News: IMPORTANT UPDATE REGARDING SITE IN FORUM ANNOUNCEMENT FOLDER.

  • May 21, 2018, 12:16:21 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 4285303 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Amara

  • Member
  • Posts: 2134
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2940 on: November 09, 2012, 10:39:41 AM »
Well, better to find out now than in two months. Plus, your not having rejected the other candidates yet still gives you all those options. I am sure you will find the perfect fit.

Jocelyn

  • Member
  • Posts: 2013
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2941 on: November 09, 2012, 06:45:24 PM »
    But more to the point, it's incredibly unprofessional to aggressively pursue and accept a job opportunity without giving any indication of other potential opportunities or priorities.    And yes, I probed deeply into all of those things with her - so I can only assume she was lying to me.  And no, there's no scholarship or anything like that.
I think it's a bit much to expect a candidate will say, 'I've got a few things I'm considering- some other job opportunities, or maybe I'd go to grad school if I were accepted. Really, my first choice will be whichever one comes through with a concrete offer first.'
Would you have seriously considered her if she'd said she had other possibilities? I can see how that would be in your best interest, for her to admit that, but I don't really see how it would be in hers.

Shoo

  • Member
  • Posts: 15850
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2942 on: November 09, 2012, 08:45:03 PM »
    But more to the point, it's incredibly unprofessional to aggressively pursue and accept a job opportunity without giving any indication of other potential opportunities or priorities.    And yes, I probed deeply into all of those things with her - so I can only assume she was lying to me.  And no, there's no scholarship or anything like that.
I think it's a bit much to expect a candidate will say, 'I've got a few things I'm considering- some other job opportunities, or maybe I'd go to grad school if I were accepted. Really, my first choice will be whichever one comes through with a concrete offer first.'
Would you have seriously considered her if she'd said she had other possibilities? I can see how that would be in your best interest, for her to admit that, but I don't really see how it would be in hers.

I agree.  There's absolutely no benefit for someone to admit that to a potential employer.  In fact, I think it would be downright foolish.

PastryGoddess

  • Member
  • Posts: 6445
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2943 on: November 10, 2012, 01:31:13 AM »
For me the issue was in her explanation of declining the job.  If she had simply said, that she had found another position that suited her better or that she was considering other offers, then I'm sure that would have been more palatable than the explanation she gave

I'm assuming that Cellach knows her job field pretty well and understands the job market as well.  This girl allowed the process to move forward until the company was at the point of having her start on Monday full time.  The time for her to send an email was when she was initially offered the job.  Maybe the company could have worked around her schedule maybe not.  But by waiting until the last moment, she has put Cellach's company in a bit of a bind and they may have to reschedule the training she was getting ready to undergo, thereby wasting company resources and time.  She burned bridges in the very industry she wants to work in.  That's not good

Everyone has to do what's best for their situation, but that doesn't mean you get to make choices without consequences either.

camlan

  • Member
  • Posts: 9281
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2944 on: November 10, 2012, 01:33:52 PM »
It could be that the woman was lying about really wanting a job in Ceallach's field. I can easily imagine someone who really needed a job saying whatever they thought would get them that job, including taking a mild interest in the field and exaggerating it to a positive love for and passion for everything field-related.

It all depends. If her graduate studies are in the same field, then that's odd. But if she's studying something else, she was probably just trying to get the job.
Nothing is impossible, the word itself says, “I’m possible!” –Audrey Hepburn


nutraxfornerves

  • Member
  • Posts: 1785
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2945 on: November 10, 2012, 01:41:03 PM »
Posting racial slurs and hopes for assassination about the US President on Facebook, and then telling a TV interviewer that "I didn't think it would be that big of a deal," might not be a good career move.

Obama threat gets Turlock woman fired, reported to Secret Service

Nutrax
The plural of anecdote is not data

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 #2946 on: November 10, 2012, 02:59:26 PM »
Posting racial slurs and hopes for assassination about the US President on Facebook, and then telling a TV interviewer that "I didn't think it would be that big of a deal," might not be a good career move.

Obama threat gets Turlock woman fired, reported to Secret Service

I can see where she would think that. She is far from being the only nutjob on the net right now - in fact she's one of the milder ones.

Still perfectly fair of them to fire her, though.
You are only young once. After that you have to think up some other excuse.

Iris

  • Member
  • Posts: 3249
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2947 on: November 10, 2012, 03:32:24 PM »
Posting racial slurs and hopes for assassination about the US President on Facebook, and then telling a TV interviewer that "I didn't think it would be that big of a deal," might not be a good career move.

Obama threat gets Turlock woman fired, reported to Secret Service

If I'm honest I don't have a massive issue with the 'threat' part of her post. It is clearly not serious and just exposes her as a hateful person by its vehemence. I don't think the secret service will lose too much sleep over it. I am astounded, though, astounded that in 2012 a white person can call a black person the "n word" in a public forum and not realise that people are going to take offence. That's what really got me. Her SURPRISE that people thought she was racist.  ???

I'm not really surprised that they sacked her but I think it's probably more to do with racism than politics.
"Can't do anything with children, can you?" the woman said.

Poirot thought you could, but forebore to say so.

AngelicGamer

  • Member
  • Posts: 4246
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2948 on: November 10, 2012, 03:37:04 PM »
Posting racial slurs and hopes for assassination about the US President on Facebook, and then telling a TV interviewer that "I didn't think it would be that big of a deal," might not be a good career move.

Obama threat gets Turlock woman fired, reported to Secret Service

If I'm honest I don't have a massive issue with the 'threat' part of her post. It is clearly not serious and just exposes her as a hateful person by its vehemence. I don't think the secret service will lose too much sleep over it. I am astounded, though, astounded that in 2012 a white person can call a black person the "n word" in a public forum and not realise that people are going to take offence. That's what really got me. Her SURPRISE that people thought she was racist.  ???

I'm not really surprised that they sacked her but I think it's probably more to do with racism than politics.

Yes, but they still have to investigate it.  So, that means time, money, and making sure it really isn't serious.  I think they'd rather do something else with their time and resources but they can't because of people like her.



Twik

  • Member
  • Posts: 29056
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2949 on: November 10, 2012, 04:00:36 PM »
I am astounded, though, astounded that in 2012 a white person can call a black person the "n word" in a public forum and not realise that people are going to take offence. That's what really got me. Her SURPRISE that people thought she was racist.  ???

I'm not really surprised that they sacked her but I think it's probably more to do with racism than politics.

I agree, it's astonishing, but it's the way some people seem to think. I'm surprised she didn't come out with "but some of my best friends are ... that is, they're African American."
"The sky's the limit. Your sky. Your limit. Now, let's dance!"

Iris

  • Member
  • Posts: 3249
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2950 on: November 10, 2012, 04:02:07 PM »
Posting racial slurs and hopes for assassination about the US President on Facebook, and then telling a TV interviewer that "I didn't think it would be that big of a deal," might not be a good career move.

Obama threat gets Turlock woman fired, reported to Secret Service

If I'm honest I don't have a massive issue with the 'threat' part of her post. It is clearly not serious and just exposes her as a hateful person by its vehemence. I don't think the secret service will lose too much sleep over it. I am astounded, though, astounded that in 2012 a white person can call a black person the "n word" in a public forum and not realise that people are going to take offence. That's what really got me. Her SURPRISE that people thought she was racist.  ???

I'm not really surprised that they sacked her but I think it's probably more to do with racism than politics.

Yes, but they still have to investigate it.  So, that means time, money, and making sure it really isn't serious.  I think they'd rather do something else with their time and resources but they can't because of people like her.

Do they? Can they really not just say "Obviously a whack job" and leave it at that? Still, I come from a country where the only Prime Minister to die in office did so while having a swim at the beach  ::) so we tend to be a bit more relaxed about things. I believe I've told the story of the time that the Prime Minister was (unexpectedly) walking past and my brother and I were having an idle (and entirely joking) chat about running over and poking him in the eye and discussing the difficulties that his glasses would pose and wondering if that's why he wore glasses - to avoid eye-pokes. We looked up and realised that a very senior police officer was well within ear-shot of us and indeed holding back giggles, whether at our conversation or amusing double take I will never know.
"Can't do anything with children, can you?" the woman said.

Poirot thought you could, but forebore to say so.

Iris

  • Member
  • Posts: 3249
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2951 on: November 10, 2012, 04:02:42 PM »
I am astounded, though, astounded that in 2012 a white person can call a black person the "n word" in a public forum and not realise that people are going to take offence. That's what really got me. Her SURPRISE that people thought she was racist.  ???

I'm not really surprised that they sacked her but I think it's probably more to do with racism than politics.

I agree, it's astonishing, but it's the way some people seem to think. I'm surprised she didn't come out with "but some of my best friends are ... that is, they're African American."

rofl
"Can't do anything with children, can you?" the woman said.

Poirot thought you could, but forebore to say so.

artk2002

  • Member
  • Posts: 13861
    • The Delian's Commonwealth
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2952 on: November 10, 2012, 04:26:56 PM »
I am astounded, though, astounded that in 2012 a white person can call a black person the "n word" in a public forum and not realise that people are going to take offence. That's what really got me. Her SURPRISE that people thought she was racist.  ???

I'm not really surprised that they sacked her but I think it's probably more to do with racism than politics.

I agree, it's astonishing, but it's the way some people seem to think. I'm surprised she didn't come out with "but some of my best friends are ... that is, they're African American."

The thing that got me was " I'm not racist and I'm not crazy. just simply stating my opinion.!!!" I'm not really sure how one can have an opinion that comes out in explicitly racist terms and not be a racist.

She lost her job because she became a liability to her employer. She's free to mouth off all she wants, but her employer is free to fire an employee who hurts his business.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bow lines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.

nutraxfornerves

  • Member
  • Posts: 1785
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2953 on: November 10, 2012, 05:13:41 PM »
Quote
Do they? Can they really not just say "Obviously a whack job" and leave it at that?
They have to look into it enough to verify that it's just someone mouthing off (which is protected speech under the First Amendment to the US constitution), not someone actually planning or inciting something. Might not take too long ot investigate, but still takes resources.

"Protected speech" applies to the government restricting what people can say. A private employer can indeed proclaim "you do not reflect our company's values. Goodbye."

Nutrax
The plural of anecdote is not data

Amara

  • Member
  • Posts: 2134
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #2954 on: November 10, 2012, 07:49:23 PM »
Iris, when Bill Bryson started off his book, In a Sunburned Country, with that anecdote I knew it was going to be a great read. (And it was. I fell madly in love with Australia.)