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   

  • September 25, 2017, 06:46:14 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 3536475 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Mental Magpie

  • Member
  • Posts: 4138
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3180 on: December 07, 2012, 05:36:54 PM »
^ The truancy talk reminded me of a potential case of PD I encountered recently.

I WISH it was against the law for parents to take their child on vacation during school term in my country. One of my students just missed 5 weeks of school (the timing was such that she had to do her final exam on the first day back too  ::)). On her first day back she was telling me all about her wonderful activity that she did on holidays. Except "I wasn't really happy with [aspect] because I was pretty drunk when it happened".

Great. I'm a mandatory reporter of course, so that will now be investigated and questions will probably be asked of her mother who took her on the holiday. The professional darwinism part is that her mother is a police officer. *facepalm*


I think it depends on the laws of the country she was holidaying in and the age of the student.  This doesn't automatically ring awful to me.

I have friends whose children vacation in Ireland (where the legal drinking age is much lower than the US) and in Israel (where wine is served to children as well as adults). However, those children would never be allowed sufficient quantities to get "drunk".

I am also a mandatory reporter, so I can sympathize.

My sons have had drinks in countries where it's legal. If someone wants to report me or my ex to CPS for that, they're going to have a very serious fight on their hands.

Which is fine and something I would do, too, but you can't fault the mandatory reporter for doing her/his job.

A.P. Wulfric

  • Member
  • Posts: 740
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3181 on: December 07, 2012, 06:36:09 PM »
Ahh fun with school stuff.

I had a parent threaten to sue me for giving his child an F on her project.  Why? Child hadn't done anything on the project b/c out of the 10 periods allotted for doing project, child was out for 7 of them.  Now, in a regular circumstance, I'd obviously give an extension, except this was May, and the project was due in February.  See, when you miss 130 days and come in late for another 20 or so, it's awfully hard to get caught up.  (Our school year is 187 days.)  No, there were no extenuating circumstances whatsoever. 

In terms of darwinism, I had a just had a colleague scream at a theatre-arts teacher for sending out a request for a student to make-up a missed musical audition during HER class period.**  Screaming colleague teaches an elective study skills course-the closest my school has to study hall.  Regardless of the subject though, when you teach junior high, you have to be flexible in terms of scheduling and all that stuff. It really is a three-ring circus. Anyways, screaming colleague pulled musical teacher out into the hall, in front of kids, and reamed her out.  At her next break, she then stormed down to the principal to lodge a complaint against musical teacher.  She proceeded to trash musical teacher and the entire theatre arts department as a waste of time.

That was until the principal informed screaming colleague that SHE had asked musical teacher to accept a late audition and suggested the skills time.   She also reminded screaming colleague that there had been an email and a faculty meeting both mentioning this and the need for flexibility, and also reiterated that speaking professionally to co-workers is not optional in our district.  Screaming teaching can't figure out why she keeps being passed over for open positions that she covets. 

**Student was out due to a death in the family and was very upset that she had missed the audition.**


Iris

  • Member
  • Posts: 3252
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3182 on: December 08, 2012, 12:30:04 AM »
^ The truancy talk reminded me of a potential case of PD I encountered recently.

I WISH it was against the law for parents to take their child on vacation during school term in my country. One of my students just missed 5 weeks of school (the timing was such that she had to do her final exam on the first day back too  ::)). On her first day back she was telling me all about her wonderful activity that she did on holidays. Except "I wasn't really happy with [aspect] because I was pretty drunk when it happened".

Great. I'm a mandatory reporter of course, so that will now be investigated and questions will probably be asked of her mother who took her on the holiday. The professional darwinism part is that her mother is a police officer. *facepalm*


I think it depends on the laws of the country she was holidaying in and the age of the student.  This doesn't automatically ring awful to me.

I have friends whose children vacation in Ireland (where the legal drinking age is much lower than the US) and in Israel (where wine is served to children as well as adults). However, those children would never be allowed sufficient quantities to get "drunk".

I am also a mandatory reporter, so I can sympathize.

My sons have had drinks in countries where it's legal. If someone wants to report me or my ex to CPS for that, they're going to have a very serious fight on their hands.

Why? A mandatory reporter is a mandatory reporter is a mandatory reporter. If your child is old enough to drink then they're old enough to understand what mandatory reporter means. Don't go to school and tell your teacher about your drinking session. It's not that hard. We don't keep it secret or anything.

FWIW I live in a country where the legal drinking age is 18 and I see nothing at all wrong with someone from a place with a drinking age of 21 giving their 19 year old a drink while they're here. I also don't see anything wrong with parents who give their child a 'taste', European style, although it's not what I choose to do. But - and this is the important bit - my personal opinion doesn't matter. That's what mandatory means. You can disagree with the system all you want and I certainly agree that it's OTT in many cases, but I really don't care enough to lose my job over it.
"Can't do anything with children, can you?" the woman said.

Poirot thought you could, but forebore to say so.

RingTailedLemur

  • Member
  • Posts: 2086
  • Rudeness is a small person's imitation of power.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3183 on: December 08, 2012, 01:10:58 AM »
^ The truancy talk reminded me of a potential case of PD I encountered recently.

I WISH it was against the law for parents to take their child on vacation during school term in my country. One of my students just missed 5 weeks of school (the timing was such that she had to do her final exam on the first day back too  ::)). On her first day back she was telling me all about her wonderful activity that she did on holidays. Except "I wasn't really happy with [aspect] because I was pretty drunk when it happened".

Great. I'm a mandatory reporter of course, so that will now be investigated and questions will probably be asked of her mother who took her on the holiday. The professional darwinism part is that her mother is a police officer. *facepalm*


I think it depends on the laws of the country she was holidaying in and the age of the student.  This doesn't automatically ring awful to me.

I have friends whose children vacation in Ireland (where the legal drinking age is much lower than the US) and in Israel (where wine is served to children as well as adults). However, those children would never be allowed sufficient quantities to get "drunk".

I am also a mandatory reporter, so I can sympathize.

My sons have had drinks in countries where it's legal. If someone wants to report me or my ex to CPS for that, they're going to have a very serious fight on their hands.

Why? A mandatory reporter is a mandatory reporter is a mandatory reporter. If your child is old enough to drink then they're old enough to understand what mandatory reporter means. Don't go to school and tell your teacher about your drinking session. It's not that hard. We don't keep it secret or anything.

FWIW I live in a country where the legal drinking age is 18 and I see nothing at all wrong with someone from a place with a drinking age of 21 giving their 19 year old a drink while they're here. I also don't see anything wrong with parents who give their child a 'taste', European style, although it's not what I choose to do. But - and this is the important bit - my personal opinion doesn't matter. That's what mandatory means. You can disagree with the system all you want and I certainly agree that it's OTT in many cases, but I really don't care enough to lose my job over it.

But why would the mandatory reporter report it?  No-one did anything illegal.

Iris

  • Member
  • Posts: 3252
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3184 on: December 08, 2012, 01:24:26 AM »
^ The truancy talk reminded me of a potential case of PD I encountered recently.

I WISH it was against the law for parents to take their child on vacation during school term in my country. One of my students just missed 5 weeks of school (the timing was such that she had to do her final exam on the first day back too  ::)). On her first day back she was telling me all about her wonderful activity that she did on holidays. Except "I wasn't really happy with [aspect] because I was pretty drunk when it happened".

Great. I'm a mandatory reporter of course, so that will now be investigated and questions will probably be asked of her mother who took her on the holiday. The professional darwinism part is that her mother is a police officer. *facepalm*


I think it depends on the laws of the country she was holidaying in and the age of the student.  This doesn't automatically ring awful to me.

I have friends whose children vacation in Ireland (where the legal drinking age is much lower than the US) and in Israel (where wine is served to children as well as adults). However, those children would never be allowed sufficient quantities to get "drunk".

I am also a mandatory reporter, so I can sympathize.

My sons have had drinks in countries where it's legal. If someone wants to report me or my ex to CPS for that, they're going to have a very serious fight on their hands.

Why? A mandatory reporter is a mandatory reporter is a mandatory reporter. If your child is old enough to drink then they're old enough to understand what mandatory reporter means. Don't go to school and tell your teacher about your drinking session. It's not that hard. We don't keep it secret or anything.

FWIW I live in a country where the legal drinking age is 18 and I see nothing at all wrong with someone from a place with a drinking age of 21 giving their 19 year old a drink while they're here. I also don't see anything wrong with parents who give their child a 'taste', European style, although it's not what I choose to do. But - and this is the important bit - my personal opinion doesn't matter. That's what mandatory means. You can disagree with the system all you want and I certainly agree that it's OTT in many cases, but I really don't care enough to lose my job over it.

But why would the mandatory reporter report it?  No-one did anything illegal.

Again, not my call. If a minor child tells me they were drunk, it's not my role to ask which country they were holidaying in and research the laws relevant to that country. It just isn't. It's my job to TELL the person whose job it IS to follow things like that up. If nothing illegal was done it will simply be dropped, and everything will be fine, but that's not my role in this.

I have even made reports like "Student X was trying to tell me how stoned they were. I'm pretty much 100% sure they were making it up just to annoy me, but anyway, now I've told you." They probably ARE making it up, they may be taking medicinal marijuana, they may have been in a country where it's legal, but it's Not My Call. It's never, ever my call.
"Can't do anything with children, can you?" the woman said.

Poirot thought you could, but forebore to say so.

VorFemme

  • Member
  • Posts: 13746
  • It's too darned hot! (song from Kiss Me, Kate)
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3185 on: December 08, 2012, 01:13:07 PM »
^ The truancy talk reminded me of a potential case of PD I encountered recently.

I WISH it was against the law for parents to take their child on vacation during school term in my country. One of my students just missed 5 weeks of school (the timing was such that she had to do her final exam on the first day back too  ::)). On her first day back she was telling me all about her wonderful activity that she did on holidays. Except "I wasn't really happy with [aspect] because I was pretty drunk when it happened".

Great. I'm a mandatory reporter of course, so that will now be investigated and questions will probably be asked of her mother who took her on the holiday. The professional darwinism part is that her mother is a police officer. *facepalm*


I think it depends on the laws of the country she was holidaying in and the age of the student.  This doesn't automatically ring awful to me.

I have friends whose children vacation in Ireland (where the legal drinking age is much lower than the US) and in Israel (where wine is served to children as well as adults). However, those children would never be allowed sufficient quantities to get "drunk".

I am also a mandatory reporter, so I can sympathize.

My sons have had drinks in countries where it's legal. If someone wants to report me or my ex to CPS for that, they're going to have a very serious fight on their hands.

Why? A mandatory reporter is a mandatory reporter is a mandatory reporter. If your child is old enough to drink then they're old enough to understand what mandatory reporter means. Don't go to school and tell your teacher about your drinking session. It's not that hard. We don't keep it secret or anything.

FWIW I live in a country where the legal drinking age is 18 and I see nothing at all wrong with someone from a place with a drinking age of 21 giving their 19 year old a drink while they're here. I also don't see anything wrong with parents who give their child a 'taste', European style, although it's not what I choose to do. But - and this is the important bit - my personal opinion doesn't matter. That's what mandatory means. You can disagree with the system all you want and I certainly agree that it's OTT in many cases, but I really don't care enough to lose my job over it.

But why would the mandatory reporter report it?  No-one did anything illegal.

Because the law is written in black & white terms - if they KNOW (or seriously suspect) then they have to report it and let the investigation begin.......or risk their own job if circumstances "out" the information and it comes out in THAT investigation that "mandatory reporter" knew anything (or had reason to suspect) that something was going on.

DH is also a teacher and a mandatory reporter.
Let sleeping dragons be.......morning breath......need I explain?

artk2002

  • Member
  • Posts: 13799
    • The Delian's Commonwealth
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3186 on: December 08, 2012, 03:01:15 PM »
I'm not going to give the mandatory reporter grief. I understand their position (both my wife and my ex are mandatory reporters.) It's what happens to that report that is my issue.
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.

MissRose

  • Member
  • Posts: 1637
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3187 on: December 08, 2012, 03:05:54 PM »
Back to PD ....

When I worked at the Golden Arches many years ago, I worked with this one guy who was slow as molasses in January.  He was always placed in the grill area to work that didn't require a lot of speed, and he drove many people nuts including me.  How he didn't commit PD I will never know, I know he was still there for a few years longer after I left for an office job.

Mediancat

  • Shibboleth of Shadowland
  • Member
  • Posts: 130
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3188 on: December 10, 2012, 12:15:02 PM »
I was an educator when No Child Left Behind was adopted, and I had not clue what she was talking about so had to open another tab to find it.

I was a librarian when Accelerated Reader program was started and did all the computer programing for them and manually labeled all of the books myself. Kids would come in for 'AR' books and I would just look at them blankly.

Pretty much except for FBI as an acronym, I'm lost. That includes staring at the computer screen and having to think about what DH means. No hope for me, I gress.

I know what it means in this context, but I keep thinking "Designated Hitter."

Rob
"In all of mankind's history, there has never been more damage done than by someone who 'thought they were doing the right thing'." -- Lucy, Peanuts

AfleetAlex

  • Member
  • Posts: 578
  • Proud cat mom and Auntie
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3189 on: December 13, 2012, 09:29:05 AM »
A case of PD at my previous job:

BG/ It was a small company (less than 50 employees) and the owners were always in-house. There were about 10 sales staff. One such employee was a healthy man in his mid 30's. (This is relevant.) /end BG

The employee lost his job thusly. He (and the rest of the sales staff) were always under lots of pressure to sell, sell, sell and meet their quotas. All was going swimmingly until he unexpectedly fell ill and had to be hospitalized (he recovered completely), and then his plan unravelled.

To meet his quotas, we learned he was writing up orders for his clients without their consent, and then cancelling the orders before the product was actually delivered.  However, while he was hospitalized, some of the fake orders actually went through before he could cancel them, and companies were calling to find out why something they hadn't ordered was being delivered. And thus his medical leave became permanent.
I have a chronic case of foot-in-mouth disease.

LazyDaisy

  • Member
  • Posts: 1154
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3190 on: December 13, 2012, 10:52:13 AM »
That sounds like something that has been going on here for about two years -- except that we're the customer. On large print jobs for the university, we get bids from several print vendors to show that we're not favoring anyone and we're getting the best prices. We have a short list of vendors we trust who we have a good idea that their prices consistently beat out the competition. Every once in a while we'll go with a new vendor so it isn't unheard of.

About two years ago, the owner of a print company that we've never used called up my boss to ask him about the dozen or so print estimates that one of his salesmen, Brett Vanderhouse (made up but he has an unusual name), had in the system for us. He indicated that Brett was no longer with the company so he just wanted to follow up. Boss let him know that while Brett had solicited business from us, we've never actually had him bid on any jobs (he verified with each of us graphic designers that we haven't contacted Brett). That seemed the end of it at the time.

And then about a year later Boss gets a similar call from a different print company that we've never used. Brett Vanderhouse, who has recently left the company, has several print jobs pending for us and they want to follow up. Nope, we've never requested estimates from them.

And then just this last week...Boss gets an email announcement /solicitation from another print company..."Hey meet our new sales associate, Brett Vanderhouse. If you have any print needs, please give us a call...yadda yadda yadda." Boss is debating on whether to call the owners to let them know what Brett has been up to at his last two jobs. The crazy thing is that Brett himself never actually calls us up to solicit work and most print sales people I know work mostly on commission, so other than buying time, what does Brett get by faking jobs that aren't ever going to print?
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Ms_Cellany

  • The Queen of Squee
  • Member
  • Posts: 6001
  • Big white goggie? No. Hasn't seen him.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3191 on: December 13, 2012, 01:42:55 PM »
The crazy thing is that Brett himself never actually calls us up to solicit work and most print sales people I know work mostly on commission, so other than buying time, what does Brett get by faking jobs that aren't ever going to print?

Wasn't there something in the PD thread about a guy who made quota by falsifying orders then cancelling them at the last second?
Bingle bongle dingle dangle yickity-do yickity-dah ping-pong lippy-toppy too tah.

greencat

  • Member
  • Posts: 3899
  • Trap...Neuter...What was that third thing again?
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3192 on: December 13, 2012, 02:31:37 PM »
The crazy thing is that Brett himself never actually calls us up to solicit work and most print sales people I know work mostly on commission, so other than buying time, what does Brett get by faking jobs that aren't ever going to print?

Wasn't there something in the PD thread about a guy who made quota by falsifying orders then cancelling them at the last second?

This is the PD thread - and the post you're talking about was the one right before it!

I was wondering if they might have been one and the same person, though...

Ms_Cellany

  • The Queen of Squee
  • Member
  • Posts: 6001
  • Big white goggie? No. Hasn't seen him.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3193 on: December 13, 2012, 02:37:25 PM »
The crazy thing is that Brett himself never actually calls us up to solicit work and most print sales people I know work mostly on commission, so other than buying time, what does Brett get by faking jobs that aren't ever going to print?

Wasn't there something in the PD thread about a guy who made quota by falsifying orders then cancelling them at the last second?

This is the PD thread - and the post you're talking about was the one right before it!

I was wondering if they might have been one and the same person, though...

My only excuse is the prescription cough syrup...
Bingle bongle dingle dangle yickity-do yickity-dah ping-pong lippy-toppy too tah.

Seraphia

  • Member
  • Posts: 1816
  • Unabashed cat person
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3194 on: December 13, 2012, 02:40:22 PM »
Ms_Cellany, I thought the exact same thing.  :P In my case, it was the alka-seltzer.
Ancora Imparo - I am still learning