News: All new forum theme!  See Forum Announcements for more information. 

  • February 01, 2015, 12:44:57 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 1535026 times)

1 Member and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Browyn

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 756
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7140 on: January 27, 2015, 10:39:54 AM »
That reminds me of when I was preparing to leave my job as a secretary for a better job.  My boss, suddenly realizing that he had no idea what I did, asked me to type up a "Shalamar's Job Guide for Dummies" type of list.   His eyes bulged when I handed him a multi-page document.  "You do all this?"  "Yup."

I did that once, I put together a binder "How did Browyn do that?"  I was leaving for a new job in the same organization so I wanted to reduce the helpless phone calls I would get.

o_gal

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 660
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7141 on: January 27, 2015, 01:26:37 PM »
Note to future PD candidates: if you're going to deal (and partake of) drugs, don't do it on company property.  Especially don't do it on property that is behind guarded gates, requires special privileges to access, and is under continuous video monitoring.

Or is a US Air Force base. Bonus points for getting teenagers involved to help run your drugs. Should have been said to the woman who briefly had the office next to me.

Softly Spoken

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 688
  • "I am a hawk on a cliff..."
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7142 on: January 27, 2015, 03:03:27 PM »
Note to future PD candidates: if you're going to deal (and partake of) drugs, don't do it on company property.  Especially don't do it on property that is behind guarded gates, requires special privileges to access, and is under continuous video monitoring.

And while we're at it, gifting your fellow coworkers with company vouchers for free stuff is a nice reward system that we have. Taking lots of company vouchers without permission or management approval is still not okay even if you spread them around to your fellow coworkers (a little group that kept it to themselves), and it will get you all fired.
...Do you by chance work for a certain airplane manufacturer? Because my brother does and he just told me about a similar incident - the company pinged on the racket when a group went from about 1 voucher awarded to each person every month to hundreds :o. The greedy ones always get caught. ::)
"... for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."
-William Shakespeare

"We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't."  ~Frank A. Clark

lilfox

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1916
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7143 on: January 27, 2015, 05:34:56 PM »
Note to future PD candidates: if you're going to deal (and partake of) drugs, don't do it on company property.  Especially don't do it on property that is behind guarded gates, requires special privileges to access, and is under continuous video monitoring.

And while we're at it, gifting your fellow coworkers with company vouchers for free stuff is a nice reward system that we have. Taking lots of company vouchers without permission or management approval is still not okay even if you spread them around to your fellow coworkers (a little group that kept it to themselves), and it will get you all fired.
...Do you by chance work for a certain airplane manufacturer? Because my brother does and he just told me about a similar incident - the company pinged on the racket when a group went from about 1 voucher awarded to each person every month to hundreds :o. The greedy ones always get caught. ::)

 ;)  I think this happens every few years, too.

For extra amusement, when interviewed by investigators, it sounds like they went with the George Costanza defense - "Was that wrong?  Because I gotta plead ignorance here."

Peppergirl

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 576
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7144 on: January 28, 2015, 04:40:00 AM »
Unfortunately when you give group talks about one particular problematic employee's behaviour, if they're bad/incompetent enough they won't even realise the talk is about them and it will glide right over their heads. (Too incompetent to recognise their own incompetence). Meanwhile the conscientious workers will be racking their brains trying to figure out if it's them that is being talked to/about.

Yup. Or the good ones will be monumentally annoyed that they have to put up with a lecture because of someone else's incompetence. The school my ex teaches at sends out generic scolding e-mails on a regular basis and it really bugs her.

This.  We used to have one problem employee who consistently abused the generous policy that we had...the fact that we were allowed to text/play with our phones on the clock, during down time provided you kept it silenced. This is call center work.

We all abided, except for one - whose phone was constantly beeping, ringing, etc.  Even when talking to customers.  We all had to be subjected to emails about cell phone usage, all knowing dingdangity well it was about this one employee, who just didnt get it (or didnt care) that it was about her.

She eventually got fired for something unrelated, but it was annoying as hell...and made us so mad that she darned near got the (what we considered to be a super- generous) policy revoked for all of us. 

Ceallach

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4875
    • This Is It
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7145 on: January 28, 2015, 05:40:28 AM »
Re managers understanding what the frontline do, one thing I love about my company is that the founders initially started out doing the "frontline" job, then as we grew they hired the next tier and so on.    The managers have literally all done the frontline job themselves.   So when I empathise with our frontline staff about their challenges they know it's sincere and that I do get it.    I think as we get bigger it may become more common for people to come in without that frontline experience (specialist managers etc) but I am going to make it a priority that they connect with the frontline regardless.

Actually, one of the managers has sort of committed PD.... despite coming from the frontline herself she has showed absolutely no empathy for her staff, treating them like disposable resources and not giving them any nurturing or mentoring in their roles, and being super critical of them.  Instead of understanding their position she's taken the stance of "I did it so it's not that hard, they should get over it".     They're all miserable and anxious and making mistakes, despite having plenty of resources and training.  Fortunately I've come off maternity leave in time to fix it (I have good relationships with the affected staff as they were mine years back) and our board of directors has had a come to deity meeting with her and agreed the job isn't for her and she needs to move on.   Fingers crossed sooner rather than later.    It's sad though when somebody forgets where they came from.   Our founder commented that being a manager seems to have "gone to her head".    We gave her lots of support but she just seemed to change her whole perspective on everything as soon as she had the manager title.   It turns out things that she was agreeing with us to do weren't happening or weren't getting filtered down to the staff properly.    (And yes, we feel responsible too for not realising sooner what was happening). 
"Nobody can do everything, but everybody can do something"


pierrotlunaire0

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4388
  • I'm the cat's aunt!
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7146 on: January 29, 2015, 04:35:59 PM »
Say a manager goes out on a medical leave, and an assistant manager fills in.  The medical leave gets extended, and gets extended.  Assistant manager ends up running the office for a little over a year.  Not only does the assistant manager do a good job: overall office performance improves dramatically.  Production rates go up, and customer complaints for this particular office fall to an all time low.  Staff morale is high.

Then the manager decides that they will not come back.  Instead manager decides to formally retire, at which point OHR can finally post the position.

There were 2 assistant managers (not the one who ran the office for a year) who become mighty peeved that do not get the job.  The person who ran the office become the new official manager.  How can that be?  Can't upper management see how superior either one of them is to the guy who got it?

Well, to begin with, the 2 rejected candidates were offered the temporary position, but both rejected it.  They didn't want a temporary posting, they wanted a permanent one.  Successful guy, in effect, paid his dues and helped out the department when they needed it.

Secondly, Successful Guy proved himself worthy in the best place possible: the actual position.  He made great strides, and the staff loves him.  You don't destroy what is working.

The 2 rejectees have made a name for themselves as candidates whose opinion of themselves is inflated.  Last round of job openings did not go well for them as well.  Gee, I wonder why?
I have enough lithium in my medicine cabinet to power three cars across a sizeable desert.  Which makes me officially...Three Cars Crazy

guihong

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6667
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7147 on: January 30, 2015, 12:20:57 AM »
I nominate the two 16 year old baggers who shoplifted beer right out of their own store, got caught, prosecuted, and obviously fired  ::).

The only good thing is that DD16 could probably get a job with Mom :).



TeamBhakta

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2719
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7148 on: January 30, 2015, 12:38:12 AM »
I nominate the transit authorities saying it was unnecessary for passengers to kick out windows, after their train filled with smoke and the doors wouldn't open from the inside or outside. The authorities insist there was no smoke. Someone in the comment section claimed to have been on the train

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2015/01/29/mbta-red-line-train-windows-kicked-out/
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 12:39:45 AM by TeamBhakta »

kglory

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 953
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7149 on: January 30, 2015, 02:25:59 AM »
I nominate the transit authorities saying it was unnecessary for passengers to kick out windows, after their train filled with smoke and the doors wouldn't open from the inside or outside. The authorities insist there was no smoke. Someone in the comment section claimed to have been on the train

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2015/01/29/mbta-red-line-train-windows-kicked-out/

This recently happened where I live in DC, minus the kicked out windows.

A woman died.  And 80+ were hospitalized.

If anyone from Boston heard that story, I don't blame them for kicking out the windows when the same thing started happening to them!

jmarvellous

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3716
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7150 on: January 30, 2015, 08:28:56 AM »
A friend of a friend was in the car in front of them and reports it was "scary" and didn't seem to doubt that there was smoke at all.

Lady Snowdon

  • Super cool awesome title
  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6102
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #7151 on: January 30, 2015, 11:05:21 PM »
A couple of weeks ago, we hired a new front desk person solely to answer calls.  She trained for a week with another front desk person and they apparently became BFF's.  The next week, when they were at separate locations, one called the other and they spent hours on the phone instead of answering the phone calls coming in!  The new person has been fired, the other front desk person is pouting and mad at the world because she's on a performance management plan and doesn't understand why what she did is a problem.