Legal Aid - How come somebody with a good job qualifies

Status
Not open for further replies.
In the context of the article quoted, there is nothing misleading about the OP's title as the article didn't say he didn't have a job. If you have other information, perhaps you should share it.
 
In the context of the article quoted, there is nothing misleading about the OP's title as the article didn't say he didn't have a job. If you have other information, perhaps you should share it.
Does the article say that he HAS a good job, or did somebody rush to judge?
 
When I first heard the story I was surprised that a Fas executive or anyone employed by Fas could get legal aid. Would a Fas executive not be on a really good salary? What is a Fas executive?
 
What is a Fas executive?
It is a meaningless term, completely undefinable, and designed to incite bad feelings in their readers. If the article was complaining about public service pay, it would have referred to him as a FAS penpusher.
 
Does the article say that he HAS a good job, or did somebody rush to judge?

Nope - I didn't rush to judge! I am guessing that he is on a grade at least equivalent to an Administrative Officer/HEO and therefore on €60K - good money and therefore a good job in my book. Maybe not good money to you.

When I first heard the story I was surprised that a Fas executive or anyone employed by Fas could get legal aid. Would a Fas executive not be on a really good salary? What is a Fas executive?

Exactly my thoughts and where I was coming from! I didn't expect for the thread to be hijacked by a discussion about what constitutes a good job and/or an executive!

My understanding is that he was just as assistant manager, I wouldn't necessarily class that as an executive.

I agree not an executive but are you splitting hairs?!
 
Nope - I didn't rush to judge! I am guessing that he is on a grade at least equivalent to an Administrative Officer/HEO and therefore on €60K - good money and therefore a good job in my book. Maybe not good money to you.
The gentleman in question was fired earlier this year - see [broken link removed]. In assuming that was still employed by FAS (even though the article you read didn't actually say this), you did rush to judgement.
 
In the context of the article quoted, there is nothing misleading about the OP's title as the article didn't say he didn't have a job. If you have other information, perhaps you should share it.


The gentleman in question was fired earlier this year - see [broken link removed]. In assuming that was still employed by FAS (even though the article you read didn't actually say this), you did rush to judgement.


Great! So, you did have additional information! Thanks for sharing and caring! Don't suppose you know the salary scale of a FAS grade seven employee?
 
The truth is that there does not seem to be any info in the public domain as to whether this guy is truly broke. The prosecution made no objection to legal aid. Investigating the means of the accused is not by usually a top priority for the prosecution - though one would imagine it would me more important in a case involving alleged financial shenanigans. They may already have very satisfactory evidence that the accused requires free legal aid - we just don't know

Time for our lazy journalists to earn a crust on this one.......
 
Great! So, you did have additional information! Thanks for sharing and caring! Don't suppose you know the salary scale of a FAS grade seven employee?
What information I have isn't really relevant. What is important is to consider what information you had when you started the post. The article that you linked to did not state that he was still working for FAS, yet you seemed quite happy to jump to this conclusion. Strange that you still haven't bothered to correct your thread title.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top