Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 1466506 times)

1 Member and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

blue2000

  • It is never too late to be what you might have been
  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6883
  • Two kitties - No waiting. And no sleeping either.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2820 on: September 12, 2012, 07:02:04 PM »
We have been told (and I'm only slightly paraphrasing here) "morale is low so you all need to cheer up! Oh and work harder, because upper management all think youre incompetant at your jobs.".

"The beatings will continue until morale improves."

 I worked for a company once with high turonver, terrible morale, etc.  They got an outside company to come in and administer one of those 'be completely honest, it's all anonymous' surveys.  And then we all got called in to a group meeting and were told by the owner that if we hated it that much, we were all free to leave because we could be replaced within 24 hours, and if we all didn't improve our attitude, he would start firing people in batches of 10 and replacing them until he had a happy G*d* workplace.

LOL! I've had managers who said "You can be replaced!"

Problem is, they can't replace us. For every ten people we hire, we might have one - ONE - left after the probation period. The job is just that awful. And if we are really lucky, it is someone that actually works!

We do a survey every year. One year the manager came in just before the survey and had a long talk with us about how he didn't believe the previous survey that we had low morale - we were such wonderful people that surely there must be some mistake. Morale did not improve much. The year after that he went with "Our store is so wonderful! The best in our section!!!" That speech got better marks. :P
You are only young once. After that you have to think up some other excuse.

LazyDaisy

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1071
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2821 on: September 12, 2012, 07:14:22 PM »
I worked for a company once with high turonver, terrible morale, etc.  They got an outside company to come in and administer one of those 'be completely honest, it's all anonymous' surveys.  And then we all got called in to a group meeting and were told by the owner that if we hated it that much, we were all free to leave because we could be replaced within 24 hours, and if we all didn't improve our attitude, he would start firing people in batches of 10 and replacing them until he had a happy G*d* workplace.

Quick way to improve morale:  Fire All the Unhappy People!  ::)

I know it was meant tongue in cheek and I had a good  ;D but that does actually work when there are Negative Nancys that bring everyone else down (without other issues). I've been in offices where a small group of complaining unhappy coworkers made working there untenable and firing them would have improved my morale immensely. Without them, work was sometimes stressful but mostly enjoyable; with them there, it was just stressful.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

audhs

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1855
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2822 on: September 12, 2012, 07:17:05 PM »
Friend of mine worked for a company that was much better than the ones being discussed here, at least in most ways. They even offered to cover the cost of sessions with a psychologist they had on retainer. So my friend went to the shrink and talked out some problems she was having at work. Nothing huge, but it helped to discuss it.

Then, of course, her supervisor started commenting and acting on information that she could only have received from the psychologist. And not just in theoretically good ways, but subtly criticizing my friend. My friend kept seeing the shrink, but only as a means of disinformation - "Oh, I'm working so hard" or "I'm putting in so much unpaid overtime," and various other things that might not have been entirely true but would only affect her job if the psychologist was massively unethical. Which it turned out she was, continuously. But hey, friend's boss loved her.

Does the psychologist come in to the office or does the employees go off-site?  If it's at the company, I wonder if the boss put in a hidden camera.  If it's off-site, I would totally report her (after giving enough misinformation  >:D).  If the shrink is tattling to the boss, I wonder if she's even licenced.  Maybe the company just told the employees it's a real psychologist, but she's just hired to play one.

I'm so suspicious  :P

I'd be suspicious that there wasn't some fine print in the info given that company sponsered therapy not being confidential.

Cami

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1307
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2823 on: September 12, 2012, 08:24:48 PM »
We have been told (and I'm only slightly paraphrasing here) "morale is low so you all need to cheer up! Oh and work harder, because upper management all think youre incompetant at your jobs.".

"The beatings will continue until morale improves."

 I worked for a company once with high turonver, terrible morale, etc.  They got an outside company to come in and administer one of those 'be completely honest, it's all anonymous' surveys.  And then we all got called in to a group meeting and were told by the owner that if we hated it that much, we were all free to leave because we could be replaced within 24 hours, and if we all didn't improve our attitude, he would start firing people in batches of 10 and replacing them until he had a happy G*d* workplace.

My husband worked for a company that did one of those "anonymous" surveys.  He was a little behind in turning his in, and HR contacted him and asked him what was taking so long.

He kinda doubted the anonymity after that.

20+ years ago, we had an opening for a high-level position at our organization. One of the candidates was a current staffer. After going through the interviews, TPTB asked all staff to fill out an anonymous and confidential survey about our responses to the interviews. We didn't have enough typewriters for everyone to use given the timeline, so most of us wrote them out by hand. Shortly afterwards, the internal candidate started treated me like crap. I finally confronted him and asked what his problem was and he told me that he was angry that I had denigrated him on my evaluation. I told him I had done no such thing and asked who had seen these evals. He told me that HR had given my boss the evals "for his information" and my boss had supposedly recognized my handwriting (and that of everyone else). He had promptly told this staff person what everyone said about him. But he had also, for reasons known only to him, colored the evals to make them sound far worse than they were. (The internal candidate was a decent guy and would have been quite fine in the job, so there was no reason for any negativity).

A few years ago, I was at a training seminar for a software program that included survey tools. The trainer was explaining how to program the surveys for named surveys and anonymous surveys. A woman raised her hand and asked, "How can I program it to look like an anonymous survey but actually know who the respondents are?"  Everyone in the room whips around and looks at her. The trainer was actually really peeved and said, "Our company has ethics and deliberately set it up so that you cannot do that." Then someone asked her the name of her company and when she asked why, he replied, "So I know to never apply for a job with you." LOL

Jocelyn

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3264
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2824 on: September 12, 2012, 09:43:30 PM »
I'd be suspicious that there wasn't some fine print in the info given that company sponsered therapy not being confidential.
I can't imagine that a state licensing board, or a professional organization, would consider this as being acceptable conditions of employment. You owe confidentiality to your client unless you are specifically given permission by the client, their legal guardian, or a judge instructs you to release the information- or if the client is a danger to himself or others. Agreeing to counsel employees,  and discussing the contents of their sessions with their supervisor...I think that would get you sanctioned just about anywhere.

StarFaerie

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1198
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2825 on: September 12, 2012, 11:57:05 PM »
I'd be suspicious that there wasn't some fine print in the info given that company sponsered therapy not being confidential.
I can't imagine that a state licensing board, or a professional organization, would consider this as being acceptable conditions of employment. You owe confidentiality to your client unless you are specifically given permission by the client, their legal guardian, or a judge instructs you to release the information- or if the client is a danger to himself or others. Agreeing to counsel employees,  and discussing the contents of their sessions with their supervisor...I think that would get you sanctioned just about anywhere.

I'm sure it depends on the job and why they have a therapist. My BF has to go to the work psychologist every 12 months as part of his security clearance process and that certainly isn't completely confidential. The psychologist sends a report to the security clearance agency about his mental state. Plus if the psychologist finds out something that may be used against him by someone, shows he has undue stress or anything else that may jeopardise national security, she has to report it immediately. If they need a confidential counselling, their work pays for them to go elsewhere (same as for all government employees), but then they can't discuss anything work related as the counsellor won't have security clearance.

zyrs

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2061
  • spiffily male.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2826 on: September 15, 2012, 05:09:45 AM »
My husband worked for a company that did one of those "anonymous" surveys.  He was a little behind in turning his in, and HR contacted him and asked him what was taking so long.

He kinda doubted the anonymity after that.

At a company I worked for there was a plant manager and then two people who worked directly under him, one of whom should never have been given a position with any responsibility and another who was probably the best person I have ever worked for, bar none. 

There was a company-wide morale and rating survey (supposedly anonymous).  As it was being handed out to us on of the office staff made a huge point of telling everyone "Oh, where it says "not responsible guys job, it really means really great guys job."

Needless to say when the results came back and really great guy got super low marks and not responsible guy got really high marks, we realized it had been fixed.

nutraxfornerves

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2052

Nutrax
The plural of anecdote is not data

Mental Magpie

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5721
  • ...for the dark side looks back.
The problem with choosing the lesser of two evils is that you're still choosing evil.

Jocelyn

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3264
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2829 on: September 15, 2012, 02:24:59 PM »
I'd be suspicious that there wasn't some fine print in the info given that company sponsered therapy not being confidential.
I can't imagine that a state licensing board, or a professional organization, would consider this as being acceptable conditions of employment. You owe confidentiality to your client unless you are specifically given permission by the client, their legal guardian, or a judge instructs you to release the information- or if the client is a danger to himself or others. Agreeing to counsel employees,  and discussing the contents of their sessions with their supervisor...I think that would get you sanctioned just about anywhere.

I'm sure it depends on the job and why they have a therapist. My BF has to go to the work psychologist every 12 months as part of his security clearance process and that certainly isn't completely confidential. 

That's a different situation- in an evaluation, the client intends from the very beginning for the psychologist to release a report about what he talked about, there's no therapeutic relationship, no ongoing relationship, and no expectation of confidentiality. But if the psychologist is counseling or providing therapy, there's a reasonable expectation of confidentiality, no matter who's paying for the psychologist.

Kaora

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1167
  • I'm just a singer in a rock and roll band
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2830 on: September 15, 2012, 04:31:27 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VMSGrY-IlU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Ha!  AllI  could think of was The Cat Came Back, but the link brings back memories.  My dad would play this and Iko Iko Unday! :D Great music. :)

greencat

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2743
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2831 on: September 19, 2012, 08:39:35 PM »
My local grocery store tends to have issues with people misbehaving just outside the front doors, and truly needs to have a uniformed security guard stationed outside it in order to prevent the customers entering and exiting the store from getting harassed in assorted ways, from being accosted by panhandlers to being heckled by drunks and jerks.  The guard usually stands by the bike rack, which also deters the occasional bike thief.

Recently, they got a new security guard.  The guard seemed like a nice guy, but then he started letting his buddies hang around him while he was doing his shift. I walked by them today and his friends were making absolutely horrible comments about the people walking in and out of the store.  The guard was chuckling along with them.  When I walked past them, they quieted down for a second, but once I'd gotten a few feet away from them, I clearly heard them saying something about me - it was extraordinarily rude and trying to repeat it would break the filters as it involved a number of vulgarities.

I walked into the store and told the manager on duty what was going on.  She called the guard in - and he wasn't out front anymore when I left with my groceries half an hour later.

Hazmat

  • This Veteran is heavily medicated for your protection
  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 158
  • How can I miss you if you won't go away?
    • Chronus Is Latin For Time
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2832 on: September 20, 2012, 06:48:57 AM »
My local grocery store tends to have issues with people misbehaving just outside the front doors, and truly needs to have a uniformed security guard stationed outside it in order to prevent the customers entering and exiting the store from getting harassed in assorted ways, from being accosted by panhandlers to being heckled by drunks and jerks.  The guard usually stands by the bike rack, which also deters the occasional bike thief.

Recently, they got a new security guard.  The guard seemed like a nice guy, but then he started letting his buddies hang around him while he was doing his shift. I walked by them today and his friends were making absolutely horrible comments about the people walking in and out of the store.  The guard was chuckling along with them.  When I walked past them, they quieted down for a second, but once I'd gotten a few feet away from them, I clearly heard them saying something about me - it was extraordinarily rude and trying to repeat it would break the filters as it involved a number of vulgarities.

I walked into the store and told the manager on duty what was going on.  She called the guard in - and he wasn't out front anymore when I left with my groceries half an hour later.
That's horrible!  That's what the store was trying to prevent!  Surely whoever hired him had to tell him so.  What are maroon!
A guest is a jewel on the cushion of hospitality. -Nero Wolfe

Indiana

RebeccainGA

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1207
  • formerly RebeccainAR
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2833 on: September 20, 2012, 11:03:41 AM »
We had one - guy was a manager in my department. Angry all the time, needlessly demanding, micro-manager, backstabbing, condescending - a really class A jerk. He had a particular hatred of women in positions of authority, women in IT, women who aren't thin and beautiful (we'd all overheard his long tirades at his wife by phone about her weight). Our old director was useless, and let him get away with it - his employees HATED him. When old director went on sick leave for a few months, and new director met the twit, he was gone in a few weeks - transferred to management in another department (and, I heard, a 1-for-1 swap for a guy who was the manager in that new department, who is now in an unrelated department and happy as a clam).

New department, old jerk - he's put in charge of managing one of the development groups, specifically on a tool that his old department (my current department) uses daily. Who gets put as his point of contact in our department? Me. (yes, the fat lesbian who refused to put up with his nonsense when we worked together). He flatly refused to deal with me.

His tool is now slated for end-of-life in the next year. Wonder why?

gingerzing

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1027
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2834 on: September 20, 2012, 12:54:44 PM »

His tool is now slated for end-of-life in the next year. Wonder why?

I want a like button for this so much