News:

  • April 23, 2018, 08:45:28 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 4209172 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

ladyknight1

  • Member
  • Posts: 12201
  • Not all those who wander are lost
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11640 on: January 31, 2018, 09:52:43 PM »
This is more of a work pet peeve than PD, but the people responsible are no longer employees or managers of the organization where I work.

Long, long ago, I started working for my boss, and she had a boss that frequently oversaw my work/schedule/etc. That boss decided that I could not take classes, or do homework, on my lunch break. She decided my hour lunch break for being scheduled 9 hours was too long, and I should only take half hour and two scheduled breaks. I was never a shift worker, with a set schedule for breaks, and no one relieved me. HR had to intervene to set her straight on that.

Another colleague, and the site director for his location, had a dispute over certain staff being allowed to leave property on their lunch breaks, but IT staff was not allowed to do so. It turned into a huge issue, and the director was eventually called to the highest office over it.

Both the first and second bosses are now retired, and it's probably for the best.
ďAll that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost."
-J.R.R Tolkien

Aleko

  • Member
  • Posts: 142
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11641 on: February 01, 2018, 03:43:21 AM »
Quote
I totally believe this story, and it is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.  Enforced medical leave (for public safety) is not the same as absenteeism!

No, it's actually not stupid at all. Many organisations have an obligatory management procedure which must be carried out for any single absence above a given length of time, or for repeated short absences. For example, the employee's line manager has to have a formal meeting with them to discuss the issue and write a report on it. (Till recently I worked for a British public service organisation, and my team leader agreed she felt a perfect fool solemnly sitting down with every successive team member as they staggered back to the office after 4 or 5 days off with that winter's flu, to "discuss the issue" and "resolve" it; but that was the rule and it had to be done.)

It's not an unreasonable policy, however. It means that a manager doesn't have to make a judgement call - 'Is Warren just taking the p***?' before talking to him about his frequent Monday absences; nor can Warren scream 'Victimisation!'. Also, as we all know, people with serious health or family problems are often in denial, or hoping that their absences aren't too noticeable and 'least said, soonest mended', and it just doesn't occur to them to that if they only discussed the issue frankly with their manager there might be a work-around that would help everyone.

Plus, when as in Mr Sirius's case someone comes back after a major illness or serious surgery, they may well need adjustments to their working pattern and / or workstation; and the meeting is the place to discuss this and record in the report anything they require - e.g. shorter hours or longer breaks for an initial period, a special chair or PC monitor, whatever. No, I'm not seeing anything stupid about this story at all.

Harriet Jones

  • Member
  • Posts: 8854
  • Yes, we know who you are.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11642 on: February 01, 2018, 05:31:55 AM »
Quote
I totally believe this story, and it is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.  Enforced medical leave (for public safety) is not the same as absenteeism!

No, it's actually not stupid at all. Many organisations have an obligatory management procedure which must be carried out for any single absence above a given length of time, or for repeated short absences. For example, the employee's line manager has to have a formal meeting with them to discuss the issue and write a report on it. (Till recently I worked for a British public service organisation, and my team leader agreed she felt a perfect fool solemnly sitting down with every successive team member as they staggered back to the office after 4 or 5 days off with that winter's flu, to "discuss the issue" and "resolve" it; but that was the rule and it had to be done.)

It's not an unreasonable policy, however. It means that a manager doesn't have to make a judgement call - 'Is Warren just taking the p***?' before talking to him about his frequent Monday absences; nor can Warren scream 'Victimisation!'. Also, as we all know, people with serious health or family problems are often in denial, or hoping that their absences aren't too noticeable and 'least said, soonest mended', and it just doesn't occur to them to that if they only discussed the issue frankly with their manager there might be a work-around that would help everyone.

Plus, when as in Mr Sirius's case someone comes back after a major illness or serious surgery, they may well need adjustments to their working pattern and / or workstation; and the meeting is the place to discuss this and record in the report anything they require - e.g. shorter hours or longer breaks for an initial period, a special chair or PC monitor, whatever. No, I'm not seeing anything stupid about this story at all.

No, it is ridiculous. Her husband had a documented medical condition, he wasn't calling out because he had a hangover for 3 months.  It would be fine if they just had to note it in their records, but he should not get a bad performance review because of it.

GreenHall

  • Member
  • Posts: 950
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11643 on: February 01, 2018, 07:42:10 AM »
Quote
I totally believe this story, and it is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.  Enforced medical leave (for public safety) is not the same as absenteeism!

No, it's actually not stupid at all. Many organisations have an obligatory management procedure which must be carried out for any single absence above a given length of time, or for repeated short absences. For example, the employee's line manager has to have a formal meeting with them to discuss the issue and write a report on it. (Till recently I worked for a British public service organisation, and my team leader agreed she felt a perfect fool solemnly sitting down with every successive team member as they staggered back to the office after 4 or 5 days off with that winter's flu, to "discuss the issue" and "resolve" it; but that was the rule and it had to be done.)

It's not an unreasonable policy, however. It means that a manager doesn't have to make a judgement call - 'Is Warren just taking the p***?' before talking to him about his frequent Monday absences; nor can Warren scream 'Victimisation!'. Also, as we all know, people with serious health or family problems are often in denial, or hoping that their absences aren't too noticeable and 'least said, soonest mended', and it just doesn't occur to them to that if they only discussed the issue frankly with their manager there might be a work-around that would help everyone.

Plus, when as in Mr Sirius's case someone comes back after a major illness or serious surgery, they may well need adjustments to their working pattern and / or workstation; and the meeting is the place to discuss this and record in the report anything they require - e.g. shorter hours or longer breaks for an initial period, a special chair or PC monitor, whatever. No, I'm not seeing anything stupid about this story at all.

No, it is ridiculous. Her husband had a documented medical condition, he wasn't calling out because he had a hangover for 3 months.  It would be fine if they just had to note it in their records, but he should not get a bad performance review because of it.
Just add a line to the absenteeism form, or whatever that you check off - "Employee is on Medical Leave". Boom, it's been 'discussed' as far as it needs to.

Margo

  • Member
  • Posts: 2185
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11644 on: February 01, 2018, 08:11:13 AM »
Quote
I totally believe this story, and it is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.  Enforced medical leave (for public safety) is not the same as absenteeism!

No, it's actually not stupid at all. Many organisations have an obligatory management procedure which must be carried out for any single absence above a given length of time, or for repeated short absences. For example, the employee's line manager has to have a formal meeting with them to discuss the issue and write a report on it. (Till recently I worked for a British public service organisation, and my team leader agreed she felt a perfect fool solemnly sitting down with every successive team member as they staggered back to the office after 4 or 5 days off with that winter's flu, to "discuss the issue" and "resolve" it; but that was the rule and it had to be done.)

It's not an unreasonable policy, however. It means that a manager doesn't have to make a judgement call - 'Is Warren just taking the p***?' before talking to him about his frequent Monday absences; nor can Warren scream 'Victimisation!'. Also, as we all know, people with serious health or family problems are often in denial, or hoping that their absences aren't too noticeable and 'least said, soonest mended', and it just doesn't occur to them to that if they only discussed the issue frankly with their manager there might be a work-around that would help everyone.

Plus, when as in Mr Sirius's case someone comes back after a major illness or serious surgery, they may well need adjustments to their working pattern and / or workstation; and the meeting is the place to discuss this and record in the report anything they require - e.g. shorter hours or longer breaks for an initial period, a special chair or PC monitor, whatever. No, I'm not seeing anything stupid about this story at all.

Having a policy requiring that absences are documented isn't stupid, and having back-to-work meetings with people who have been off for extended periods isn't stupid. However, having a policy which means that someone is automatically written up because they have been off sick is ridiculous. In my experience, while it is not uncommon for organisations to have policies which treat sickness as a (potential) disciplinary issue, it is usually on the basis that it reflects patterns of absence - so one absence of 2 weeks because you've been hospitalised wouldn't trigger disciplinary action, but 5 absences of 2 days each might.
Which makes a lot of sense, as anyone may have a one-off illness or accident, but if you are regularly or frequently off, there  may be underlying issues (either in relation to your health, or because you are trying to play the system) in which case the employer needs to look into it to consider appropriate support, disciplinary action or ultimately whether you are still capable of doing the job.

MrTango

  • Member
  • Posts: 2879
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11645 on: February 01, 2018, 08:55:05 AM »
This is more of a work pet peeve than PD, but the people responsible are no longer employees or managers of the organization where I work.

Long, long ago, I started working for my boss, and she had a boss that frequently oversaw my work/schedule/etc. That boss decided that I could not take classes, or do homework, on my lunch break. She decided my hour lunch break for being scheduled 9 hours was too long, and I should only take half hour and two scheduled breaks. I was never a shift worker, with a set schedule for breaks, and no one relieved me. HR had to intervene to set her straight on that.

Another colleague, and the site director for his location, had a dispute over certain staff being allowed to leave property on their lunch breaks, but IT staff was not allowed to do so. It turned into a huge issue, and the director was eventually called to the highest office over it.

Both the first and second bosses are now retired, and it's probably for the best.

If my employer were to require me to be on-site during my lunch breaks, then I'd be adding that time to my timecard.  You require me to be in a particular place during a particular time, then you're paying me for that time.

Twik

  • Member
  • Posts: 29026
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11646 on: February 01, 2018, 09:48:24 AM »
And somewhat akin to Goldilocks' tale, may I present the sports talk radio show host who called the five-year-old daughter of the local team's quarterback - on air - an 'annoying little pissant'.  Said quarterback is a regular caller into the station to talk football with the hosts.  For years.

The host is now on suspension.

Who does that?!

Someone who's trying to make a name as a "shock jock," I guess. "I'm tough and macho and not politically correct! I'll even attack five-year-old girls!"
"The sky's the limit. Your sky. Your limit. Now, let's dance!"

Shalamar

  • Member
  • Posts: 366
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11647 on: February 01, 2018, 10:36:01 AM »
Quote
She was dinged on her annual review for being "unavailable" or some such stupid nonsense.

I had something similar happen in my old job.  (If this story sounds familiar, you might have seen it on "Not Always Working"!)

I had recently returned to work after a 6-month maternity leave (which was the law in Canada at that time.  Nowadays, it's a full year).  I had my performance review.

Supervisor:  Your work was excellent, but you won't be getting a raise.
Me:  May I ask why?
Supervisor:  Well, you were gone for six months. 
Me:  Yes ... because I had a baby.
Supervisor:  Even so, it wouldn't be fair to give you a raise when you were only here for half the year.
Me:  Let me get this straight - if I'd been here for the full year and done mediocre work, I'd have a better chance of getting a raise?
Supervisor:  Well ... um ... probably.
Me: ...

(I started looking for another job after that.)

TracyXJ

  • Member
  • Posts: 406
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11648 on: February 01, 2018, 12:17:01 PM »
This is more of a work pet peeve than PD, but the people responsible are no longer employees or managers of the organization where I work.

Long, long ago, I started working for my boss, and she had a boss that frequently oversaw my work/schedule/etc. That boss decided that I could not take classes, or do homework, on my lunch break. She decided my hour lunch break for being scheduled 9 hours was too long, and I should only take half hour and two scheduled breaks. I was never a shift worker, with a set schedule for breaks, and no one relieved me. HR had to intervene to set her straight on that.

Another colleague, and the site director for his location, had a dispute over certain staff being allowed to leave property on their lunch breaks, but IT staff was not allowed to do so. It turned into a huge issue, and the director was eventually called to the highest office over it.

Both the first and second bosses are now retired, and it's probably for the best.

If my employer were to require me to be on-site during my lunch breaks, then I'd be adding that time to my timecard.  You require me to be in a particular place during a particular time, then you're paying me for that time.

Had a supervisor that tried to plan departmental meetings during our hour lunch break.  He wouldn't allow us to charge time for it and refused to pay lunch as it wasn't in the budget.  He was shocked and dismayed that there was so little attendance at these meetings. 

Shalamar

  • Member
  • Posts: 366
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11649 on: February 01, 2018, 12:32:13 PM »
I used to have a supervisor who always had his weekly "how's everyone doing" meetings at 10:30.   No problem there, but they were only supposed to last 1 hour, and they always, ALWAYS ran overtime.  We'd usually still be sitting there at 12:00 or 12:30 while someone blathered on and on about something that only he and maybe one other person in the room cared about. 

siamesecat2965

  • Member
  • Posts: 9294
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11650 on: February 01, 2018, 02:36:52 PM »
Almost committed a bit of PD myself today. we get an industry trade publication daily. Via email to all who want it, plus a site license where its posted on our internal website. Its VERY expensive. and my job is to handle the renewal of the contract. in the past, even though the license expired on x date, we had wiggle room, nad our former, now retired rep, would 'adjust" if he knew it was in the works.

So our new rep has sent me several emails, but through a combo of procrastination and other more pressing projects, i hadn't done it yet. So today, he tells me it will expire today, and they no longer can manually "adjust" oh poop. and our contract procedure is it goes to legal for review, then several other depst, than back to me where i get my director to sign off on it.

oh boy. this could take a couple of days, and WHY didn't i start it sooner?

well, i told the rep hey, it may be a couple of days, its in process, which it was. he was ok with that, and agreed to email me the publication, in the interim, knowing i was going to get it to him in a day or so.

well, the legal person, who is notorious for taking her sweet time, got it reviewed, routed, and back to me i 2 hours. probably helped it was more of a PO than contract. i then sent it to the vendor.

while i wouldn't have gotten fired over this, ther would have been repercussions. i was sick to my stomach thinking about it. but now all is well. Whew.

and i most certainly have learned my lesson! Next year? It will be done early!

Sirius

  • Member
  • Posts: 9071
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11651 on: February 01, 2018, 02:43:37 PM »
A wonderful boss I had years ago would provide food for meetings outside of work hours, paying for the food out of her own pocket.  Granted, not every boss can afford this, but she could and did.  She'd also send out for pizzas for everyone if we had to work late to get ready for an inspection.  In this case she'd accept donations from the rest of us.  Wish I still worked for her, but she did such a good job getting our record section on track that she was transferred to a record section that badly needed help.   

TracyXJ

  • Member
  • Posts: 406
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11652 on: February 01, 2018, 02:53:55 PM »
Almost committed a bit of PD myself today. we get an industry trade publication daily. Via email to all who want it, plus a site license where its posted on our internal website. Its VERY expensive. and my job is to handle the renewal of the contract. in the past, even though the license expired on x date, we had wiggle room, nad our former, now retired rep, would 'adjust" if he knew it was in the works.

So our new rep has sent me several emails, but through a combo of procrastination and other more pressing projects, i hadn't done it yet. So today, he tells me it will expire today, and they no longer can manually "adjust" oh poop. and our contract procedure is it goes to legal for review, then several other depst, than back to me where i get my director to sign off on it.

oh boy. this could take a couple of days, and WHY didn't i start it sooner?

well, i told the rep hey, it may be a couple of days, its in process, which it was. he was ok with that, and agreed to email me the publication, in the interim, knowing i was going to get it to him in a day or so.

well, the legal person, who is notorious for taking her sweet time, got it reviewed, routed, and back to me i 2 hours. probably helped it was more of a PO than contract. i then sent it to the vendor.

while i wouldn't have gotten fired over this, ther would have been repercussions. i was sick to my stomach thinking about it. but now all is well. Whew.

and i most certainly have learned my lesson! Next year? It will be done early!

Put a reminder in your calendar!  Those things are life savers for me!

Shalamar

  • Member
  • Posts: 366
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11653 on: February 01, 2018, 04:58:52 PM »
Ooh, that reminds me of what happened to me about 3 years ago. 

Boss:  Did you do (annual task that I've been doing for the last 10 years, so I have no excuse)?
Me:  ... oh boy.  No.
Boss:  What?  You should have at least started it by now!    It's due tomorrow!
Me:  Agh!  *starts task, somehow manages to get it done on time*
Boss:  Sooo, what have we learned?
Me:  Set a reminder in my calendar for next year, 3 weeks before the deadline.
Boss:  Attagirl.

jedikaiti

  • Swiss Army Nerd
  • Member
  • Posts: 2886
  • A pie in the hand is worth two in the mail.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11654 on: February 01, 2018, 07:14:33 PM »
Almost committed a bit of PD myself today. we get an industry trade publication daily. Via email to all who want it, plus a site license where its posted on our internal website. Its VERY expensive. and my job is to handle the renewal of the contract. in the past, even though the license expired on x date, we had wiggle room, nad our former, now retired rep, would 'adjust" if he knew it was in the works.

So our new rep has sent me several emails, but through a combo of procrastination and other more pressing projects, i hadn't done it yet. So today, he tells me it will expire today, and they no longer can manually "adjust" oh poop. and our contract procedure is it goes to legal for review, then several other depst, than back to me where i get my director to sign off on it.

oh boy. this could take a couple of days, and WHY didn't i start it sooner?

well, i told the rep hey, it may be a couple of days, its in process, which it was. he was ok with that, and agreed to email me the publication, in the interim, knowing i was going to get it to him in a day or so.

well, the legal person, who is notorious for taking her sweet time, got it reviewed, routed, and back to me i 2 hours. probably helped it was more of a PO than contract. i then sent it to the vendor.

while i wouldn't have gotten fired over this, ther would have been repercussions. i was sick to my stomach thinking about it. but now all is well. Whew.

and i most certainly have learned my lesson! Next year? It will be done early!

Put a reminder on your calendar now!
What part of v_e = \sqrt{\frac{2GM}{r}} don't you understand? It's only rocket science!

"The problem with re-examining your brilliant ideas is that more often than not, you discover they are the intellectual equivalent of saying, 'Hold my beer and watch this!'" - Cindy Couture