Modern Discipline

[2B]

My uber-boss met with me because a project manager complained about me sending out an email to our client that he deemed inappropriate.

He started out the conversation by telling me how great my work has been. He then said that I shouldn't be upset with what he's going to say. He then said I should clear emails to the client with my "project area lead."

My reply was that he wasn't in the office when I wanted to send the email and I talked with the "project lead." He told me it was so minor and obvious (I agreed) that there wasn't any need to send it to the project manager. I didn't GAS. During the early part of the conversation, I started adding unemployment into my SWR.

The "project lead" went nuts when it was passed to him and fired off an offensive email. My principal hope is that there aren't any promotions coming from this.

Life is sure different when you're "almost" FI and the j*b market is hot for even washed up older engineers.

I told one of my coworkers and he got all upset. I am going to find out what unemployment compensation is in Texas these days. Maybe I should view this as a path to FIRE.

2B

 

[Donzo]

Ahhh, megacorp egos....there is something I miss...not! Hang in there it will all be a funny memory when you jump. I think back to some of the E mails, conference calls and the ever-present unfounded sense of urgency....and smile My conversations w/ co-workers still at the job remind me that even that "bootafull" income was'nt enough---once I had enough!

 

[jazz4cash]

Interesting that Uber boss never said anything about the content of the email, so its just a bruised ego situation

 

[landover]

350 a week max, they hold back first or second till i think 4th week, and other conditions apply

http://www.twc.state.tx.us/customers/jsemp/jsempsub2.html

 

[CyclingInvestor]

When I sent out :

"This request was sent in last Friday Jul 14 2006,
and the natives are getting restless. Could we
get these created in the next day or so ?"

to our data provider, my project lead sent me :

"You may not want to use the phrase "the natives are getting
restless". Some people could be offended."

I am glad these days are behind me.

 

[donheff]

When I sent out :

"This request was sent in last Friday Jul 14 2006,
and the natives are getting restless. Could we
get these created in the next day or so ?"

to our data provider, my project lead sent me :

"You may not want to use the phrase "the natives are getting
restless". Some people could be offended."

I am glad these days are behind me.

The project lead was correct. Ironically, some of the "some people" might get offended by his reference to "some people," viewing that as disparaging of their (the some people's) oversensitivity to age-old sayings. He put his message in writing just like you.

 

[USK Coastie]

I got jacked up by my boss for sending out an e-mail. He thought it was to alarmist warning the IT folks that they did not have sufficient redundancy in their cooling systems and that failure in any one system would bring down the server room. Got quite a lecture from him. Two weeks later one of the cooling systems failed in 20 minutes the sever room had gone from 70 to 95 degrees resulting in the loss of a couple of million dollars of data.

Funny thing about that,my e-mail had gone to the server room folks and also to the director of IT. 12 hours after the crash we were instructed to double the capacity of cooling in the server room.

My boss never admitted that I had been correct in my evaluation of the situation.

 

[LOL!]

Maybe a little OT for this thread, but ....

We're sitting in a meeting and the CEO hands out a couple of pages from a blog from one of our co-workers who posted on a so-called anonymous message board.

The writings of the poster name our company (btw, it ain't megacorp) and go on to rag on some of his co-workers. Items in the blog make it trivial to identify the writer.

So, what's your recommendation to the CEO? What would you do about this?

 

[johanne]

When I sent out :

"This request was sent in last Friday Jul 14 2006,
and the natives are getting restless. Could we
get these created in the next day or so ?"

to our data provider, my project lead sent me :

"You may not want to use the phrase "the natives are getting
restless". Some people could be offended."

I am glad these days are behind me.

I would not have gotten upset. I myself often use the 'local yokals' even in writing. I do not know how it is down in the USA but in this country, Canada, there are those who seem to delight in practising this sickening political correctness.

Certain words, the N word for instance are clearly offensive (and in my view no one should use it even as a so called term of endearment) but it would be a lot healthier if people in the workplace just lightened up a little. Here we have a world which is in the process of polluting itself, plus an absurd war in the Middle East, and there are still some out there who are concerned about what words just might give offence.

Laughable really!

 

[donheff]

I would not have gotten upset. I myself often use the 'local yokals' even in writing. I do not know how it is down in the USA but in this country, Canada, there are those who seem to delight in practising this sickening political correctness.

Certain words, the N word for instance are clearly offensive (and in my view no one should use it even as a so called term of endearment) but it would be a lot healthier if people in the workplace just lightened up a little. ...
Laughable really!

I am of two minds on this. I agree that some people over-react to things that are really harmless. And I completely agree that universities are over-reaching to ban expression of unpopular thought (although I think that is not a common practice). But, once a phrase becomes associated with racism or other hateful associations, I wonder why someone would choose to continue using it. They know that "some people" (read African Americans, for example) will perceive it as negatively directed to them, yet they flaunt the term? The Confederate flag comes to mind. There are undoubtedly many associations to independence, blah, blah, blah that the flag can be tied to but lots of people assume they are looking at a white supremacist when it is flying over a pickup. I will defend to the death your right to fly it, but I will still call you a dick-head racist for choosing to do so.

By the way, the natives are restless is not so clearly a negative term that I would question the motives of someone who dropped that particular bon mot in a conversation. But it is getting close and, if you thought about the implications, and tossed it out anyway I would question your judgment.

 

[johanne]

I am of two minds on this. I agree that some people over-react to things that are really harmless. And I completely agree that universities are over-reaching to ban expression of unpopular thought (although I think that is not a common practice). But, once a phrase becomes associated with racism or other hateful associations, I wonder why someone would choose to continue using it. They know that "some people" (read African Americans, for example) will perceive it as negatively directed to them, yet they flaunt the term? The Confederate flag comes to mind. There are undoubtedly many associations to independence, blah, blah, blah that the flag can be tied to but lots of people assume they are looking at a white supremacist when it is flying over a pickup. I will defend to the death your right to fly it, but I will still call you a dick-head racist for choosing to do so.

By the way, the natives are restless is not so clearly a negative term that I would question the motives of someone who dropped that particular bon mot in a conversation. But it is getting close and, if you thought about the implications, and tossed it out anyway I would question your judgment.

Perhaps someone at this forum would be kind enough to tell me why some Blacks still use the N word and defend their right to use it by claiming that it is a term of endearment? Logically if the N word is to be verboten then it should be banned for all. I recall the stink when Kramer (Michael Richards) made that awful faux pas and how how he virtually had to beg, if not grovel, for public forgiveness whilst others, some Blacks specifically, still use it with impunity.

 

[Caroline]

He then said I should clear emails to the client with my "project area lead."

Well... if it were me and I REALLY didn't GAS, I'd be sure to consult the project area lead when I sent an email -- no matter where he was, or what else he was doing, or how many I "needed" to send every day (and there would be a LOT!) I'd also be sure to run various and sundry other incidentals by him on an hourly basis... since he's so important.

Perhaps someone at this forum would be kind enough to tell me why some Blacks still use the N word and defend their right to use it by claiming that it is a term of endearment?

Is this really such a big mystery?

Not being African American, I wouldn't presume to speak directly to your question. I can say, however, that my sister and I have been known to kid each other with the "B" word from time to time. Anyone who thinks that I'll look kindly on their using it when speaking to me, or when speaking publicly about a specific woman or about women in general, is very much mistaken.

That said, I wouldn't try to censor them if they did. I'd much rather have them identify themselves than keep their attitudes under wraps -- how else will I know them for who they are?

 

[samclem]

I think it is amazing that, apparently, there is a word in the English language that adults are not allowed to actually say or write for fear of offending people. We are whispering about the "N-word" like 9 year olds talking about the "F-word."

How can a word itself give offense? Can anybody read Hucklebery Finn and not see simultaneously that it is a tremendous treatise against racism and the message would be far less powerful had Twain not used the word "******" liberally?

Ooops--I wrote it! Mom's gonna wash my mouth out.

 

[donheff]

I think it is amazing that, apparently, there is a word in the English language that adults are not allowed to actually say or write for fear of offending people. We are whispering about the "N-word" like 9 year olds talking about the "F-word."

How can a word itself give offense? Can anybody read Hucklebery Finn and not see simultaneously that it is a tremendous treatise against racism and the message would be far less powerful had Twain not used the word "******" liberally?

Ooops--I wrote it! Mom's gonna wash my mouth out.

Common Sam, you know damn well it isn't talking about the word that bothers people it is using the word. No one took offense at your use of the N-word in your penultimate sentence but if you had said "the n*****'s are just too damn sensitive about this stuff" virtually everyone would. This stuff is basic socialization. If you don't get it people view you as a jerk. If you do it intentionally to get people's goat, you are a jerk.

 

[samclem]

Common Sam, you know damn well it isn't talking about the word that bothers people it is using the word. No one took offense at your use of the N-word in your penultimate sentence but if you had said "the n*****'s are just too damn sensitive about this stuff" virtually everyone would. This stuff is basic socialization. If you don't get it people view you as a jerk. If you do it intentionally to get people's goat, you are a jerk.

Well, the conversation earlier in this thread does not support your contention. Look at the references to "the N-word." In each case (including yours above, since it was used as an example of offensive use of the word), the word [moderator edit] clearly should have caused no offense--but it is deemed wrong, or at least impolite, to do so. Newscasters are in the same bind: "Today, Michael Richards used the "N-word" on stage, shocking audiences." There's no reason at all that the newscaster shouldn't tell us the actual word he used. And, when we hear him using it, we can clearly understand why his speech was so offensive.

If a Richards had slurred Rudolph Guliani based on his ethnic background, I think the news woud say "Today, Michael Richards used the term "wap" on stage, shocking audiences" instead of saying "he used the w-word". Of course, that wouldn't have been news in the first place, would it?

This is not a major issue, I think it is more funny/awkward than it is important.

 

[johanne]

Here is an excellent example of political correctness gone crazy. If you read the link below it is pretty clear that the person accused of being racist is anything but.

Shadow home secretary David Davis told ITV1's The Sunday Edition: "You have to be very careful you don't say something you don't intend. That's part of the skill of politics.

"If you make mistakes in politics sometimes the consequences can be very fierce, and he has paid the price, he has lost his front bench job.

"I don't think anybody should ever see Patrick Mercer as a racist. If there is an opposite of racist, that's Patrick."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6439101.stm

 

[samclem]

In each case (including yours above, since it was used as an example of offensive use of the word), the word [moderator edit] clearly should . . .

(bold added)

As if to prove the point. Apparently it is simply the word itself that is verbotten.

 

[samclem]

Here is an excellent example of political correctness gone crazy. If you read the link below it is pretty clear that the person accused of being racist is anything but.

I don't agree with you. The article does not make it clear at all that Cameron is not a racist. Here's a quote from him (from the article) "I came across a lot of ethnic minority soldiers who were idle and useless, but who used racism as cover for their misdemeanours."

That comment requires a lot more clarification, and he should have made it. Does he believe black soldiers are "idle and useless" at the same rate as whites, but used allegatons of racism to defend themselves from punishment? Or, does he believe minority soldiers are "idle and useless" to a higher degree than white soldiers? His comment is not offfensive in itself, but it was certainly ill advised.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Well... if it were me and I REALLY didn't GAS, I'd be sure to consult the project area lead when I sent an email -- no matter where he was, or what else he was doing, or how many I "needed" to send every day (and there would be a LOT!) I'd also be sure to run various and sundry other incidentals by him on an hourly basis... since he's so important.

And save up all your junk mail and stuff all the unaddressed material contained into an interoffice mail envelope and mail it to him once a week.

I hate this sort of BS. I remember having a contracts guy I worked with who loved me because by the time I passed a vendor to him the vendors sales guys were so glad to see him they were willing to settle on any deal he proposed, providing they didnt have to negotiate any further with me. One time he screwed up a contract pretty badly and then went on vacation, and it blew up the day he left. So I snagged the vendor, pulled him into a conference room and got him all fixed up, and in the process got another 5% or so knocked off the deal. About $6-7M.

Apparently he wasnt happy with being re-engaged while he wasnt expecting it and was embarrassed about caving in, so he whined to his boss, who whined to his boss, who whined to the VP I worked for.

All of it lay dormant until my next review when i got an "improvements" bullet to use the full chain of command and get approvals from other departments before doing their jobs for them when they're absent.

I translated that into "We'll have NONE of those ridiculous SUCCESSES around here, mister!"

As far as the blogging event, I dont see any difference between what happens online and what happens in real life. What the employee did was announce issues loudly at a bar with a hundred thousand people within earshot, some of them customers, some of them competitors, and including all of the people being discussed.

If that sort of behavior is frowned upon by the business in question (and I can certainly imagine that it is), the employee should be disciplined in the same manner.

Posting it to some anonymous board anonymously but using company names and specific situations is not protected speech nor is it harmless.

As for the rest of it, I think people take exactly as much offense from specific other people and groups as they want to. Change the words and the names and the circumstances, they'll find something else to offend them.

Some people just dont have enough actual problems and actual perpetrators in their lives to account for the victimhood they feel, so they make some.

The above is not pointed at anyone of any particular race, creed or color.

 

[johanne]

I don't agree with you. The article does not make it clear at all that Cameron is not a racist. Here's a quote from him (from the article) "I came across a lot of ethnic minority soldiers who were idle and useless, but who used racism as cover for their misdemeanours."

That comment requires a lot more clarification, and he should have made it. Does he believe black soldiers are "idle and useless" at the same rate as whites, but used allegatons of racism to defend themselves from punishment? Or, does he believe minority soldiers are "idle and useless" to a higher degree than white soldiers? His comment is not offfensive in itself, but it was certainly ill advised.

Here is an earlier report which makes it clear, at least it does to me, that he is no racist. Rather that he 'says it like it is'.

Quote

But Leroy Hutchinson, a black former corporal who served with Mr Mercer for 12 years, said: "He never tolerated racism in the battalion and not a single one of his men would consider him to be racist."

He added: "In the forces... name-calling - whether you be black, white, ginger, red, brown - it is part of the establishment."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6431005.stm

 

[johanne]

As for the rest of it, I think people take exactly as much offense from specific other people and groups as they want to. Change the words and the names and the circumstances, they'll find something else to offend them.

Some people just dont have enough actual problems and actual perpetrators in their lives to account for the victimhood they feel, so they make some.

The above is not pointed at anyone of any particular race, creed or color.

Well put. Hard to argue with that logic.

 

[bssc]

I translated that into "We'll have NONE of those ridiculous SUCCESSES around here, mister!"

I always translated sentiments like that to mean, it is more important to save face then save money. When I worked at a hospital, the end of the fiscal year we had to spend any money we had left over since if we didn't we wouldn't have it next year. We bought good stuff and we bought junk but we spent it.

 

[2B]

Perhaps someone at this forum would be kind enough to tell me why some Blacks still use the N word and defend their right to use it by claiming that it is a term of endearment? Logically if the N word is to be verboten then it should be banned for all. I recall the stink when Kramer (Michael Richards) made that awful faux pas and how how he virtually had to beg, if not grovel, for public forgiveness whilst others, some Blacks specifically, still use it with impunity.

Interesting observation. Back when I was responsible for "millions of dollars and hundreds of lives" (and still gave a s**t), I verbally counseled a dark complexioned individual that used the N word in a negative context with another individual with a dark complexion. His answer was that he could use it because of the color of his skin. My answer was that I would have given a written reprimand to a non-dark skinned individual and understand his belief that he had special rights. I told him that I will not allow that language to be used by anyone. I reinforced the "non-harassment policy" at future shift meetings but the word had already gotten around. No one complained. If I would have had this taken to HR, I'm sure they wouldn't have actually let the discipline process move forward to any time off or temination. They might even have made me apologize for the "verbal."

If you go back in US history, the terms "mick" for Irish, "wop" for Italian, and "squarehead" for German were just as offensive and used to be offensive. Simply by the moderators letting me put these words out on the forum tells you we've gotten over this labeling in a couple of generations. Hopefully, we'll move on past the N word and our grandchildren will laugh that anyone would take offense to something so silly.

 

[donheff]

(bold added)

As if to prove the point. Apparently it is simply the word itself that is verbotten.

Did a moderator actually edit that out? : I assumed you did it to make your point.

 

[2B]

Did a moderator actually edit that out? : I assumed you did it to make your point.

I edited my post because I typed too fast. I didn't notice anything edited out as of yet. I didn't attempt to use the N word because that is well known as not politically correct in any form or context (even supposedly adult discussions on its suitability) to the point that even this forum will enforce its non-use.