Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 1258446 times)

1 Member and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

darling

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 269
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3420 on: February 13, 2013, 10:32:32 AM »
Fab.  It's busy season - I'm lucky I have clean underwear, and that's only because my husband is the bestest ever.  Answering the phone is just about bottom of the list.  Being in a dubious directory?  Not even in the top 1,072,876 things I need to work through.

LOL, I had to laugh, because that's exactly how busy I am right now. Only it's my son (18) who has to do the laundry!

pierrotlunaire0

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4151
  • I'm the cat's aunt!
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3421 on: February 13, 2013, 12:08:15 PM »
I am not yet certain how this is going to play out.  BG: We have to be very careful with driver information.  The DPPA (Driver Privacy Protection Act) forbids us from accessing people's info for personal use, as well as releasing info to any unauthorised person.  One employee lost her job last year for looking up her ex's info.  We also had a specific training session on the importance of DPPA. End BG.

Mary and Rhonda shared a printer.  Both are fast and a little careless.  In December, both process licenses and both grab at the paper coming out of the printer, except they managed to grab each other's.  Mary takes a photo and sends her customer on his way with SOMEONE ELSE'S personal info.  Rhonda managed to tear her paper, so she looked at it carefully, realized the error, and redid hers.  Rhonda's customer ended up leaving with his own, but Mary's customer didn't.  I bring Mary into the office and discuss it with her.

In January, it happens again.  I am walking by when Rhonda's customer returns: This is not my registration, this is someone else's!  This time two customers have received someone else's info.  The main office feels that this is becoming a major problem.  I am directed to write up both clerks for being in violation of the law.

Mary has a problem with this.  She says she didn't do anything!  Rhonda did it!  And what is this about it happening before?  This has never happened before.  When I reminded her, she only "vaguely remembered something about it."  Mary files a union grievance: she wants the write up expunged from her record.  The union rep even asked me why only Mary was written up, and not Rhonda.  Rhonda was written up also, but she acknowledged her mistake and vowed to be more careful.

So I am waiting for the union grievance, and Mary has changed work stations and now shares with Tory.  Then last week, Mary abruptly goes off on sick leave for at least two weeks (the flu is decimating us).  Monday, I found out that the day before she went off sick, Mary did it again, this time swapping info with Tory.  It also seems that Mary told Tory that she had told me all about it, and I had directed her to mail out correct info to the customers affected.

It will be interesting to see what happens when (or if) Mary returns.
I have enough lithium in my medicine cabinet to power three cars across a sizeable desert.  Which makes me officially...Three Cars Crazy

Midnight Kitty

  • The Queen of Sludge
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3635
    • The Stoddard's Hale
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3422 on: February 13, 2013, 02:31:46 PM »
Monday, I found out that the day before she went off sick, Mary did it again, this time swapping info with Tory.  It also seems that Mary told Tory that she had told me all about it, and I had directed her to mail out correct info to the customers affected.
Since you mention you found out about this Monday, I deduce that Mary was lying to Tory and you don't think mailing out the correct info to the customers affected is a satisfactory resolution.  Someone's pigeons are about to come home to roost.

I work for the State Dept. of Health.  Even though I don't work with patients (I work in Environmental Health), all the HIPAA rules apply to the entire Dept. of Health.  Other state agencies have had some spectacular security/privacy breaches - secured personal data which should never have been downloaded to a private laptop in the first place, let alone leaving the laptop in a parked car in plain sight so it gets stolen.  I am surprised that they have not announced the termination of that idiot.  Sometimes head have to roll to get the attention of entrenched bureaucrats.
"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

pierrotlunaire0

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4151
  • I'm the cat's aunt!
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3423 on: February 13, 2013, 02:44:08 PM »
In terms of satisfactory resolution, Mary's write up contained the language: Effective immediately, you will not release customer information to anyone else except for the customer in question.  Failure to adhere to this may result in suspension or even termination.

I don't know how many times I said to her: Look at the paperwork before you hand it to the customer.  Make certain that the name on the paperwork matches your customer.  Our info isn't as sensitive as HPPA, but it is extremely sensitive.  Some of our stuff would contain enough info to successfully commit identity fraud.
I have enough lithium in my medicine cabinet to power three cars across a sizeable desert.  Which makes me officially...Three Cars Crazy

anonever13

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 48
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3424 on: February 13, 2013, 04:29:32 PM »
I was trying to decided whether to post this in Professional Darwinism or Special Snowflakes

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Seattle-barista-fired-over-snarky-anonymous-blog-190947201.html

Short story:  A barista who created an anonymous blog listing complaints about customers was fired by the coffee shop he worked for once they found out about the blog. 

On the one hand I think it's wrong for someone to get fired for things they posted anonymously, on the other hand this guy was writing some pretty petty and awful things.

bopper

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12222
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3425 on: February 13, 2013, 04:31:48 PM »
I am not yet certain how this is going to play out.  BG: We have to be very careful with driver information.  The DPPA (Driver Privacy Protection Act) forbids us from accessing people's info for personal use, as well as releasing info to any unauthorised person.  One employee lost her job last year for looking up her ex's info.  We also had a specific training session on the importance of DPPA. End BG.

Mary and Rhonda shared a printer.  Both are fast and a little careless.  In December, both process licenses and both grab at the paper coming out of the printer, except they managed to grab each other's.  Mary takes a photo and sends her customer on his way with SOMEONE ELSE'S personal info.  Rhonda managed to tear her paper, so she looked at it carefully, realized the error, and redid hers.  Rhonda's customer ended up leaving with his own, but Mary's customer didn't.  I bring Mary into the office and discuss it with her.

In January, it happens again.  I am walking by when Rhonda's customer returns: This is not my registration, this is someone else's!  This time two customers have received someone else's info.  The main office feels that this is becoming a major problem.  I am directed to write up both clerks for being in violation of the law.

Mary has a problem with this.  She says she didn't do anything!  Rhonda did it!  And what is this about it happening before?  This has never happened before.  When I reminded her, she only "vaguely remembered something about it."  Mary files a union grievance: she wants the write up expunged from her record.  The union rep even asked me why only Mary was written up, and not Rhonda.  Rhonda was written up also, but she acknowledged her mistake and vowed to be more careful.

So I am waiting for the union grievance, and Mary has changed work stations and now shares with Tory.  Then last week, Mary abruptly goes off on sick leave for at least two weeks (the flu is decimating us).  Monday, I found out that the day before she went off sick, Mary did it again, this time swapping info with Tory.  It also seems that Mary told Tory that she had told me all about it, and I had directed her to mail out correct info to the customers affected.

It will be interesting to see what happens when (or if) Mary returns.

Get everyone their own printer.

Amara

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2495
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3426 on: February 13, 2013, 05:06:04 PM »
I am not yet certain how this is going to play out.  BG: We have to be very careful with driver information.  The DPPA (Driver Privacy Protection Act) forbids us from accessing people's info for personal use, as well as releasing info to any unauthorised person.  One employee lost her job last year for looking up her ex's info.  We also had a specific training session on the importance of DPPA. End BG.

Mary and Rhonda shared a printer.  Both are fast and a little careless.  In December, both process licenses and both grab at the paper coming out of the printer, except they managed to grab each other's.  Mary takes a photo and sends her customer on his way with SOMEONE ELSE'S personal info.  Rhonda managed to tear her paper, so she looked at it carefully, realized the error, and redid hers.  Rhonda's customer ended up leaving with his own, but Mary's customer didn't.  I bring Mary into the office and discuss it with her.

In January, it happens again.  I am walking by when Rhonda's customer returns: This is not my registration, this is someone else's!  This time two customers have received someone else's info.  The main office feels that this is becoming a major problem.  I am directed to write up both clerks for being in violation of the law.

Mary has a problem with this.  She says she didn't do anything!  Rhonda did it!  And what is this about it happening before?  This has never happened before.  When I reminded her, she only "vaguely remembered something about it."  Mary files a union grievance: she wants the write up expunged from her record.  The union rep even asked me why only Mary was written up, and not Rhonda.  Rhonda was written up also, but she acknowledged her mistake and vowed to be more careful.

So I am waiting for the union grievance, and Mary has changed work stations and now shares with Tory.  Then last week, Mary abruptly goes off on sick leave for at least two weeks (the flu is decimating us).  Monday, I found out that the day before she went off sick, Mary did it again, this time swapping info with Tory.  It also seems that Mary told Tory that she had told me all about it, and I had directed her to mail out correct info to the customers affected.

It will be interesting to see what happens when (or if) Mary returns.

Get everyone their own printer.

Or institute a rule that the name on the paper has to be highlighted before it is handed over. Something like that?

VorFemme

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12642
  • Strolls with scissors! Too tired to run today!
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3427 on: February 13, 2013, 05:35:20 PM »
I am not yet certain how this is going to play out.  BG: We have to be very careful with driver information.  The DPPA (Driver Privacy Protection Act) forbids us from accessing people's info for personal use, as well as releasing info to any unauthorised person.  One employee lost her job last year for looking up her ex's info.  We also had a specific training session on the importance of DPPA. End BG.

Mary and Rhonda shared a printer.  Both are fast and a little careless.  In December, both process licenses and both grab at the paper coming out of the printer, except they managed to grab each other's.  Mary takes a photo and sends her customer on his way with SOMEONE ELSE'S personal info.  Rhonda managed to tear her paper, so she looked at it carefully, realized the error, and redid hers.  Rhonda's customer ended up leaving with his own, but Mary's customer didn't.  I bring Mary into the office and discuss it with her.

In January, it happens again.  I am walking by when Rhonda's customer returns: This is not my registration, this is someone else's!  This time two customers have received someone else's info.  The main office feels that this is becoming a major problem.  I am directed to write up both clerks for being in violation of the law.

Mary has a problem with this.  She says she didn't do anything!  Rhonda did it!  And what is this about it happening before?  This has never happened before.  When I reminded her, she only "vaguely remembered something about it."  Mary files a union grievance: she wants the write up expunged from her record.  The union rep even asked me why only Mary was written up, and not Rhonda.  Rhonda was written up also, but she acknowledged her mistake and vowed to be more careful.

So I am waiting for the union grievance, and Mary has changed work stations and now shares with Tory.  Then last week, Mary abruptly goes off on sick leave for at least two weeks (the flu is decimating us).  Monday, I found out that the day before she went off sick, Mary did it again, this time swapping info with Tory.  It also seems that Mary told Tory that she had told me all about it, and I had directed her to mail out correct info to the customers affected.

It will be interesting to see what happens when (or if) Mary returns.

Get everyone their own printer.

Or institute a rule that the name on the paper has to be highlighted before it is handed over. Something like that?

Or the customer has to confirm the birth date or something on the paperwork for the employee to check before handing the printout over to them.  It would be unlikely for that to duplicate often....if you go with "last four" and birthdate - it should almost never duplicate (statistically, at least, it would be extremely rare - not being Spock, I'm not going to calculate the odds). 
Let sleeping dragons be.......morning breath......need I say more?

pierrotlunaire0

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4151
  • I'm the cat's aunt!
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3428 on: February 13, 2013, 05:47:42 PM »
 New printers: Not going to happen.  This is government, and we limp along with the equipment we have.

The other suggestions I have made: Look at the paperwork, and say, "Mr. Donan, here is your updated registration."  Or when you tear off the small corner that we keep, compare our tab with your computer screen.

Mary's response is to blame her coworkers, and claim that she is only making a simple mistake, and we are making a undo fuss. 
I have enough lithium in my medicine cabinet to power three cars across a sizeable desert.  Which makes me officially...Three Cars Crazy

Midnight Kitty

  • The Queen of Sludge
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3635
    • The Stoddard's Hale
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3429 on: February 13, 2013, 06:24:18 PM »
Mary's response is to blame her coworkers, and claim that she is only making a simple mistake, and we are making a undo fuss.
Mary needs a reality check.  There are "simple mistakes" and "acts that violate the law."  Acts that violate the law are not simple mistakes and they have serious consequences, like losing your job.
"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

Miss Tickle

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 211
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3430 on: February 14, 2013, 12:45:55 AM »
Well, if I wanted to personalize that someone I'd never met made comments that personally applied to me, I guess I could construe that he hates me.
Actually, she didn't fire him immediately...she sent him home to wait for a call from his manager. Then she went and demanded the manager fire him.
I think you may be confused about what I'm saying. I'm not saying that the employee should not have been fired. I'm saying that it was handled badly. And that a company who handles a firing this way is probably abusive of its employees in many other ways, as the other workers described. A company that doesn't prioritize being kind to workers probably doesn't really care about customers, either. Just about pretending whatever's necessary to 'preserve the brand'.
I guess I did, because I completely agree with everything you say. I also think if you sign a release to be on tv you better be very careful, what you say can and will be used against you and all that.

Miss Tickle

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 211
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3431 on: February 14, 2013, 01:00:55 AM »
My husband asked me if I would recognize my company's CEO if he did something like this. I said of course I would. He asked how I knew. I told him that it was because our CEO is French and has a very distinct accent.  :P >:D :P

Our CEO is orange.

He spends a LOT of time in his tanning bed that is in his penthouse office.

Our CEO is almost 7 feet tall.

Mixed marriage on the parents part?

Half Oompa Loompa half giant?

"Oompa Loompa doompady do
How's the weather down there for you?"
Ha!

Speaking of the giant CEO, there is a long standing tradition of firing (usually new) employees that violate privacy to see what his bonus is each year. Fee, Fie, Foo, Fum, I smell the blood of a dum-dee dum-dum.

Mediancat

  • Shibboleth of Shadowland
  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 559
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3432 on: February 14, 2013, 08:01:31 AM »
Mary's response is to blame her coworkers, and claim that she is only making a simple mistake, and we are making a undo fuss.
Mary needs a reality check.  There are "simple mistakes" and "acts that violate the law."  Acts that violate the law are not simple mistakes and they have serious consequences, like losing your job.

Slight disagreement. I work with HIPAA and there are indeed some very simple things you can do that violates the law.  Which in no way, shape or forms makes violation of the law excusable, just that it can be very easy to do so.

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

MrTango

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2256
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3433 on: February 14, 2013, 08:19:53 AM »
Mary's response is to blame her coworkers, and claim that she is only making a simple mistake, and we are making a undo fuss.
Mary needs a reality check.  There are "simple mistakes" and "acts that violate the law."  Acts that violate the law are not simple mistakes and they have serious consequences, like losing your job.

Slight disagreement. I work with HIPAA and there are indeed some very simple things you can do that violates the law.  Which in no way, shape or forms makes violation of the law excusable, just that it can be very easy to do so.

Rob

You're right, it can be very easy to inadvertantly violate privacy laws.  For that reason, an attitude like Mary's is absolutely unacceptable in that sort of position.  If I had an employee who reacted as Mary did when confronted with her repeated errors, I'd bring it to HR and request that she either be terminated or reassigned to a position that doesn't involve access to private data.

ladyknight1

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6895
  • Operating the logic hammer since 1987.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #3434 on: February 14, 2013, 10:08:51 AM »
I work with the Federal Education Right to Privacy Act (FERPA) and we have permanent and salaried employees who are fired on a regular basis for violating FERPA. It usually involves money, student athletes and the media.