyers fees for this frivilous litigation which should have never been started, there never was a legal action to be had. There was never any political discrimination either, a conservative lost his/her job so MacTavish could have his.
-
- TO: 2 more cents
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:11:15
Really? Would you care then to explain Justice Campbell's statements below? The compensation MacTavish sought was a direct result of the Patronage!
In his decision, Justice Campbell said MacTavish mitigated his losses, adding that he earned considerably more in every year after the discrimination than he did before.
Justice Campbell writes: . . . it is my conclusion that MacTavish did not suffer any loss of wages or income as a result of the discrimination. -
- island taxpayer
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:11:05
This guy was 30 years old in 1996. You have got to be kidding me -- that being an asphalt raker was worth more than what Judge Campbell decreed?!?!?
I think that justice was served here. This guy wanted binding arbitration and $8,000 is what the claim was worth. Enough said.
It is high time for PEI to stop hiring people based on political connections as opposed to their qualifications. Do we hire doctors based on whether they are Liberal or PC?
I should certainly hope not.
Government is a pervasive force on this island and patronage makes it stink worse than the garbage on the streets of Toronto.
We need a professional civil service that is above cronyism. -
- non-patron and proud of i
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:10:09
This story proves a point that was drilled into my head by my father many years ago.
As a young islander 25 years ago, I remember looking at the summer job options and finding many jobs at minimum wage that required me to assume real responsibilities and to sacrifice (not unlike everyone else), and seasonal road work for higher wages. When I asked for some guidance and blessing to pursue the latter, I was told it was not an option. When I asked why?? , I was told because there is no future there (period, end of story).
To this day, I am so greatful for that guidance and the fact that I took the tougher road (pardon the pun) but in the end it was worth it. I am a tax payer in PEI adding to our collective well-being like we are suppose to do, and driving my kids towards the same path.
While seasonal jobs are important to our economy, and there is always a need for folks to take this work, the saddest part of this story is that Mr MacTavish seems to be leaving a legacy for his children that this way of life is what they should pursue too.
Heck if it's good enough for the old man, it's good enough for the young fella!
This is what has to change more than anything in PEI. There is only one person responsible for a persons position and situation. While friends, family, govts, church, etc help, its the individual who strikes their own path. Seems he struck his path many years ago, and he feels he is too far down that road to change. I doubt this is true, but even if it is, it ain't too late to focus the next generation down a better path.
Lead by example Mr MacTavish. Your kids deserve your best. -
- Don't believe the Hype
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:08:34
I bet that $59K + legal fees looks pretty good now. $59K would have to be close to 4 years salary for a seasonal asphalt raker.
And then to say on the news last night that you would just quit your job on go on social assistance. I hope if you do quit your job, you get neither Social assistance or EI. -
- JP
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:08:23
If I had any sympathy for this man then I would have lost it upon hearing his reaction to the news was to quit his job and declare bankruptcy again. I suppose if he doesn't get what he wants from taxpayers in a lump sum settlement he'll get it from us by sucking it from social assistance.
-
- Sam
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:08:09
Ok . Can we finally stop talking about this guy . The smirk on his face is considerably different than the one the day he walked out of court with visions of sugar plums dancing in his head . Reminds of that game show , Deal or No Deal , and watching people run up a potential wad of big money only for the last time announce No Deal Howey , then to lose most or all of it . Let me spell it out for you McLavish ..........GREED .
Quit work and starve
I can only imagine what he'll do next . I have a few ideas though . -
- Quick, sue!!!
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:06:16
That rail you are leaning on looks too low. Quick, sue the builder of the house immediately for shoddy workmanship. At the same time claim compensation for a sore back. Since you are quitting your job you will have plenty of time to do all this. Good luck.
-
- Live by
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:05:53
He obviously had Mickey Burge type numbers rolling around in his head....Forgetting that Mickey had a business and didn't rake asphalt for 12 weeks a year.
Two adult children living at home still, what do they say about the apple falling? Now taxpayers can look after all four of them.!!! -
- Joesph
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:03:12
I wrote a comment earlier that wasn't posted, maybe I was a little harsh.
I find it very difficult to have any sympathy for him after witnessing what I saw on Compass and reading in The Guardian I'm going to quit my job and file for bankruptcy . He stated his nerves are shot - well a lot of other peoples nerves, and they get help for that. Your mental health affects you as a whole. I can't understand why he can't get help for his nerves and pick up the pieces again, he's young enough to start over. When life hands you lemons make lemonade (or a margarita!)
He has a wife and two adult children - why can't he turn to them to get jobs and help the family out? It appears he is the only on ethat works, because no story mentions the rest of them working. All four people in that family can be working to get back on their feet. I guess its just easier to sit on your a$$ and collect social assistance. Maybe I'll quit my job and do the same. -
- joe
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:02:58
Man quits his job then expects the taxpayer to look after him,this better not happen.
-
- LA
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:01:41
WHY does he keep going on about this in the news when it's obvious everybody thinks he's foolish??
-
- RED
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:58:53
Justice was 110% served.
I never thought, I'd ever agree with Gordon Campbell, but he did get this right on the money.
Pardon the pun! -
- dan
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:58:51
Unfortunately, the taxpayers are on the hook for more with this guy every day. We're paying him welfare because he just doesn't want to have to work. I hope the provincial government denies his welfare claim. He could work.
$8,000 is about 4 times what he deserved.
He should have to reimburse the taxpayers for the welfare he's received, and for the taxes we'll pay for his frivolous lawsuit in the supreme court. -
- Fed Up
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:58:49
This should not come as a surprise to Mr. Mactavish. I'm sure his lawyer informed him of all aspects of the case including the possibility of losing. Any lawsuit is a calculated gamble with consequences if you loose. Nothing is hidden! It's obvious that he thought he was entitled to more money then he was offered and declined their offer. I don't think he is entitled to anything. If you loose your job because of politics, then it's probably because you got the job the same way. I have little sympathy for him. Score one for the taxpayers of P.E.I.
-
- M
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:57:00
Well done Justice system.. He was offer a good settlement ages ago and said no, he was offer his job back and even turned it down. I don't know who filled you you head with high hopes.. all the others settled out of court but you got greedy and we all saw it but you.. I hear the Guardian is looking for paperboys... welcome back to the real world
-
- Chris S
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:56:55
Alot of high and mighty people in this room.
-
- wog
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:56:39
He was offered $60,000 and decided to take his chances with a huge legal bill hanging over his shoulder. He gambled...and lost. He should have realized this could have been a possibility from the outset.
As far as not knowing where to turn, well...the job market is always available, such as it is, it seems to work for most of us. -
- Justice has been served
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:55:25
It is about time the court made a proper ruling. Mr. MacTavish got what he deserved, actually probably more.
-
- 2 more cents
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:54:08
Trevor Leclerc: This case was about compensation only. It has nothing to do with anyone's Charter of Rights or arguments of legal principles.
As mentioned in the article John MacTavish of Montague had already proven to the courts that he was a victim of political discrimination.
Not wanting John MacTavish to get more free money from tax payers is not an endorsement of patronage - quite the opposite. -
- Hard
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:53:31
He has 2 things to blame poor legal representation and a poor work ethic on his own part......His nerves are shot....because he did not get $300,000 well I never won the 9 million the other night but my nerves are still intact............ NERVES=LAZINESS+social assistance....
-
- Trevor
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:52:58
An opportunity to end a practice that would be considered unacceptable anywhere in this county but here has slipped out of our grasp. People here will continue to get jobs and lose jobs based on how they voted in this province. The really disturbing part is by the comments above Islanders like it that way and resent any attempt to end that CORRUPT practice (Only here does everyone know how everyone else votes and it determines your access to jobs. Disgraceful.
-
- To Trevor LeClerc
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:52:58
Thank You! My Sentiments Exactly! And I am an Islander! And don't be surprised if your stoned for voicing the same. I was on the CBC Site!
You would think Islanders would be ashamed to admit they endorsed Patronage but on PEI it's a practice that is accepted and worse EXPECTED!
On PEI Qualifications and Experience are two prerequisites that are not required for positions with Goverment! I have to wonder if they are required for our Provincial or Federal Leaders? And I also wonder how many applications and resumes our Provincial Goverment have on file?
I was hoping beyond hope that the publicity regarding Mr. MacTavish's situation might be the lightning rod that would jolt Patronage out of existence! Sadly it seems to have had the opposite affect! Apparently Islanders are not ashamed to admit they received positions due to their political stripe and loyalty!!!! I find that at best SHOCKING!
And Disgusting for sure and then some!
Spudgal -
- Antigua Sam
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:52:51
Wow! Votes for judgement - 63. Votes against judgement -0.
I think that says it all! -
- And we wonder
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:50:50
Why our young people aren't interested in Politics or voting???
Wonder no more! -
- them's the risks
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:49:17
The best advice I can glean from the case and all of the above posts - if you are not a politician, don't look for loads of taxpayers dollars. Or, if you do,be sure and have a few close friends in high places first.
I feel it was a bit unfair for him to get his hopes built up only to be dumped like this.
Live by the sword, die by the sword - well, this may be news but he was not respponible for the letting go of the guy who had the job ahead of him. That was purely politics and, obviously, this man is not a politician. You can pretty well tell that by the miniscule award he received.
And the fact that he received much, much less than the original offer of 59,000 is a bit hard to figure. If his case was worth 59,000 a while back why is it so much less worthy now ? I don't agree with his outlook on life but that doesn't mean I agree with this miniscule award either. As for the voting angle Trevor L mentions, that, too, is a mystery. Do a lot of these people go around telling everybody how they voted which can mean the holding onto or the loss of a job depending upon which political party is voted into power ? They must reveal their political leanings in some kind of way.
Mr. McTavish, if you currently hold a job then my advice would be to keep it. And I am forced to agree that if there are four adults in your home then there should be no problem in your family being self-supporting -
- Wilson
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:46:55
I can't be proud to be from PEI so I'll be leaving as will many others who look at this and know they can't raise their children here
Hurry up and leave!! -
- brian
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:46:44
why should us taxpayers keep paying for political patronage. my question would be whose job did he take when thegovernment changed.
-
- Plain
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:46:08
I thought the verdict was a bit harsh. I don't entirely agree with the judge's sentiments that patronage is essentially a thing of the past. Still around I'm afraid.
But this guy should have taken the $59K plus legal costs with both hands so he has only himself to blame. I wonder if his lawyer advised him not to accept what was a generous offer. I understand why most people have no sympathy for the guy. Then, there's the comment about going on welfare. Mmmm. Maybe it was the right verdict after all. -
- To Trevor
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:45:53
He's trying to END THAT CORRUPT PRACTICE????? No!! He's trying to make someone else pay when the corrupt practice is not working for HIM now. lol lol How did he get the job in the first place? I was a dancing in the shower when I heard this on the news this morning!
I'm in agreement with just about everyone here. Good! End of story..........get a job, like the rest of us.
IF it doesn't pay those high wages, work more hours! -
- bob
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:43:35
I say well done the government does not owe anyone a job.It is our responsibility to find work.As we all know anyone of us could be out of work at anytime .Look at the auto industry who would ever think that they would be filing for bankruptcy.So I say get a job and move on with your life.
-
- Amazed by Comments
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:43:04
I am stunned and deeply saddened by the degree of judgements cast by all those in this forum. While I am not a religious person, I do believe most Islanders align to some form of Christian religion that denotes those without sin be the first to cast a stone. Regardless of this man's circumstances, none of us has the right to judge his character. Whatever happened to the kindness and neighborly ways of Islanders? If I were from outside the province reading this paper and stumbled upon these remarks, I would never ever visit the place based on the cruelty of its people toward each other!
-
- Glen
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:39:43
Now I can appreciate more than anyone that Trevor Leclerc used his real name,but I have to disagree with him on patronage being soley an island issue.It runs rampent all over,and it is not something that I forsee ever being eradicated.It is the back bone of politics.Lobyists could also be called Patronage Brokers and Ottawa is full of them.I really dont know what the Supreme Court would have to say about patronage,considering it's the main tool that placed them all there.The trouble with this small island is that patronage is just more transparent.When handled the way it's supposed to,it is fair and just.Your party goes in,I start looking for a job grading potatoes,etc.When my party comes back,I expect that I get the oppurtinity to get off the grading line and into the D.O.T truck.Without it,party purses grow poor,and alot of people lose interest.It is the way it always WORKed(By the way Mr.MacTavish,if you enjoyed raking asphalt so much,there's always been a demand in the private sector!Per hour rate is a little less,but you more than make up for it with the much longer hours!!)And besides,whoever brought fairness into all this?Definately not Pat Binns and Mike Currie who classified the jobs of all their supporters and signed all their hand picked contactors to long term contracts only weeks before the last election.But it is truly sad that people like Binns,Currie,Mr.MacTavish and his 13 other buddies,Mr.Dowling,Mickey Burge and Larry MacGuire have done such damage to a system that ran so smoothly in the past.I am happy that justice prevailed in this case.$300,000 for a man that ran a government owned rake?It's just downright silly to be using Mickey Burge as a case to compare to,as the man owned equipment and cut paycheques in his community.Unfortunately,Burge didn't want to play by the rules either,and as someone else on here said,he too reduced himself to zero in the eyes of his peers .Good luck Mr Leclerc on your attempt to purge patronage from the system!I look forward to reading some editorials in the paper about your progress with that.As long as there's people who know people in government,patronage will persist
-
- Matt
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:38:50
Just to get this right, I do not feel high and mighty, but like most people, I go to work every day to support my family. Again like most people we face hard times, but I do not quit my job and look for the government to support me. I would love to see EI look at this guy and say nope you had a job and quit, your on you own.
-
- JP
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:38:44
wow!! can you believe this guy!! it's amazing what pure greed can do to a person. well he deserved everything he got and gets. judging by the negative comments that i have read about him, i would not want to be mr. mactavish walking down the street. and the lawyer who represented him, well how does he feel now to hear that mr. mactavish is thinking of quitting his job and filing for bankrupcy. oh my the lawyer and mr. mactavish made alot of stupid decisions in this case and now they are paying for it!! thumbs up for the justice department!! oh, just a reminder to the social services dept.-- think twice when you see this man walk in your doors looking for help. he is just looking for the other $292,000 that he didn't get.
-
- paperboy
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:37:50
this is the results i hoped for, garnish his pay to collect the legal fee's now!
-
- Gerry
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:37:24
Justice works both ways, and it should. The audacity to turn down the $59,000 when others received far less, for a political patronage job, is beyond comprehension. As for proving to the court that he was Victim of political discrimination, I beg to differ. People who choose to gamble with political patronage soon come to the realization that their luck has run out. A lesson to all those folks out there who think government owes them, have some dignity and earn your way in life as most do.
-
- RG
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:35:39
That's what you get for being greedy. If he would've taken the more than generous offer of 59,000, he'd be sitting pretty.
He's the one who wanted to take it further, which is why his court costs are so high.
Whatever happened to I'll accept whatever the judge decides is fair ? I guess that was a lie when he stated that in previous article quotes.
