News: IMPORTANT UPDATE REGARDING SITE IN FORUM ANNOUNCEMENT FOLDER.

  • May 22, 2018, 08:50:45 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 4288171 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Tsaiko

  • Member
  • Posts: 190
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4710 on: November 01, 2013, 07:33:39 AM »
A section of my company is going through some reorganization. Management of that section has been replaced, and the employees under them are having to reapply for their positions, which are being relocated to a centralized facility and reduced in number for a variety of reasons. I am interviewing the old employees to see which (if any) will be rehired.

It's important to know that the employees have two main tasks: produce product A and follow procedure B when updating anything. Product A can take up 6-8 months to complete the first time, but should only take 2-3 months on subsequent versions. These can be done every 2-3 years. And procedure B comes into play because employees often have to do many, many updates in order to create product A.

We interviewed our first internal candidate a few days ago. This guy has worked for us for over 7 years, with a short break in there where he worked for another company. We asked him about what he had done in his position. He talked at great length about having produced product A, not once, but twice! during his 7 years of employment. Okay, a little slow on releasing and updating product, but reasonable.

I then asked about procedure B. Candidate then proceeded to tell me that he'd never really looked at procedure B, it must have been created sometime during his brief stint at other company (it wasn't, it was completed and released well before that), and besides which, he was much too busy doing tasks C, D, E, F, and G to worry about following procedure B.

So basically he told us that not only was he not doing half his job for 7 years, but that he didn't follow procedure B when producing product A either time, meaning his product A probably isn't up to specifications. He was also wasting time doing tasks that he was not authorized to do.

He then had the nerve to say when we hired him back, he expected his full relocation costs to be covered. Not if, when.

Yeah, no.

Jones

  • Member
  • Posts: 2511
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4711 on: November 01, 2013, 11:21:55 AM »
I am holding off ordering our newest technician's business cards.

You see, he was hired a year and a half ago as an assistant. He worked his way up to technician via learning about the products and getting certifications (which the company paid for). He knows all the rules and procedures. So, imagine our surprise when he's gotten his promotion and suddenly all the paperwork has mistakes. Some are improperly turned in. His inventory is a mess after 2 weeks.

But, today he was posting pictures to Facebook while driving. Company vehicle. Company phone. Did I mention he is FB friends with both his supervisor and the general manager?

So, although I was to order his business cards today I'm going to hold off until next week.
A real desire to believe all the good you can of others and to make others as comfortable as you can will solve most of the problems. CS Lewis

cwm

  • Member
  • Posts: 2337
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4712 on: November 01, 2013, 01:16:49 PM »
Sigh.  Onion chip cookies.    ;D

Is it sad that I think the mention of them is hilarious, while I think the original occurrence as posted was a little sad?  I'd have been crushed if I were the child they happened to.  Am I bad to find it after the fact funny?

There were really onion chip cookies? I thought that was whimsical hilarity. What have I missed?

Is it my onion cookies? My mom gave me a knife she'd just used to cut onions for me to cut tube sugar cookies. They were horrid.

And it's not bad to find it funny, it's one of the things I still tease my mom about, years later. It's more proof that my whole family is crazy, not just me.

Editeer

  • Member
  • Posts: 303
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4713 on: November 01, 2013, 01:56:01 PM »
There's a family story about my great-aunt, my very polite sister, and the onion cookies . . . let's see, which thread does it beling in . . .

Diane AKA Traska

  • Member
  • Posts: 4704
  • Or you can just call me Diane. (NE USA EHellion)
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4714 on: November 01, 2013, 03:23:48 PM »
Sigh.  Onion chip cookies.    ;D

Is it sad that I think the mention of them is hilarious, while I think the original occurrence as posted was a little sad?  I'd have been crushed if I were the child they happened to.  Am I bad to find it after the fact funny?

There were really onion chip cookies? I thought that was whimsical hilarity. What have I missed?

Is it my onion cookies? My mom gave me a knife she'd just used to cut onions for me to cut tube sugar cookies. They were horrid.

And it's not bad to find it funny, it's one of the things I still tease my mom about, years later. It's more proof that my whole family is crazy, not just me.

That was my "onion chip cookie" reference, yes.  ;D
Location:
Philadelphia, PA

chi2kcldy

  • Member
  • Posts: 64
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4715 on: November 01, 2013, 03:45:04 PM »
This act of PD happened at my company's holiday party. My company moved a new division into our corporate office in early December. One of the new ppl was a lady named "June." Our cubes were back to back.

We would chat here and there. Nothing overly personal. The basics like children, weather and lunch. As we continued talking, I thought we may have a nice friendship outside of work one day. That was up until the holiday party.

The party is open bar and is held at the corporate office. A group of about 6, myself included, are upstairs talking. June interrupts the conversation and suggest we do a round of shots. We declined. June calls us a bunch of stiffs and goes over to the bar. During this time her husband is sitting in a chair quietly.

Later I notice June is drunk. Not tipsy but drunk. Another co-worker (Mary) and I tried to keep June in one place hoping she would sober up. I was hoping for assistance from her husband. He did nothing. Just sat in the same spot.

Well after noticing you couldn't keep June in a corner, I exited the situation. My DH and I continued to mingle and enjoy the night. Later Mary's husband ask if I would go into the bathroom and check on her. I ask if everything is ok. He said that Mary took June to the restroom. They have been gone a while.

I go into the ladies room. There is Mary trying to convince June to pull up her pants. June does not want to pull up her pants b/c she is hot. I tell June she is at work, pull it together. She looks at me and lets out a loud wicked yell. It's the type of noise a witch would make when she is flying on a broom. 

I look at Mary and say you are on your own. When i'm exiting the ladies room Mary is hot on my heels. She left June on the toilet. We tell June's husband where to find his wife.

A few moments later the VP's wife found a pants-less June in the ladies bathroom. Needless to say, June quit shortly there after.

White Dragon

  • Formerly St Monica
  • Member
  • Posts: 2347
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4716 on: November 01, 2013, 10:20:46 PM »
Now I want cookies.   ??? ::) ;D
Me too, and could you add more frosting and more chocolate?

Are all of the responses from the same baker or is the whole kitchen falling on their spatula?

They are pretty much all from the same baker, but I think he is speaking for the whole bag of nuts because he uses "we" a lot.
So either he is speaking for the group or speaking from the throne. (The royal kind, not the other kind...)

"The royal 'we', the editorial 'we', or the 'we' of people with tapeworms."

But is it a giant Satanic tapeworm called George?

(Despite the obscurity of that reference, I fully expect at least one EHellion to recognise the source! ;D)

So....all of a sudden my office has been flooded with cookies.
Somebody shook a tree and the cookies fell out. All my missing cookies have come home to roost.
This is good, but it has made me kinda busy. :)

Next week I get to learn how to make my own cookies.
I guess if I can't stand the heat U should stay out of the kitchen. ;D
"I think her scattergun was only loaded with commas and full-stops, although some of them cuddled together for warmth and produced little baby colons and semi-colons." ~ Margo


Library Dragon

  • Member
  • Posts: 1440
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4717 on: November 01, 2013, 11:24:33 PM »
Sometimes it's hard to get people past their probationary period due to PD.

Our newest hire (NH) who's on temporary restricted physical duty.  Okay, I modified the schedule so NH wouldn't be physically stressed. NH went on to do a task that involved heavy lifting, bending, pushing, etc., and that was assigned to someone else. All the time muttering about cussing someone out before the day is over.  Manager hears and asks if everything is okay.  NH is upset because of having to do this physical task. Manager asks why NH did it when it was assigned to someone else.  "I wanted it done now," is the response. 

NH then complained about the other staff talking bad about NH in the break room at b o'clock. Later Manager and I are talking about how to handle the other staffers when volunteer comes in and apologizes for monopolizing staff from a o'clock to c o'clock reviewing her recent big trip.  We casually asked if she met NH.  No, she never saw NH and no one even mentioned that NH was on staff. 

So, we have NH stepping in doing someone else's job and complaining about doing it. Then whining about being "bad mouthed" when NH wasn't even mentioned.   

Some are determined to make their lives miserable.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2013, 11:26:18 PM by Library Dragon »

            Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter

misha412

  • Member
  • Posts: 345
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4718 on: November 02, 2013, 06:23:30 PM »
I hope I haven't posted this before. I apologize if I have.

b/g I used to work in the IT department of Company A. Company A is in a very specific industry without a lot of competition. The owners of Company A used to work for Company B, also in the same industry. When Company B was bought out after the owner's death, the buyer let most of Company B's staff go. The owners of Company A basically went out the day they were let go and started the new company. Over time, they ended up hiring a good number of staff from Company B. I was NOT part of the Company B staff members. end b/g

Company A was growing quickly and lagging behind as far as IT staff. I had been there a couple of years at this point. The head of the department got the budget to hire a couple of contractors to bolster the IT staff. I got assigned to do the initial orientation with the two contractors (showing them what we do, giving them overview, etc.)

So, I spent the Monday morning they arrived giving them the overview. I then took them on a tour of the building to orient them to where certain things were. Along the way, I introduced them to a few people. One of the introductions was to the VP of Finance, a woman who used to work at Company B. She gave one of the contractors (I'll call him Walter) a very odd look during the introductions. This was very unusual for this woman who was always very professional, even with people she didn't care for. W didn't seem to know her or show any sign of it.

After I returned from lunch, I found Walter had been escorted out of the building.

Long story short, Walter had worked for Company B many years before. He had been fired for sexual harassment and making threats. The VP of Finance had recognized him and talked with the head of IT about him. The company had no use for a guy like this.

What gets me the most is that Walter acted like he didn't know anything about the particular industry that both companies are a part of. He had worked in the IT department of Company B for at least a year before being fired. So, he was faking lack of knowledge the entire time he was with me.

FauxFoodist

  • Member
  • Posts: 5015
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4719 on: November 02, 2013, 06:30:37 PM »
Sometimes it's hard to get people past their probationary period due to PD.

Our newest hire (NH) who's on temporary restricted physical duty.  Okay, I modified the schedule so NH wouldn't be physically stressed. NH went on to do a task that involved heavy lifting, bending, pushing, etc., and that was assigned to someone else. All the time muttering about cussing someone out before the day is over.  Manager hears and asks if everything is okay.  NH is upset because of having to do this physical task. Manager asks why NH did it when it was assigned to someone else.  "I wanted it done now," is the response. 

NH then complained about the other staff talking bad about NH in the break room at b o'clock. Later Manager and I are talking about how to handle the other staffers when volunteer comes in and apologizes for monopolizing staff from a o'clock to c o'clock reviewing her recent big trip.  We casually asked if she met NH.  No, she never saw NH and no one even mentioned that NH was on staff. 

So, we have NH stepping in doing someone else's job and complaining about doing it. Then whining about being "bad mouthed" when NH wasn't even mentioned.   

Some are determined to make their lives miserable.

Oddly, it sounds like someone determined to be the center of attention, even negative attention.

My recent PD -- DH told me several months ago this woman (TW) lost her job as church secretary for one of the parishes he attends (they were cutting her job).  Last Thursday, I let DH know we have an ASAP temp opening for another admin and wanted to know if TW still needs a job.  DH contacts her, she does and she tells him she'll contact the temp pool at work (temp pool at my work) and update her resume the next morning.  Early Friday morning, I e-mail TW and let her know the basic requirements for the job and let her know I look forward to hearing from her.  Cue the sound of crickets because it is now Saturday evening, and I still haven't heard from her, not even something as simple as "Thank you for the information; I will send you my resume shortly" to just acknowledge she got the e-mail (DH was part of the thread so I doubt it would've gone to spam).  It may sound like I'm expecting too much but if you are desperate for work and have been given an in for a good position that needs someone immediately, don't you think you should do your best to be quick to maintain contact so that you give a good impression?  At this point, I question her reliability because if she can't even reply to my e-mail in a timely fashion, what makes me think she would be able to handle the responsibilities of the job?  I don't know her but thought I'd try to help someone DH knows.

nutraxfornerves

  • Member
  • Posts: 1785
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4720 on: November 02, 2013, 09:23:34 PM »
Before assuming that TW is being uncooperative, I'd try to contact her by phone. She might be away from internet access due to vacation, death in the family, inability to look at email except by going to the library, etc.

Nutrax
The plural of anecdote is not data

FauxFoodist

  • Member
  • Posts: 5015
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4721 on: November 03, 2013, 01:12:45 AM »
Before assuming that TW is being uncooperative, I'd try to contact her by phone. She might be away from internet access due to vacation, death in the family, inability to look at email except by going to the library, etc.

I understand, but TW told DH she was going to immediately go to the campus the morning I e-mailed her to make sure to update her resume.  I don't know this person; I just thought I'd do her a favor as someone DH mentioned to me who is in need and who he personally knows.  I wouldn't normally do this for an unknown because I don't know what her knowledge is or quality of work is so, yeah, my expectation is high that if someone takes the time out to give you a heads up on a good job opportunity that will go quickly once it's posted and you're in desperate need of a job, then you make sure to quickly reply to the person doing you that favor so the person will do what's possible to advocate for you.  I don't benefit one way or the other by providing my input on who to select; it's my coworker whose going to have to train the person to do her job.

In any case, it might be a blessing in disguise because we had a friend over tonight who also has experience in admin work and currently needs a job.  I let her know also and will send her the link to the temp pool so she can apply when it pops up. 

phred246

  • Member
  • Posts: 342
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4722 on: November 03, 2013, 03:04:05 AM »
I just remembered a couple, not sure I submitted them already...

    A friend who worked for a big drug company told me that there had been a young guy who had worked there for several years right out of college who got the chance for a promotion/department transfer. The new position required an FBI background check, so he filled out all of the paperwork,  and included a misdemeanor drug arrest he got during college. However, HR noticed that the arrest was not on his original job application. When asked about it, he said that he was afraid he wouldn't be hired if the company knew. HR told him that it wouldn't have mattered back then, but by not listing it, he had submitted a false application, and not only would not be promoted/transferred, but also immediately fired!

     Three weeks after I started with a telecom company (1996), another guy was hired for a different department. He started on Monday, filling out all the new employee paperwork, on Tuesday his Supervisor (who sat next to me) had him configure a couple of brand new database servers, on Wednesday morning, he got his company photo ID, on Wednesday afternoon, he got called into a Corporate Directors office and fired, when he came out, he was escorted off the premises! Supervisor wanted so bad to tell me why, but legally/ethically couldn't, so he let me guess. It wasn't that he failed the drug test, but something on his resume and/or job application didn't verify! Supervisor was ticked off, because he couldn't trust the work done on Tuesday, and he had to spend a day to reconfigure the servers, just in case!

   This one is not a PD, but a year or so later, Supervisor (an ex-Marine sharpshooter) put a background program on a UNIX box in his cube that randomly made explosion sounds, from a pistol up to a field gun, at varying volumes. One day, when he was at another site, I was sitting at my desk, working on a preliminary design for a major project that I was in charge of, pencil in one hand, coffee cup in the other, when a very loud noise that sounded like every 16 inch gun on the USS New Jersey had just fired came from his cube! I managed to toss coffee all over that side of my desk, totally destroying the tablet I was writing on, plus a lot of naughty words came out of my mouth! I cleaned up, went to his cube and unplugged the speakers on the system, then copied my work to a new tablet! The next day, I told him what happened and gave him the coffee-scented tablet!

edited to correct a wrong word
Work fascinates me! I can stare at it for hours!

iridaceae

  • Boring in real life as well
  • Member
  • Posts: 3573
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4723 on: November 03, 2013, 03:56:34 AM »
Yeah at a different job we had a guy terminated because he lied on the application. The sad thing was that the arrest he had omitted was such an apparently grey area in terms of why and for what that had he been honest it would not have kept him from being hired or promoted.
Nothing to see here.

heathert

  • Member
  • Posts: 1927
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4724 on: November 03, 2013, 06:49:29 AM »
Just to give a little perspective on why some people may not want to put anything listed on their arrest record onto a job application, a friend of mine did have a drug charge from 20 years ago on her record. She has since totally changed her life and worked at a job for 15 years after but when that position dissolved, it was a very long and hard road to find another job.  Even though it's been 20 years with no further offenses or even a traffic ticket.  People would flat out tell her that was the reason they wouldn't even interview her when she sent in the applications, if they responded at all.

So while obviously you should never lie about it because that would indicate you have not changed, I can see the other side when people get desperate.