Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 1087119 times)

1 Member and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

violinp

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3374
  • cabbagegirl28's my sister :)
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4380 on: August 30, 2013, 10:57:58 PM »
WOW.   :o

I'll admit to having a glass of wine at lunch when I got my first job (this would be about 25 years ago), but in my defense, all the other ladies were having wine, too.  (That's why I had some - I wanted to fit in.)  We were always very giggly on Friday afternoons.  :)  Showing up smashed first thing in the morning is another matter altogether!

It was Thursday at 4. How could he possibly be that drunk at only 4 in the afternoon, I don't know.
"It takes a great deal of courage to stand up to your enemies, but even more to stand up to your friends" - Harry Potter


snowfire

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2171
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4381 on: August 30, 2013, 11:23:48 PM »
I can believe it.  When I worked at a construction company one guy showed up for an interview so stoned that he fell out of his chair.  Also, the head mechanic got canned for doing lines of coke on the breakroom table....

PastryGoddess

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4022
    • My Image Portfolio and Store
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4382 on: August 30, 2013, 11:54:24 PM »
I can believe it.  When I worked at a construction company one guy showed up for an interview so stoned that he fell out of his chair.  Also, the head mechanic got canned for doing lines of coke on the breakroom table....

*facepalm*

Really people, you do your lines of coke in the bathroom stall...NOT on the breakroom table
My Photography Gallery
http://www.ctartisticphotos.com/

Library Dragon

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1160
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4383 on: August 31, 2013, 12:58:01 AM »
It's a little thing, but it's best not to wear bright blue panties with white pants to your interview.  It was distracting.

            Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter

MariaE

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4307
  • So many books, so little time
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4384 on: August 31, 2013, 02:43:14 AM »
Getting drunk at a work party - no problem, even some of the partners do that.
Getting drunk at a work party when you know you get agressive when drunk - problem.
Getting drunk at a work party and trying to butt a coworker - huge problem.
Getting drunk at a work party and trying to butt a coworker when you've already been given a warning about such behaviour - PD.

Yeah, he's not with us any longer. He was brilliant at his job, but completely unpleasant when drunk.
 
Dane by birth, Kiwi by choice

rain

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 708
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4385 on: August 31, 2013, 06:24:52 AM »
What's "butt" a co-worker mean?

I'm thinking head butt (problem) or butt bump (I don't see as an issue - when the "butt"er is drunk)
"oh we thank thee lord for the things we need, like the wind and the rain and the apple seed"

PastryGoddess

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4022
    • My Image Portfolio and Store
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4386 on: August 31, 2013, 12:00:40 PM »
I hope you don't mean (head) butt a co-worker...cause I'm pretty sure that's assault
My Photography Gallery
http://www.ctartisticphotos.com/

gramma dishes

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7616
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4387 on: August 31, 2013, 12:08:55 PM »
I hope you don't mean (head) butt a co-worker...cause I'm pretty sure that's assault

In most cases a butt-butt would also be considered an assault.   >:(

MariaE

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4307
  • So many books, so little time
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4388 on: August 31, 2013, 04:17:17 PM »
What's "butt" a co-worker mean?

I'm thinking head butt (problem) or butt bump (I don't see as an issue - when the "butt"er is drunk)

I meant head butt. I looked the (Danish) word up in the dictionary, and "butt" was all they gave me - I thought it sounded weird too. Yeah, definitely assault. Other coworkers prevented it from happening and no charges were filed (as far as I know - I wasn't there), but he was fired with immediate effect.

Gramma dishes, in most cases at my work a butt-butt wouldn't be considered an assault. Inappropriate, yes. Assault, no.
 
Dane by birth, Kiwi by choice

jmarvellous

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3050
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4389 on: August 31, 2013, 08:01:04 PM »
We had a guy at my last company who always seemed a bit ... dull. Not dumb, just slow and kind of out of it, fine via email but not very good at explaining simple things or having a conversation longer than two minutes. He would tell me he couldn't fix errors when I knew he could, he just didn't want to go to the trouble.

He was "leaving the company" about 6 months after I started (he'd been there at least 3-4 months longer than me, perhaps more than that), and he was being pretty unclear about what he was leaving for. Most people I worked with were hotshots and would leave for great jobs at great companies.

It came out at a company dinner on his last day, from his BOSS, who had clearly had more than enough, that he was consistently, daily, somewhere between tipsy and plastered. First thing in the morning it was usually tipsy, after lunch it was significantly worse. There may have been alcohol in his desk. They came to "a mutual agreement that he'd seek other opportunities."

I have no idea why he was able to stay there for more than 9 months, but it did explain one thing I'd been pretty curious about: Why did he always smell of whiskey?

TeamBhakta

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2297
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4390 on: August 31, 2013, 10:06:46 PM »
We had a guy at my last company who always seemed a bit ... dull. Not dumb, just slow and kind of out of it, fine via email but not very good at explaining simple things or having a conversation longer than two minutes. He would tell me he couldn't fix errors when I knew he could, he just didn't want to go to the trouble.

He was "leaving the company" about 6 months after I started (he'd been there at least 3-4 months longer than me, perhaps more than that), and he was being pretty unclear about what he was leaving for. Most people I worked with were hotshots and would leave for great jobs at great companies.

It came out at a company dinner on his last day, from his BOSS, who had clearly had more than enough, that he was consistently, daily, somewhere between tipsy and plastered. First thing in the morning it was usually tipsy, after lunch it was significantly worse. There may have been alcohol in his desk. They came to "a mutual agreement that he'd seek other opportunities."

I have no idea why he was able to stay there for more than 9 months, but it did explain one thing I'd been pretty curious about: Why did he always smell of whiskey?

I'd be thinking at that table "pot meet kettle"

jmarvellous

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3050
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4391 on: August 31, 2013, 11:18:48 PM »
We had a guy at my last company who always seemed a bit ... dull. Not dumb, just slow and kind of out of it, fine via email but not very good at explaining simple things or having a conversation longer than two minutes. He would tell me he couldn't fix errors when I knew he could, he just didn't want to go to the trouble.

He was "leaving the company" about 6 months after I started (he'd been there at least 3-4 months longer than me, perhaps more than that), and he was being pretty unclear about what he was leaving for. Most people I worked with were hotshots and would leave for great jobs at great companies.

It came out at a company dinner on his last day, from his BOSS, who had clearly had more than enough, that he was consistently, daily, somewhere between tipsy and plastered. First thing in the morning it was usually tipsy, after lunch it was significantly worse. There may have been alcohol in his desk. They came to "a mutual agreement that he'd seek other opportunities."

I have no idea why he was able to stay there for more than 9 months, but it did explain one thing I'd been pretty curious about: Why did he always smell of whiskey?

I'd be thinking at that table "pot meet kettle"

Ahh, I really misspoke there. I meant he had had enough, as in "he was fed up enough to abandon his usual discretion, " not that he'd had enough to drink!

snowfire

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2171
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4392 on: August 31, 2013, 11:59:36 PM »
Have to keep the details a bit vague, but someone I know had to fire the same guy twice, two different jobs, two different companies, same problem.  The guy in question liked to "self medicate" (yeah, those were his words) with a bottle....a lot.

He had been through rehab several times. Swore up & down that he was sober. He was sent on an overseas business trip with a coworker.  Coworker called back to the U.S. about 48 hours into the trip that this guy had picked up a bottle when they changed planes at major airport, got sloshed on the flight, crawled into his hotel room and kept drinking.  He did not show up at all for work the next day.  Coworker had to finish business meetings solo. Company had to hire a doctor to fly back home with this guy to keep him sober on the plane.  Fired when he got back.

Second time the same guy would keep a bottle stashed behind the dumpster & go out for a swig regularly.  He also had a bad habit of taking crucial equipment home, then when he didn't show up for work the other folks were unable to do their jobs because they did not have critical equipment.  Fired second time.

WolfWay

  • They burnt down my house... They ate my tailor!
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2292
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4393 on: September 03, 2013, 04:46:13 AM »
Update from SA with the [femaledog]-dar: apparently Boss (who is almost never in the office) has got wind of the personality clashes going on with new coworker. He asked Senior Analyst her impression of new coworker. SA gave boss her unfiltered honest opinion. Boss is "making a plan" about new coworker. That means that she's probably on her way out.
Apparently Boss is being hit from all sides by complaints about new coworker (jn less than 7 days of being employed here). She also shot herself in the foot by ticking off HR on her list of people who's toes she's going to stomp on. She was having some access issues with our network (standard for the first couple of days while they get your access set up properly) and she decided the best way to solve this was to spend 40 minutes on the phone complaining to various people. One of the many people she complained to works in HR, and the person who works in HR was NOT IMPRESSED with the way she got spoken to by new coworker.
It's best to love your family as you would a Siberian Tiger - from a distance, preferably separated by bars . -- Pearls Before Swine (16-May-2009)

Twik

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 27850
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4394 on: September 03, 2013, 09:31:47 AM »
More chemists committing PD, this time by photoshop:

http://www.chemistry-blog.com/2013/08/13/alleged-data-manipulation-in-nano-letters-and-acs-nano-from-the-pease-group/

Briefly, a paper was submitted to and published in a very prestigious chemistry journal.  AFTER publication, readers started noticing that in the photos, the experimental objects (nanoparticles) had very distinct boxes of color around them, often with the same flaws on "different" particles...  When the blogger contacted the professor in charge of the lab, he told them that the matter was under internal investigation, and that they better not post a blog entry or he'd sue them for libel.  The paper has been removed from the journal.  One commenter notes that the defense against libel is to tell the absolute truth.

My personal favorite comment was the person who re-photoshopped the pictures to remove the obvious flaws, and said it took him about 10 minutes, including time to get the demo version of PhotoShop.

I've looked at that, and it's quite remarkable how poorly the Photoshopping was done. I could probably have done better, even though I have never been trained in Photoshop. At least clone out the defects that appear in each rod!
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."