Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 1329334 times)

2 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Margo

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1566
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5460 on: February 28, 2014, 05:02:25 AM »
'Mong' is short for 'mongol' so is an outdated and pejorative term for people with Downs Syndrome.

Both it and 'Spaz' are definitely very offensive here in the UK, I think an equivalent might be describing with physical disabilities as a cripple. They are not terms, here, which would be seen as 'outdated but part of normal vocabulary for the general population'  as opposed to people within specific communities, or where you'd be getting eye-rolls for being offended!

It's interesting that the terms haven't fallen out of use in the US - is it still the same with the terms '*******' and 'retarded'? I've never come across '*******' as anything other than a pejorative here in the UK, but I understand it was used officially / descriptively in education in the US until fairly recently  (not sure whether it is still used in that way)

(On a similar note, 'handicapped' has fallen out of use here - it's much more usual to hear people described as having disabilities, and things like parking spaces and permits are described that way. I think 'handicapped' is a term which would be seen more as outdated than offensive, in the general population, however)

At least in education terminology, it's a bit of a divide. The original legislation which allowed intellectually disabled to come into public schools refers to them as "mentally retarded". However, when learning about disabled children as a music therapy student, we're instructed to use person-first terminology, such as "person who is blind" or "person who is intellectually disabled". We're also asked to use terms such as intellectually disabled.

Now this is interesting, as it goes against some aspects of newer Critical Disability Theory for me. I have a disability and I used to hear the "person first" language, but newer advocates have been trying to "take back" the language. (FYI, I am also in education at a high level) This means saying 'disabled person'. The idea appears to be, and I am not an expert in Critical Disability, that you would not say "someone with gayness", you would say "gay person" or so on, so why should disability be treated as something outside of your identity?

In specific situations, I do identify as a "disabled person", as to me, I am taking back that label as it is part of my identity.

This is merely an aside, as I find it interesting.


I find it interesting too.  My understanding is that the current appropriate terminology (here) is to use terms such as 'person with disabilities / person with visual impairment' etc, as that language reflects the fact that they are a person first, and that the disability doesn't define them, it is simply one of their characteristics. But of course if an individual preferred to be referred to in a different way I would follow their preference while talking to or about them.

o_gal

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 575
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5461 on: February 28, 2014, 07:44:25 AM »
UPDATE on Mr16Y....

He just sent us all a "Today is my last day here. Thank you and goodbye email". I have no idea what happened.  ???

You should have a farewell party for him.  He is not there anymore? All the better.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/boss-goingaway-party-a-little-too-jubilant,1737/

Roodabega

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 128
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5462 on: February 28, 2014, 09:33:00 AM »
...
What is it with HVAC/maintenance services at academic institutions not understanding how important it is that certain buildings function at 100% at all times?  I work in a building which has ONE classroom, a few dozen offices, and our server farms - big rooms full of very big stacks of very important computers that generate a lot of heat.  My coworkers and I staff the building 24/7.  Now, the server farms do have their own independently operating air conditioning systems, but our office does not.  Furthermore, if the server room cooling systems have to cool the rooms down from the outside air temperature instead of the cooler temperature produced by the building cooling system, they tend to end up overworked and fail.  Some bright bulb in our maintenance department decided that since students stop having classes in the building in the early afternoon in the summer, they should set the building's air conditioning system to turn off after the students leave.  This action ended up causing some heat-related malfunctions of our server stacks...which are very expensive.  They thought they were saving money...

I worked for an IT department in a company in Central Florida.  Our company had two independent computer rooms for different divisions of the company.  On a weekend during the middle of summer, the facilities people decided to shut down the HVAC to work on it.  They told the people for the other group, but never told us.  This was back in the old mainframe days with a huge data farm.  And it generated a LOT of heat.  I think the top temperature in the room hit around 130ish.

We spent the next year replacing randomly failing components and disk units that failed because of the heat.  Never did hear if anyone got in trouble over it.  I would say it eventually came to about 50% of the equipment in the room had to be replaced.

alkira6

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 970
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5463 on: February 28, 2014, 10:09:08 AM »
I have a (tiny) server in my office closet made mostly from old drives slaved together. My husband has been educated on why closing the closet door and turning off the venting fan is a bad, horrible, no good idea.

Ms_Cellany

  • The Queen of Squee
  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5754
  • Big white goggie? No. Hasn't seen him.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5464 on: February 28, 2014, 10:17:50 AM »
Our office has a copier in a tiny room with a huge sign on the door: "Do NOT close the door. It must stay open to keep the equipment cool."

If I ran this particular circus, I'd just have the door removed.
Current fosters: Boojum (F, adult);  Balrog, Rooney, Rascal, Rocket (M)

goldilocks

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 786
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5465 on: February 28, 2014, 02:45:42 PM »
I just interviewed someone for a manager position.   He'd be roughly my equal, just over a different area of responsibility. 

During the interview he mentioned that he was "good friends" with one of our senior VP's.   

Okay, I like SVP, but do I really want one of his buddies around all the time?   I put a call into SVP for a recommendation, and depending on the outcome of that I may veto him.

Carotte

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1131
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5466 on: February 28, 2014, 06:46:13 PM »
I just interviewed someone for a manager position.   He'd be roughly my equal, just over a different area of responsibility. 

During the interview he mentioned that he was "good friends" with one of our senior VP's.   

Okay, I like SVP, but do I really want one of his buddies around all the time?   I put a call into SVP for a recommendation, and depending on the outcome of that I may veto him.

And if SVP actually knows the guy! How many people have pullet the "I know the owner" trick? Maybe not in your specific situation, but "good friend" might mean they just frequent the same golf club and chatted once..

melicious

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 306
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5467 on: February 28, 2014, 06:50:40 PM »
During the interview he mentioned that he was "good friends" with one of our senior VP's.

I'll bet a dozen donuts that he believed mentioning this would give him an edge on getting the position.

LazyDaisy

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1006
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5468 on: February 28, 2014, 07:03:25 PM »
It is a good idea, however, to disclose any personal relationships with existing employees. My employer asks that question specifically on the job application, "Do you know, or are you related to any current or past University employees?", in addition to the more general "how did you hear about this job?" It doesn't automatically count for or against anyone as far as I know. We have lots of husband/wife, parent/child etc. people working around campus. They just can't report directly to each other.

It could be that he didn't want to appear deceitful.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

shadowfox79

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2861
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5469 on: March 01, 2014, 04:12:02 AM »
One of our lecturers may have dropped herself in it this week.

"Sirena" is a young, pretty lecturer who knows how to ingratiate herself with the students and also how to get herself out of trouble with management. When there is a deadline to be met she will never, ever meet it, no matter how hard you chase her, and when the Head of School finally pulls her in about all these unconfirmed minutes and missing exam papers she brings out the waterworks. We dread having to deal with her.

However, I was typing up student module evaluations this week for a module she teaches on. The other tutor on the module is an African man. I came to an abrupt halt when, on one of the evals, I found the comment "I believe Sirena is racist." Going through the rest of the evals I pulled out five which all stated that Sirena spends a lot of class time directing hostility towards the other tutor, even trying to incite the students against him.

I suspect there would have been many more comments had she actually said something specifically racist. However, clearly this is unprofessional, so I sent the copies over to the Head of School. He let me know he'll be investigating it. Hoo boy.

DollyPond

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 671
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5470 on: March 01, 2014, 11:46:03 AM »
Here's a ticking time bomb of PD...

New Hire's first day of work was yesterday.  In this first day he managed to accomplish the following:

 - ask to schedule several weeks of vacation time around major holidays because he's "used to" taking that time off
 - say to a group of co-workers (mostly women) "I guess I need to watch that I don't offend the LAY-DEES because there's a lot of women here."
 - spend time talking about his extensive knowledge of pron movies

All of this and more on Day One.  I'm getting some popcorn.

End of Week One update:

In addition to the above he has...

Said to one female co-worker: "I'm a tool - so use me."

Told a group of co-workers (both male and female) an "off color" joke where no one laughed and just stared at him.

Will post more as it occurs as I doubt the clue-by-four has yet to (or ever will) take effect.

SoCalVal

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2464
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5471 on: March 01, 2014, 01:38:33 PM »
One of the employees in my section is too blind to see she's committing PD.

She's currently a per diem employee who is in the process of finalizing her move to career.  When you're per diem, you're guaranteed nothing, including your job.  The department can simply not schedule you for four months (because there's no guarantee of hours) then terminate you for not working for four months (it's called a "per diem release").

Anyway, apparently, she doesn't understand office politics and how she's quickly going to lose the career offer if she doesn't quit being a prima donna.  Last year, she and another resident applied for the same career position and were equal as far as qualifications.  Ultimately, the other resident was offered the position because she (employee) has some personality issues.  As a "consolation," she was hired on as per diem (because we had no more career positions available at the time).

Fast forward a few months and the other person leaves for another job so the position is available again.  We are allowed to offer it to her since we're still within the hiring deadline and then won't need to recruit for the position again.  She says she needs to think about it.  She spends a few weeks thinking about it then says she'll take it.  Great.  I submit the necessary info to hire her into the position.  She changes her mind.  Great, I just wasted about 30-45 minutes of work because now I have to cancel the request and start over, which I do.  Guest what?  She changes her mind AGAIN and decides to apply.   :o  >:(  I'm peeved because, now, she's just wasting everyone's time.

She then withdraws because she decides she wants to hold out for one of the other career positions that has the hours she wants...sort of.  The other career positions are "fill-in" positions to boost the staffing during our low-staffing times -- evenings and weekends.  She also, apparently, goes round and round with the recruiter claiming that a University policy states that, as a per diem employee, she does not have to do the six-month probation period when being hired into a career position.  The recruiter points out that, yes, that is a University policy...that doesn't apply to her position! (it's for a non-represented, meaning non-union, group; her union contract stipulates that she undergoes a six-month probation period).

Okay, you think she'd learn at this point.  Nope!  She argues with the person who will be her supervisor about the hours she will be expected to work and asks how those hours are equitable with the other staff.  Well, her position was specifically created to cover evenings and weekends; otherwise, it wouldn't exist.  To make sure this is in writing and very clear, her supervisor adds that stipulation into her job description (it was in the ad for the position).  The assistant manager (who is her supervisor's supervisor) has already e-mailed the employee that this is her last opportunity and if she does not want to take this career position, then she may remain per diem (which actually means she'll be on her way out the door).

I'm not looking at my employer through rose-colored glasses; it is an excellent place to work and there are lots of opportunities for career advancement.  We also earn a pension for once we retire.  This employee has not learned the dynamics of choosing her battles (I have; while I'm not thrilled about having to "play the game," I like my job and know to assess the atmosphere before deciding when to address things or not to address them at all).  The impression I get is she thinks she's looking out for her best interest and is being really savvy in asking all these questions.  What she doesn't get is she has painted herself as a prima donna (even the recruiter told the supervisor that all these demands set up a huge red flag of problems to come).  I have a feeling that she's either not going to make it through probation or she's going to find a career position elsewhere (we knew she'd been looking; I'm guessing no one else was offering exactly what she wanted or else she would've left months ago).  Once she goes out that door, though, I know without question that she won't be welcome back (won't even make it past the application screening process; fortunately, we can screen out for those with proven personality/behavior issues, despite the skill-set and/or experience).



Giraffe, Esq

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 288
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5472 on: March 01, 2014, 06:09:19 PM »
I just realized I have a story for here!  I am now the coordinator of the summer associate program for my small, non-profit law firm.  We placed the job listing at multiple schools and it explicitly stated that we prefer 2Ls (students finishing their second year of law school), but 1Ls may apply.

10 days before the application deadline, a 1L emails our generic "info" email to say that he loves our mission, is "keenly interested" in the position...but has a few questions about us before he applies.  Goes on to say he can be reached best by phone and gives his phone number.

Note, he does not ask if someone could please call him.  Just states that he can be reached by phone.  Also...he's a 1L.  Applying for a paid summer position.  Those are HARD to find.  He claims to love our mission, so what other info does he need?  He loves our mission, it's paid -- APPLY!

I responded to give him our website and say that any questions he still has can be brought up in an interview "if he gets one."

He did apply and ended up getting a preliminary interview, whereupon we found out what his question was...

"What jobs have your prior summer associates gone on to do?"

Seriously?!?!  That tells me that he's got SUCH an ego that he will only take a job that will offer a great stepping stone to the bigger and better things he will do someday and we're just SO lucky to get him!

Yeah, no.  He did not get a second interview.

jmarvellous

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3464
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5473 on: March 01, 2014, 06:29:19 PM »
I just realized I have a story for here!  I am now the coordinator of the summer associate program for my small, non-profit law firm.  We placed the job listing at multiple schools and it explicitly stated that we prefer 2Ls (students finishing their second year of law school), but 1Ls may apply.

10 days before the application deadline, a 1L emails our generic "info" email to say that he loves our mission, is "keenly interested" in the position...but has a few questions about us before he applies.  Goes on to say he can be reached best by phone and gives his phone number.

Note, he does not ask if someone could please call him.  Just states that he can be reached by phone.  Also...he's a 1L.  Applying for a paid summer position.  Those are HARD to find.  He claims to love our mission, so what other info does he need?  He loves our mission, it's paid -- APPLY!

I responded to give him our website and say that any questions he still has can be brought up in an interview "if he gets one."

He did apply and ended up getting a preliminary interview, whereupon we found out what his question was...

"What jobs have your prior summer associates gone on to do?"

Seriously?!?!  That tells me that he's got SUCH an ego that he will only take a job that will offer a great stepping stone to the bigger and better things he will do someday and we're just SO lucky to get him!

Yeah, no.  He did not get a second interview.

Lowly 1L here. I know not to do what your applicant did, but I can see many of my peers doing exactly the same thing.

I'm really excited about my nonprofit summer work, and I smiled when they told me it was unpaid and started doing my own funding research immediately. It's practically a given (and reinforced by our school at every turn) that 1L summers are unpaid.

I am curious, though, if that question is bad in general, or if it's just bad in context. I would really like to know whether firms or nonprofits are hiring their past interns, but I don't know how to get that information without asking.

BB-VA

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1264
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5474 on: March 01, 2014, 06:39:36 PM »
Managers for many years saw "working the computer" as a lower-level secretarial function.  Computers were looked on simultaneously as just improved typewriters AND as mysterious, complicated contraptions that one could blow up simply by clicking on the wrong button.   Just as managers didn't need to learn how to use a typewriter, so they didn't need to learn how to use a computer.  And it would be better if they didn't, because they were certain to press that wrong button.  ::)


I worked for one company (in the floppy disk days) where it was a status symbol for a manager to have a computer on his desk.  It was not, however, a status symbol for the manager to actually know how to use it. 

I was the payroll clerk for that company, and the HR manager was supposed to give me the data for the weekly raises before I did payroll.  AND every week, I had to go to his office to show him how to insert the floppy into the drive so he could give me the data. 

Considering that it was a family owned company, and the reason the HR manager had the job was that he was a son-in-law, it probably could have been worse.
"The Universe puts us in places where we can learn. They are never easy places, but they are right. Wherever we are, it's the right place and the right time. Pain that sometimes comes is part of the process of constantly being born."
- Delenn to Sheridan: "Babylon 5 - Distant Star"