They found the university had adopted such an entrenched position from the start that it had failed to ever consider a compromise.
The attempt by RA to resolve this is well-documented and we can only assume that Folau was satisfied with that process enough to sign a new contract.
Folau's signature is the difference. He accepted benefits with obligations.
If those obligations were an affront, he decided at the time, that it was worth it.
Responses
« Back to index | View thread »