Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 1338490 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Amava

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4751
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3225 on: January 05, 2013, 08:21:35 PM »
For those of you who don't know, I'm a corrections officer (aka prison guard).  I cannot get into much detail in the thread, but I can tell you this:

A CO was using Google Maps to show addresses for an offender because, apparently, the offender wanted to see where his daughter lived.

"his daughter" being "the CO's daughter" or "the offender's daughter"?

JadeAngel

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 977
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3226 on: January 05, 2013, 08:40:06 PM »
For those of you who don't know, I'm a corrections officer (aka prison guard).  I cannot get into much detail in the thread, but I can tell you this:

A CO was using Google Maps to show addresses for an offender because, apparently, the offender wanted to see where his daughter lived.

"his daughter" being "the CO's daughter" or "the offender's daughter"?

I would hope the CO wouldn't be showing an inmate pictures/maps of where the CO's family lived, but at this point I wouldn't put anything past anyone.

I assume the offending CO has been relieved of his duties or will be very soon. Especially as I am sure that he/she only has the inmate's word that the address they're looking for is actually the home of a family member and that this "alleged" daughter would want her father to have directions to her home. 

Mental Magpie

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5316
  • ...for the dark side looks back.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3227 on: January 05, 2013, 08:46:30 PM »
For those of you who don't know, I'm a corrections officer (aka prison guard).  I cannot get into much detail in the thread, but I can tell you this:

A CO was using Google Maps to show addresses for an offender because, apparently, the offender wanted to see where his daughter lived.

"his daughter" being "the CO's daughter" or "the offender's daughter"?

I would hope the CO wouldn't be showing an inmate pictures/maps of where the CO's family lived, but at this point I wouldn't put anything past anyone.

I assume the offending CO has been relieved of his duties or will be very soon. Especially as I am sure that he/she only has the inmate's word that the address they're looking for is actually the home of a family member and that this "alleged" daughter would want her father to have directions to her home.

It was the inmate's daughter's address.  Yes, the CO was relieved of his duties post haste.
The problem with choosing the lesser of two evils is that you're still choosing evil.

ladyknight1

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7465
  • Operating the logic hammer since 1987.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3228 on: January 05, 2013, 08:52:08 PM »
In Florida, we have CO's who are killed by inmates every year. Usually, there is another CO who is found to be at fault. So senseless and tragic.

Mental Magpie

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5316
  • ...for the dark side looks back.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3229 on: January 05, 2013, 09:21:00 PM »
In Florida, we have CO's who are killed by inmates every year. Usually, there is another CO who is found to be at fault. So senseless and tragic.

Wow.  Just wow.  In the entirety of my state's correctional history (1887), only 21 officers have been killed, 11 of which happened in one riot.  I cannot imagine being a CO in Florida.  So senseless and tragic.
The problem with choosing the lesser of two evils is that you're still choosing evil.

ladyknight1

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7465
  • Operating the logic hammer since 1987.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3230 on: January 05, 2013, 10:28:17 PM »
The federal prisons here have lower rates than the state prisons do.

I'mnotinsane

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2373
  • My mother had me tested
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3231 on: January 05, 2013, 11:51:20 PM »
Why on earth would one start a fight over ketchup? Maybe it wasn't his idea of a good sandwich, but if the customer wants ketchup, and you have ketchup, why (at best) lose a customer over a couple of cents that are the company's, not yours, and (at worst) end up with jail time?  :o

As far as I know, Subway doesn't carry ketchup and never has. It might be one of the ones in a Wal-Mart, in which case, yeah, the customer could go buy his own. But that's a bizarre reason for either guy to suddenly go caveman on each other.

It is-it was mentioned in the article.  Not that he should have to buy a bottle of ketchup.

What do you mean? Of course he should. The Subway is under no obligation to provide it for him.

The customer is under no obligation to buy his sandwiches from subway.  The article didn't say whether or not he asked for ketchup from the beginning or after the sandwich was made.  If I order a sandwich with an ingredient a restaurant doesn't have the employee needs to inform me of that fact upfront. 

Hillia

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3996
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3232 on: January 06, 2013, 12:39:31 AM »
To be fair, at Subway you watch your sandwich being made as it moves down an assembly line, and condiments are the very last stop.  So the customer wouldn't have asked for ketchup til the very end, and wouldn't have known there was no ketchup until then.

Why the employee lost his mind is a mystery.

            Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Weight Loss Tools

Giggity

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8622
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3233 on: January 06, 2013, 11:06:09 AM »
Was it the nurse? I thought I read it was the hospital receptionist that transferred the call to the nurse. So very sad.

The woman who apparently committed suicide is a nurse, but she was not the nurse who divulged the details. She was the one who accepted that the pranksters were real, and put the call through to the ward, where it was handled by another nurse.

Ugh, I hope those DJs get charged with something.

They should be charged no differently than if the woman had not committed suicide.

That's a good point.

Well, I just heard that the radio hosts are not going back to their radio show until further notice out of respect for the nurse.  I hope that further notice is a day after never.

Why? This is no dumber than any other radio prank in the history of ever. It's not the DJs' fault that the woman killed herself.
Words mean things.

Giggity

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8622
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3234 on: January 06, 2013, 11:08:11 AM »
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

That's why I hate acronyms and don't use them.
Words mean things.

cass2591

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3357
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3235 on: January 06, 2013, 01:18:58 PM »
Was it the nurse? I thought I read it was the hospital receptionist that transferred the call to the nurse. So very sad.

The woman who apparently committed suicide is a nurse, but she was not the nurse who divulged the details. She was the one who accepted that the pranksters were real, and put the call through to the ward, where it was handled by another nurse.

Ugh, I hope those DJs get charged with something.

They should be charged no differently than if the woman had not committed suicide.

That's a good point.

Well, I just heard that the radio hosts are not going back to their radio show until further notice out of respect for the nurse.  I hope that further notice is a day after never.

Why? This is no dumber than any other radio prank in the history of ever. It's not the DJs' fault that the woman killed herself.


Move on, please. No reason to start this again.
There is no pie in Nighthawks, which is why it's such a desolate image. ~ Happy Stomach

I am an old man and have known a great many troubles, but most of them never happened. ~ Mark Twain

Adopting a pet won't change the world, but it will change the world for that pet.

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 #3236 on: January 06, 2013, 07:27:12 PM »
In Florida, we have CO's who are killed by inmates every year. Usually, there is another CO who is found to be at fault. So senseless and tragic.

Wow.  Just wow.  In the entirety of my state's correctional history (1887), only 21 officers have been killed, 11 of which happened in one riot.  I cannot imagine being a CO in Florida.  So senseless and tragic.

My Uncle on my mum's side is a Federal CO in Puerto Rico.  You have my respect.

Giggity

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8622
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3237 on: January 07, 2013, 08:19:24 AM »
Move on, please. No reason to start this again.

Sorry, wasn't aware it had been discussed.
Words mean things.

ladyknight1

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7465
  • Operating the logic hammer since 1987.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3238 on: January 07, 2013, 09:32:27 AM »
We have a young man who works as our receptionist. He has a Master's degree and only works here because his fiancÚ attends school here. He is doing a fairly good job.

Here is the PD part. He took a week off mid-December, returned and worked a few days before our eleven day holiday break and then took the first three days of the new year off. He is an hourly employee and gets three weeks of vacation a year, and has already used two weeks in the last month, plus the time we were closed. Before he came back to work (today), he had already contacted his manager about taking a week off in March and another in May.

He has only been here a year, so he has used all the time he has accrued, and will not accrue another week by his March requested time off.

TurtleDove

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5972
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3239 on: January 07, 2013, 10:32:30 AM »
We have a young man who works as our receptionist. He has a Master's degree and only works here because his fiancÚ attends school here. He is doing a fairly good job.

Here is the PD part. He took a week off mid-December, returned and worked a few days before our eleven day holiday break and then took the first three days of the new year off. He is an hourly employee and gets three weeks of vacation a year, and has already used two weeks in the last month, plus the time we were closed. Before he came back to work (today), he had already contacted his manager about taking a week off in March and another in May.

He has only been here a year, so he has used all the time he has accrued, and will not accrue another week by his March requested time off.

I am guessing that he does not see the receptionist job as a career so he is not overly concerned about this situation.