News: IMPORTANT UPDATE REGARDING SITE IN FORUM ANNOUNCEMENT FOLDER.

  • May 21, 2018, 11:51:36 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 4286303 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Margo

  • Member
  • Posts: 2186
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4845 on: November 22, 2013, 06:39:55 AM »
You can't do that here (UK). There is a legal obligation for a reference to be fair, accurate, and not misleading.

It tends to mean that someone who is not impressed with an employee will give a very basic reference which simply says "X was employed here from [date] to [date] as a [job title]"

We recently had a member of staff where that was literally all we felt we could say in the reference..

(We could have said a lot more while still being accurate and non-misleading, but he really would not have wanted us to. And yes, we did have to point that out when he tried to talk us into adding some glowing recommendations. It would have been fun...)

I recently wrote a reference for a friend of mine who needed a personal reference as well as a professional one. I took a copy of the form in case I made any mistakes and needed to rewrite  and am thinking about doing a more flamboyant one to send to her  as a joke (she already has the job she was applying for, so there are no negative associations to worry about)



pierrotlunaire0

  • Member
  • Posts: 4608
  • I'm the cat's aunt!
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4846 on: November 22, 2013, 07:41:10 AM »
I recently wrote a reference for a friend of mine who needed a personal reference as well as a professional one. I took a copy of the form in case I made any mistakes and needed to rewrite  and am thinking about doing a more flamboyant one to send to her  as a joke (she already has the job she was applying for, so there are no negative associations to worry about)

I did that once.  Key points:
    Punctuality - Has never been late for lunch.
    Accomplishments - Can stare off into space for hours at a time.
    Communication - keeps her coworkers informed as to the status of her monthly cycle.

My friend didn't want to use it - go figure.
I have enough lithium in my medicine cabinet to power three cars across a sizeable desert.  Which makes me officially...Three Cars Crazy

Ceallach

  • Member
  • Posts: 4493
    • This Is It
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4847 on: November 23, 2013, 06:26:19 AM »
You can't do that here (UK). There is a legal obligation for a reference to be fair, accurate, and not misleading.

It tends to mean that someone who is not impressed with an employee will give a very basic reference which simply says "X was employed here from [date] to [date] as a [job title]"

We recently had a member of staff where that was literally all we felt we could say in the reference..

(We could have said a lot more while still being accurate and non-misleading, but he really would not have wanted us to. And yes, we did have to point that out when he tried to talk us into adding some glowing recommendations. It would have been fun...)

I recently wrote a reference for a friend of mine who needed a personal reference as well as a professional one. I took a copy of the form in case I made any mistakes and needed to rewrite  and am thinking about doing a more flamboyant one to send to her  as a joke (she already has the job she was applying for, so there are no negative associations to worry about)

I would never lie, but in my experience many people who take references are exceedingly poor at it or simply following a form of preset questions. Therefore it is easy without saying a lot to portray it as either negative or positive.   I've never had an employee with no redeeming features I can focus on if needed - I hire good people, very occasionally they're just not the right fit or have some kind of personality issue that causes problems.

However I see you refer to writing a reference.  We don't provide written references here under any circumstances so I think what we are referring to is possibly very different.
"Nobody can do everything, but everybody can do something"


*inviteseller

  • Member
  • Posts: 1771
  • I am Queen Mommy
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4848 on: November 23, 2013, 09:08:05 AM »
My former boss had to institute the rule of giving references =giving just the facts of actual employment after we were threatened by some woman with a lawsuit for saying why she was let go.  We didn't lie or go off on a rant, we were asked "Why is this woman no longer at your company?" and I said "Because she had difficulty with the job requirements and was unhappy with a switch of positions."  I am sure the nice lady figured out what I meant was "She wouldn't do her job and she was demoted to a grunt position so she walked out."  We started only giving dates they worked, position they held, and a simple yes or no as to whether we would hire them back.  I called a reference for a woman we had actually already started a few days before in training (desperate to get someone started and she had experience).  She told us she would have to give notice at her last job when we called her after the interview and we thought that professional and told her to call us with a start date.  She called a few days later to say she could start the next day, so boss said just call her last employer when you get a chance but she seems fine.   Well, she lasted a day and a half because when I called her former employer, she hadn't exactly given notice...she had been fired 3 weeks prior and was under indictment for felony theft from them!  We let her go about 5 minutes after I hung up and got my jaw off the floor!

Nikko-chan

  • Member
  • Posts: 3509
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4849 on: November 23, 2013, 09:22:00 AM »
My former boss had to institute the rule of giving references =giving just the facts of actual employment after we were threatened by some woman with a lawsuit for saying why she was let go.  We didn't lie or go off on a rant, we were asked "Why is this woman no longer at your company?" and I said "Because she had difficulty with the job requirements and was unhappy with a switch of positions."  I am sure the nice lady figured out what I meant was "She wouldn't do her job and she was demoted to a grunt position so she walked out."  We started only giving dates they worked, position they held, and a simple yes or no as to whether we would hire them back.  I called a reference for a woman we had actually already started a few days before in training (desperate to get someone started and she had experience).  She told us she would have to give notice at her last job when we called her after the interview and we thought that professional and told her to call us with a start date.  She called a few days later to say she could start the next day, so boss said just call her last employer when you get a chance but she seems fine.   Well, she lasted a day and a half because when I called her former employer, she hadn't exactly given notice...she had been fired 3 weeks prior and was under indictment for felony theft from them!  We let her go about 5 minutes after I hung up and got my jaw off the floor!


I think you might win... this page at least....

Sirius

  • Member
  • Posts: 9073
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4850 on: November 23, 2013, 03:50:26 PM »
"No one would be better at this job than X."  Take that any way you like.

Jocelyn

  • Member
  • Posts: 2013
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4851 on: November 23, 2013, 05:39:12 PM »
'If you can get this man to work for you, you will be truly fortunate.'

bopper

  • Member
  • Posts: 14149
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4852 on: November 23, 2013, 06:17:55 PM »
"No one would be better at this job than X."  Take that any way you like.

or "You would be lucky to get him to work for you."  equally ambiguous


From Catbert's peformance generator:

His usefulness to the division is self evident and he has been responsible for the changes in our work group dynamics. Mr. Evans shows potential for unbounded improvement. Many employees have indicated that they are eager to comment on his work and he was tasked with many assignments this year. The quality of his work is well known. A reevaluation of his salary is long overdue. Such an employee demonstrates the importance of proper recruiting. He does the kind of work you don't expect to see today. Not surprisingly, as an employee, he is a management textbook example and many wonder at the extent of his knowledge.


RooRoo

  • Member
  • Posts: 627
  • Iím out of my mind. Please leave a message.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4853 on: November 23, 2013, 09:07:02 PM »
Speaking of Catbert giving references - I've always loved this one:
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2005-10-08/
For in the fatness of these pursy times
Virtue itself of vice must pardon beg,
Yea, curb and woo for leave to do him good.
     Hamlet, Act 3, scene 4, lines 144-146
       (Pursy: wheezing)

onikenbai

  • Member
  • Posts: 1126
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4854 on: November 23, 2013, 09:20:43 PM »
We call them "team players" as in it takes a team of people to support his employment at the company his work is so bad.

HappilyInsane

  • Member
  • Posts: 196
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4855 on: November 23, 2013, 11:04:11 PM »
My most recent former coworker decided it would be a neat idea to just do a "no sale" on the register instead of ringing food items up and stick the money off to the side for herself. While standing directly under a security camera pointed directly at said register. She was seriously shocked that she got fired.

Nikko-chan

  • Member
  • Posts: 3509
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4856 on: November 24, 2013, 04:17:20 AM »
My most recent former coworker decided it would be a neat idea to just do a "no sale" on the register instead of ringing food items up and stick the money off to the side for herself. While standing directly under a security camera pointed directly at said register. She was seriously shocked that she got fired.

I.... what? How does that even...? *Shakes head*

hjaye

  • Member
  • Posts: 1013
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4857 on: November 24, 2013, 09:08:56 AM »
My most recent former coworker decided it would be a neat idea to just do a "no sale" on the register instead of ringing food items up and stick the money off to the side for herself. While standing directly under a security camera pointed directly at said register. She was seriously shocked that she got fired.

Ahhhh yes, just like the son of my first wife.  He had a summer job at a water park working in a concession stand.  He and some of his coworkers thought it was a great way to make some extra money.  After they were all caught and fired (restitution was made so there were no charges filed) I asked him if at the end of the night they had to do an inventory count (how many hot dogs and hot dog buns were left, and other items) he said yes.  I asked him if he knew why they did that, and he said no.  I explained to him if there were fifty hot dogs in inventory at the end of the night, and the next night there were 25, then his employer would expect to see sales equal to the cost of 25 hot dogs.  If there was only enough money in the till for 20 hot dogs, then the employer would figure out someone was stealing five hot dogs.

That was a bit of a light bulb moment for him.

*inviteseller

  • Member
  • Posts: 1771
  • I am Queen Mommy
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4858 on: November 24, 2013, 09:23:26 AM »
I worked at a large department store as a front end manager and it absolutely floored me at the amount and lengths the cashiers would go to to steal.  We had a policy that employees were NOT allowed to ring up family and friends..why, you ask?  Because cashiers sister would come through the line with $400 worth of clothing and cashier would ring up maybe every 5th piece, and usually the cheapest items (they always got caught!).  And the pocketing of money was a biggie too..because obviously those readings we took and the counts we made would not show a drawer short.  Not only did we have cameras, but in the security office was a cash register that, when a cashiers number was punched in, it would ring up the sale simultaneously and we caught many short ringing sales.  They were always shocked they were fired and prosecuted.

PeterM

  • Member
  • Posts: 2326
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4859 on: November 24, 2013, 12:59:34 PM »
Ahhhh yes, just like the son of my first wife.  He had a summer job at a water park working in a concession stand.  He and some of his coworkers thought it was a great way to make some extra money.  After they were all caught and fired (restitution was made so there were no charges filed) I asked him if at the end of the night they had to do an inventory count (how many hot dogs and hot dog buns were left, and other items) he said yes.  I asked him if he knew why they did that, and he said no.  I explained to him if there were fifty hot dogs in inventory at the end of the night, and the next night there were 25, then his employer would expect to see sales equal to the cost of 25 hot dogs.  If there was only enough money in the till for 20 hot dogs, then the employer would figure out someone was stealing five hot dogs.

That was a bit of a light bulb moment for him.

Some movie theater concession workers are smart enough to get around the inventory. They collect the used popcorn and soda containers from inside theaters, then use those for new transactions. They can pocket that money and the numbers work out fine.

A friend who used to sell tickets at a theater said the way her coworkers stole was to charge adults for a normal ticket but enter a child's ticket into the computer. Almost no one looked at the ticket and realized they had the wrong type, and if they did it was just "Oops, I'm so dumb, let me print you up a new ticket."

I honestly admire the type of intelligence it takes to thwart security rules. I plot that sort of thing myself in idle moments. But I keep it as an intellectual exercise and don't use it for nickel and dime scams. If I ever get a shot at a real score, I might be tempted.