News: IT'S THE 2ND ANNUAL GUATEMALA LIBRARY PROJECT BOOK DRIVE!    LOOKING FOR DONATIONS OF SCIENCE BOOKS THIS YEAR.    Check it out in the "Extending the Hand of Kindness" folder or here: http://www.etiquettehell.com/smf/index.php?topic=139832.msg3372084#msg3372084   

  • August 17, 2017, 06:32:07 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 3426350 times)

1 Member and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

gypsy77

  • Member
  • Posts: 73
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2895 on: October 18, 2012, 02:59:39 AM »
WARNING - may include emotional triggers.

Man who posted "glad girl is dead" loses job - says he's "sorry if he offended anyone". http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1272587--ontario-man-fired-from-job-over-comment-posted-on-memorial-page-to-amanda-todd

Oh, and he "feels a little regret and remorse". Just so you don't think he's a jerk or anything. I mean, he's got his feelings, right?




I don't think he should have been fired for something he did on his own Facebook page.  Please don't get me wrong, I think what he did was reprehensible, even if he was "just curious"; but I don't think it had anything to do with his job.

I think he should. He's shown he has no moral compass whatsoever. That's not somebody I want working for me. How could I possibly trust him?  There are plenty of people out there who would like the job who don't have the emotional age of a toddler. What he did was just as stupid as poking a wasps nest with a stick -- somebody got (fatally) stung. That shows an incredible lack of judgment.

People keep wanting compartmentalize their lives. That their private life has absolutely nothing to do with their work life. The world doesn't work that way. You can't be an angel at work and a demon outside -- the demon will leak through.

My employer has an official policy about things that happen outside of the workplace. It's none of their business, until the consequences of an action you take on your own time effect what happens in the workplace.

So, if something I do on my own time comes to the attention of my workers, and is something they find offensive to the degree that they are unable to maintain a working relationship with me, then it is something I can be disciplined for, including termination. Factor in that chances are, as he was publicly outed, the store likely had at least  a few customers come in, just to berate him, and  the store for supporting him, and I can't really blame them for terminating him.

If he knew up front like I do that this is something his company takes seriously, then I have even less sympathy for him. I don't buy freedom of expression as anargument against this, either. I believe someone upthread already pointed out freedom of speech does not equal freedom of consequences. In any event, freedom of speech refers to the retrictoons of speech by government, not private entities.

Twik

  • Member
  • Posts: 28746
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2896 on: October 18, 2012, 09:24:29 AM »

Apparently he worked at a men's clothing store, which I take to mean he was a salesperson.  Now I would feel extremely like he needed to get out of his line of work if he worked at a younger person's store, but I still feel he 'represents the store to the public'. 

He worked at the Richard's Big and Tall.  Now, I don't know if you have them in the US, but it is a store specifically targeting people who are often the target of cruelty and ridicule.  Let's just sit back and enjoy the irony...

I wonder if that's one reason he was fired so quickly? As artk2002 says, the "demon will leak through". I can't imagine he would have been a great salesperson to people who may have negative body image. He may already have been on shaky ground with his employers.
My cousin's memoir of love and loneliness while raising a child with multiple disabilities will be out on Amazon soon! Know the Night, by Maria Mutch, has been called "full of hope, light, and companionship for surviving the small hours of the night."

ladyknight1

  • Member
  • Posts: 11605
  • Not all those who wander are lost
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2897 on: October 18, 2012, 09:57:06 AM »
LOL! I've had managers who said "You can be replaced!"


Not too long later, Office Mgr hired a second assistant because the workload I was handling solo had greatly increased.  Office Mgr said she was hiring based on personality because anyone could be taught to do what I do but that it was hard to find a good personality.  I'm really not surprised that the brokers 2nd Admin supported were really frustrated because she didn't know how to do anything (a 20-something recent college graduate who didn't even know how to use the tab key in Word, rather than using the spacebar -- this was 2002 so not that long ago and not unreasonable that she should've known how to use a computer reasonably well).  2nd Admin didn't last very long either but, fortunately for her, she resigned of her own volition (nice girl but really had no business doing computer-based tasks).

Snip

I am responsible for training our administrative clerks. We have never been successful at hiring someone based on their personality. After multiple failures, we hire for skill set. I have now experienced two people who were incapable of learning how to use a database, even after 7 months of intense training.
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

blue2000

  • It is never too late to be what you might have been
  • Member
  • Posts: 6172
  • Two kitties - No waiting. And no sleeping either.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2898 on: October 18, 2012, 01:47:01 PM »
More than one troll has claimed to be innocent of hostile intentions.  So often, they excuse themselves with "I just wanted to stir the pot" and "It was a social experiment."  They have little or no comprehension that there are real people out there, not just pixels on a screen.  Then the trolls get upset when the pot boils over, and the experimental guinea pigs show up at their doors. 

I read somewhere (here maybe? can't recall) about a gentleman who was being harassed online. He ended up quitting most of his activities because he couldn't take it anymore. The troll started sending death threats directly to his house, and including his kids. After years of this, he finally found the jerk - it was the teenage son of one of his best friends. The kid burst into tears when confronted and said he meant it as a joke. The gentleman was very nice in his response. Too nice, I thought. He allowed the kid to clean up his act instead of being thrown in jail.

I think it showed the disconnect some people have between 'anonymous online user' and 'real life'. They cannot comprehend that just because no one will reach through the screen and throttle you doesn't mean they don't want to. Or for that matter, that you wouldn't deserve it.
You are only young once. After that you have to think up some other excuse.

Snooks

  • Member
  • Posts: 2563
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2899 on: October 18, 2012, 02:10:29 PM »
More than one troll has claimed to be innocent of hostile intentions.  So often, they excuse themselves with "I just wanted to stir the pot" and "It was a social experiment."  They have little or no comprehension that there are real people out there, not just pixels on a screen.  Then the trolls get upset when the pot boils over, and the experimental guinea pigs show up at their doors. 

I read somewhere (here maybe? can't recall) about a gentleman who was being harassed online. He ended up quitting most of his activities because he couldn't take it anymore. The troll started sending death threats directly to his house, and including his kids. After years of this, he finally found the jerk - it was the teenage son of one of his best friends. The kid burst into tears when confronted and said he meant it as a joke. The gentleman was very nice in his response. Too nice, I thought. He allowed the kid to clean up his act instead of being thrown in jail.

I think it showed the disconnect some people have between 'anonymous online user' and 'real life'. They cannot comprehend that just because no one will reach through the screen and throttle you doesn't mean they don't want to. Or for that matter, that you wouldn't deserve it.

There's been some doubt about how true that story is http://www.resistradio.com/news/questioning-the-trollocaust-did-leotraynor-really-suffer-vile-hate-campaign

I haven't seen a response from the guy addressing the inconsistencies/unlikely situations raised in the article.

Ceallach

  • Member
  • Posts: 4490
    • This Is It
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2900 on: October 18, 2012, 10:48:33 PM »
LOL! I've had managers who said "You can be replaced!"


Not too long later, Office Mgr hired a second assistant because the workload I was handling solo had greatly increased.  Office Mgr said she was hiring based on personality because anyone could be taught to do what I do but that it was hard to find a good personality.  I'm really not surprised that the brokers 2nd Admin supported were really frustrated because she didn't know how to do anything (a 20-something recent college graduate who didn't even know how to use the tab key in Word, rather than using the spacebar -- this was 2002 so not that long ago and not unreasonable that she should've known how to use a computer reasonably well).  2nd Admin didn't last very long either but, fortunately for her, she resigned of her own volition (nice girl but really had no business doing computer-based tasks).

Snip

I am responsible for training our administrative clerks. We have never been successful at hiring someone based on their personality. After multiple failures, we hire for skill set. I have now experienced two people who were incapable of learning how to use a database, even after 7 months of intense training.

I don't hire based on personality, but I do hire based on soft skills - things like communication style, empathy, conscientiousness, attitude towards work and colleagues etc.   Those things are important to success and can't be trained, so I'd rather have somebody with the right attitude who needs a bit of training, than have somebody with the right skills but poor attitude.  They'll perform better in the long run.     

But yes they definitely need to have the basic hard skills too!   Yikes at 7 months of database training, you must be going batty trying to deal with that.   :-\
"Nobody can do everything, but everybody can do something"


PastryGoddess

  • Member
  • Posts: 6241
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2901 on: October 19, 2012, 09:18:31 PM »
On a project i worked many years ago, I had a particularly difficult supervisor to deal with.  I was working on a special assignment and did what I thought was a fine job producing an excellent deliverable.  My supervisor disagreed and we had some words over it.  He ended with "Look, I can get a chimpanzee in here to do your job by tomorrow.  Now get back to your office!"  I bit my tongue and went back.  He was gone less than a month later.

Fast forward 18 months.  I'm in a hiring position on another program and interviewing.  Guess who walks in all dressed up in his Sunday best looking for a job?  Yep!  He took one look at me as he placed his resume on my desk and said "This isn't going to go well, is it?"  I just smiled sweetly and said "Sorry, I'm full up on chimpanzees! But thanks for coming in!" as I very visibly dropped the resume into the trash can at the side of my desk. 

I know, that was entirely unfair to chimpanzees everywhere and I apologize to any I offended with my actions and re-telling of this story.

Pwnage for real!

Morticia

  • Member
  • Posts: 1736
    • Stepmonster's Travels
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2902 on: October 20, 2012, 08:54:10 AM »
On a project i worked many years ago, I had a particularly difficult supervisor to deal with.  I was working on a special assignment and did what I thought was a fine job producing an excellent deliverable.  My supervisor disagreed and we had some words over it.  He ended with "Look, I can get a chimpanzee in here to do your job by tomorrow.  Now get back to your office!"  I bit my tongue and went back.  He was gone less than a month later.

Fast forward 18 months.  I'm in a hiring position on another program and interviewing.  Guess who walks in all dressed up in his Sunday best looking for a job?  Yep!  He took one look at me as he placed his resume on my desk and said "This isn't going to go well, is it?"  I just smiled sweetly and said "Sorry, I'm full up on chimpanzees! But thanks for coming in!" as I very visibly dropped the resume into the trash can at the side of my desk. 

I know, that was entirely unfair to chimpanzees everywhere and I apologize to any I offended with my actions and re-telling of this story.
This strikes me as retaliatory rudeness. Instead of returning his insults in kind, I like to show people like this a more graceful behaviour , in the hopes they will learn something. I am not saying you should have hired him, but I wouldn't have left him feeling the burn either.
Now our mom says she's changed her mind about the devil's brood, they may be evil so she thinks, but at least they're never rude...
                                        -- Big Rude Jake

My travel blog: http://www.stepmonster.ca

sevenday

  • Member
  • Posts: 705
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2903 on: October 20, 2012, 10:46:21 AM »
To be fair, a guy who treats subordinates like that is not likely to get along well with peers either.  The guy got fired for a reason (probably several reasons).  Should the poster have "visibly dropped" the resume into the bin? Eh.  It's a bit of visual flair, but if I was Fired Guy and walked in to see a subordinate I insulted - no, I would not be hopeful for a job at all.  I don't care if the guy has every single qualification the job calls for - when you can produce a firsthand account of the man's behavior toward his peers/subordinates, his suitability for the job drops way down.  Sure, you could have Joe Bob off the street who is equally bad but you don't know that til he starts working there.  At least with Fired Guy you know he has a bad work ethic when he comes to that and can weed him out.   If I was the OP, I would have simply handed the resume back with a "No, it's not.  We won't be interviewing you, but thank you for your interest."

Ryuugan80

  • Member
  • Posts: 121
    • AO3 Profile
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2904 on: October 20, 2012, 10:59:15 AM »
On a project i worked many years ago, I had a particularly difficult supervisor to deal with.  I was working on a special assignment and did what I thought was a fine job producing an excellent deliverable.  My supervisor disagreed and we had some words over it.  He ended with "Look, I can get a chimpanzee in here to do your job by tomorrow.  Now get back to your office!"  I bit my tongue and went back.  He was gone less than a month later.

Fast forward 18 months.  I'm in a hiring position on another program and interviewing.  Guess who walks in all dressed up in his Sunday best looking for a job?  Yep!  He took one look at me as he placed his resume on my desk and said "This isn't going to go well, is it?"  I just smiled sweetly and said "Sorry, I'm full up on chimpanzees! But thanks for coming in!" as I very visibly dropped the resume into the trash can at the side of my desk. 

I know, that was entirely unfair to chimpanzees everywhere and I apologize to any I offended with my actions and re-telling of this story.
This strikes me as retaliatory rudeness. Instead of returning his insults in kind, I like to show people like this a more graceful behaviour , in the hopes they will learn something. I am not saying you should have hired him, but I wouldn't have left him feeling the burn either.

While it was certainly retaliatory, it kind of made a point. The fact that he remembered her after 18 months and immediately knew it wouldn't work well (without her saying anything at first) meant that he KNEW he had been in the wrong before. That they BOTH knew what kind of worker he was and that it simply wouldn't work out (especially if he hadn't changed much). 
"Yo, those kids are straight up liars, man. All I told them to do was run product. And by product, I mean chewing gum."  - Lie to Me

Jocelyn

  • Member
  • Posts: 2013
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2905 on: October 20, 2012, 12:05:55 PM »
Absolutely- if he'd acted as if they'd had a good relationship, one might think he really didn't understand the heinousness of his actions. But he instantly 'got it'.

Midnight Kitty

  • The Queen of Sludge
  • Member
  • Posts: 2310
    • The Stoddard's Hale
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2906 on: October 21, 2012, 12:25:48 PM »
I vote "not retaliatory rudeness."  Just plain Karma.  I enjoy hearing about someone who burns bridges they need later.  In this case, he abused his position of power to belittle a subordinate.  JustCallMePat handled it well, IMHO.
"The first rule is to keep an untroubled spirit.  The second is to look things in the face and know them for what they are."

Marcus Aurelius

ladyknight1

  • Member
  • Posts: 11605
  • Not all those who wander are lost
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2907 on: October 22, 2012, 08:58:03 AM »
LOL! I've had managers who said "You can be replaced!"


Not too long later, Office Mgr hired a second assistant because the workload I was handling solo had greatly increased.  Office Mgr said she was hiring based on personality because anyone could be taught to do what I do but that it was hard to find a good personality.  I'm really not surprised that the brokers 2nd Admin supported were really frustrated because she didn't know how to do anything (a 20-something recent college graduate who didn't even know how to use the tab key in Word, rather than using the spacebar -- this was 2002 so not that long ago and not unreasonable that she should've known how to use a computer reasonably well).  2nd Admin didn't last very long either but, fortunately for her, she resigned of her own volition (nice girl but really had no business doing computer-based tasks).

Snip

I am responsible for training our administrative clerks. We have never been successful at hiring someone based on their personality. After multiple failures, we hire for skill set. I have now experienced two people who were incapable of learning how to use a database, even after 7 months of intense training.

I don't hire based on personality, but I do hire based on soft skills - things like communication style, empathy, conscientiousness, attitude towards work and colleagues etc.   Those things are important to success and can't be trained, so I'd rather have somebody with the right attitude who needs a bit of training, than have somebody with the right skills but poor attitude.  They'll perform better in the long run.     

But yes they definitely need to have the basic hard skills too!   Yikes at 7 months of database training, you must be going batty trying to deal with that.   :-\

My mind fled for a few days after the last one. It is very difficult for me to repeat the same training with the same person more than twice. A refresher session is fine, but when they do not recall any of the information from the first session, it is pointless.
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

greencat

  • Member
  • Posts: 3899
  • Trap...Neuter...What was that third thing again?
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2908 on: October 22, 2012, 01:58:54 PM »
My former boss attempted to hire a friend of his into the not-really-open third office assistant (really, medical receptionist) position.  We had just had an incident where the other office assistant was unable to come in for several days for legal reasons (she got set up in a scam and got arrested as a result.)  I wasn't able to come in full time due to classes, and my boss was understandably terrified at having to do actual work instead of reading CNN all day.  He wanted to bring someone in who would be able to drop everything last minute to come in in emergencies - and his friend was working as a substitute teacher, so she was ideal for that.  We had evidence that she knew how to use a computer - she had a laptop which she always brought with her.  However, trying to train her to do the computer-intensive office work was almost nightmarish.  Simple concepts, like double-clicking, opening e-mails, and changing sheets in an Excel document were absolutely beyond her.  The other office assistant and I marched into the bosses' office and informed him that she was absolutely not working out after we compared notes and realized that between the two of us, we'd trained her how to enter an appointment into Outlook (a fairly simple process, just filling out the fields in pre-made slots) five times in three days, with no sign of improvement.  The boss gave us a puzzled look and said, "But she's so nice and she's a teacher..."

pierrotlunaire0

  • Member
  • Posts: 4542
  • I'm the cat's aunt!
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2909 on: October 26, 2012, 03:07:33 PM »
Small BG:  At the DMV, we hire a fair amount of Short Term Workers (STW).  They are only allowed to work 1040 in a calendar year.  This is your toehold to get a permanent position within the DMV.  This is the best way for the employee to see if the job is a good fit for them, and for the State to see that they are working out.  If they don't work out, the State will not renew their Short Term contract when it expires.  Actually, a pretty good system.  End BG.

I received 3 brand new STWs in September.  One, Mindy, was a little "quirky."  She was giggly, and just a little too eager to leap into doing transactions on her own.  One thing I emphasize is that this is an extremely complex job.  Questions are not only expected.  They are encouraged.  I stopped her one day when I went to see how she was doing.  She was getting ready to issue a first time license, and I realized that I (as manager) had not signed off on the application -- major requirement.  So I am patiently saying that I have to sign off on ALL applications and that is when I noticed that the person had not taken either a written test or a driving test!  A teenager comes into the office, and Mindy is ready to issue a license, and the kid knows nothing! 

Mindy was not too happy with me, because I have corrected her in front of a customer.  I didn't scream at her, "Are you out of your mind?  You have to be able to demonstrate that you have some basic skills before you are granted the right to just drive by yourself."

But my problem got solved when last week the region manager transfers Mindy to another office.  I was overstaffed, and Mindy lived the closest to the other office.  And now the quirkiness turns into outright weird:
1. She is caught eating coworkers' lunches, and says she thought it was okay.
2. She tells a customer who complained about Mindy's rudeness that: "I am still learning, and so politeness doesn't count."
3.  The piece de resistance: Mindy, on her own authority, assigns herself to yet another office, telling the manager there that she had been assigned there because it was the closest to Mindy's house.

The State decided not to wait for the expiration of her contract.  She has been permanently assigned OUT of the department and into unemployment.
I have enough lithium in my medicine cabinet to power three cars across a sizeable desert.  Which makes me officially...Three Cars Crazy