OLD WOMEN SHOULD NOT BE PERMITTED TO OPERATE THE HEAT CONTROL!

[Plecostomus]

I dunno, I was going to offer him the HR job here...

 

[BorgMan]

ON a side note... I had a job for a restaurant some time ago, and at some point I told a new girl *go wash the salad crops*. I came back a little bit later and saw water with soapbubbles. "What are you doing?" "I'm making soap to wash the salad!" And then, there was some silence while my lower jaw almost dropped to the floor Suffice the say, she was a flex worker, she didn't came back the next day

 

[FrontLine]

Anyone else ever have to deal with this sort of company-wide SNAFU caused by a single worker who felt the rules don't apply to him/her/it?

Corporate wise? Nope. Every place I worked has centralized control to the HVAC system that employees were not able to touch. So I suggest either locking the HVAC controls to keep her grubby, arthritic paws off them, The other option is to take her out back and shoot her, and bill her estate for the cost of the round and clean up. I prefer the latter of course. It sends a clearer message to your fellow employees.

Okay - hands up those who think that working for Frontline is more than there life is working ?

Hey, at least I allow porn on company computers.

 

[Plecostomus]

Corporate wise? Nope. Every place I worked has centralized control to the HVAC system that employees were not able to touch. So I suggest either locking the HVAC controls to keep her grubby, arthritic paws off them, The other option is to take her out back and shoot her, and bill her estate for the cost of the round and clean up. I prefer the latter of course. It sends a clearer message to your fellow employees.

Okay - hands up those who think that working for Frontline is more than there life is working ?

Hey, at least I allow porn on company computers.

Frontline-Approved porn or generic random "Oh whoops shouldn't have clicked that" porn?

 

[CordrazineOD]

Well, it sure sounds like there are serious complications involved in meddling with the temp that directly and adversely affect the nature of the work there. And 20 degrees is extreme and selfish. But lets not forget that seniors are always given, and always should be given, preferential treatment and favorable discrimination by default in a just and civilized society. But management, (or ideally, the democratic consensus of the workers), should be erring on the side of this preferential treatment; she's not entitled to do it unilaterally.

But to the extent that it may require the youthful majority to put on sweaters for the elderly minority to be more comfortable, without disrupting operations, then that is obviously the right thing to do. Even if its 100 20-year-olds vs. one 65-year-old lady.

 

[CordrazineOD]

ON a side note... I had a job for a restaurant some time ago, and at some point I told a new girl *go wash the salad crops*. I came back a little bit later and saw water with soapbubbles. "What are you doing?" "I'm making soap to wash the salad!" And then, there was some silence while my lower jaw almost dropped to the floor Suffice the say, she was a flex worker, she didn't came back the next day

First of all, I don't think it's too much to ask of a superior to practice the polite pretense of asking the new "girl" to "please go wash the salad crops", regardless of your authority to bark orders. Secondly, although soaping the lettuce is a comically unbelievable example of incompetent misinterpretation that seems to denote a very real learning disability on the part of the "flex" worker, would she have been destined to make this mistake again had she been told not to repeat it? Instead, she was thrown out like so much rotten lettuce.

If you and your former employer don't have the patience to correct honest mistakes (unless she was getting soap just to be a smart-ass) then what hope do these people have? If you won't train a learning disabled person to work in a kitchen, then where are they to work?

 

[CordrazineOD]

^the situation is a bit more volitile than that, you can't fire a woman for being hormonal

She tampered with a unit that was clearly marked stating not to do so; therefore, she violated a company policy and caused a shutdown/delay.


One office I where I worked had my cube right under a ventilation outlet. For a couple of weeks, I was almost a Popsicle until I found the controls. The damned temp was set below 60º I turned it up to 65º and then the war was on with the mystery person. Turns out that the vent system also included an enclosed office space where some pregnant woman was working. She was livid because she was "uncomfortably hot" and needed to be comfortable. My supervisor had a chat with her supervisor, and both agreed that I shouldn't have to freeze to death just because of her condition, so a compromise was reached for the thermostat to be set to 63º.

hmmm...well, compromise is good, but I'd put pregnant women in the same preferential category that I do the elderly. They should be deferred to, unless it was to the point where you were getting physically ill.

 

[Crusher Disciple]

She's probably cost the business 1000s in lost or delayed production.
This is my argument, as well as the whole violation of a posted procedure aspect. Some of the stuff we make here is rater technical, it ends up in processes that assemble medical or military devices so we need to document and procedure EVERYTHING

'

Hey, do you guys make those cool styrofoam coolers that make that squeaky noise when you move them? I love those things.

 

[CordrazineOD]

^the situation is a bit more volitile than that, you can't fire a woman for being hormonal

She tampered with a unit that was clearly marked stating not to do so; therefore, she violated a company policy and caused a shutdown/delay.

Menopause causes extreme behavior that could lead to such rash breaches of company policy. That doesn't mean she can't be held responsible for her actions with a write-up/warning; but it also doesn't mean she should be terminated and not afforded another chance as she learns to cope with the psychological effects of her biological condition. Unless she's been doing this sort of thing repeatedly and habitually, I consider it grossly over-reactionary to fire her.

 

[Plecostomus]

Well, it sure sounds like there are serious complications involved in meddling with the temp that directly and adversely affect the nature of the work there.

Yes, I spent the entire day soothing ruffled customers. In this economy you are walking on eggshells with contracts, you can't afford to have your income sources considering other options.

And 20 degrees is extreme and selfish. But lets not forget that seniors are always given, and always should be given, preferential treatment and favorable discrimination by default in a just and civilized society.

This company is not a democracy. The instructions are clearly posted. DO NOT ALTER THERMOSTAT. Period, the end. If you cannot READ, OR UNDERSTAND those instructions WHICH ARE VERY SIMPLE you have no business assembling complex electromechanical equipment.

But management, (or ideally, the democratic consensus of the workers), should be erring on the side of this preferential treatment; she's not entitled to do it unilaterally.

Next time you hear about a product recall remember someone's preferences were catered to and the job didn't get done properly. We are a manufacturing concern, not an adult daycare center. You follow procedure or you get fired. One of our contracts is to build inspection equipment for nuclear power stations. Would you like us to cater to someone's preference, ship out a faulty piece of equipment and have a billion dollar nuclear power plant break down? Not only is that dangerous to the public but that directly effects YOUR electric bill, idle plants cost money.

That's just ONE possible example. How about a medical device malfunctioning because the assembly machine we built makes one in five bad assemblies because we catered to someone's preference?

But to the extent that it may require the youthful majority to put on sweaters for the elderly minority to be more comfortable,

This has nothing to do with comfort this has to do with maintaining a stable work environment temperature and humidity, everything we do begins with a stable environmental condition. Shit expands and contracts and throws off readings. Not a big deal at fractional levels (1/8th of an inch) but when you have to run five or six place decimal places a 5 degree temp swing can create a huge swing in accuracy. 20 degrees... forget about it.

Menopause causes extreme behavior that could lead to such rash breaches of company policy. That doesn't mean she can't be held responsible for her actions with a write-up/warning; but it also doesn't mean she should be terminated and not afforded another chance as she learns to cope with the psychological effects of her biological condition. Unless she's been doing this sort of thing repeatedly and habitually, I consider it grossly over-reactionary to fire her.

The rule we considered was states "reasonable accommodation" for medical conditions. Reasonable accommodation does not include losing a grand total of $110,000 worth of production time and delaying shipments to customers... oh and now we make less money overall because we have to work overtime to catch back up.

A company isn't here to provide YOU a job. It's here to make it's owner money. If the owner isn't making money he's going to want to know why and how we are going to fix it.

Worker protection is valid up to a point, I am a worker too... but when it comes down to it, the owner is not required to keep me employed at all... in fact he can let me go "at will."

TO be fair, I put on her papers "laid off due to lack of work/no possibility of recall" so she can collect unemployment, and I wrote her a quick reference note stating that she is overall a good worker however the changing nature of the business environment required us to let her go

 

[CordrazineOD]

Where's the fun is they have a warning? All the better that a few get fried as an example to others.

wooooowwwww...kind of like whipping the uppity slave as an example to the rest, hah? You know, there're two sides to "moral hazard." The risk of making the work environment less hospitable, congenial, and secure by way of not respecting each human being who works there FAR outweights the hazard of giving the lady a second chance and the accompanying risk that other employees will be emboldened to be disobedient. Had I been working there I'd lose any respect I had for management for NOT showing some understanding for this lady's condition and giving her a second chance.

Your idea of "example"=threat. It's tantamount to economic terrorism and economic violence. These are not trained dogs; they are not commodified "human resources." They are human beings and 50% of human beings endure menopause. Perhaps the workers need to make an "example" of management to nullify the moral hazard of corrupted power that leads the latter to treat the former like so much defective machinery or toxic assets.

 

[SeerSGB]

^the situation is a bit more volitile than that, you can't fire a woman for being hormonal

She tampered with a unit that was clearly marked stating not to do so; therefore, she violated a company policy and caused a shutdown/delay.

Menopause causes extreme behavior that could lead to such rash breaches of company policy. That doesn't mean she can't be held responsible for her actions with a write-up/warning; but it also doesn't mean she should be terminated and not afforded another chance as she learns to cope with the psychological effects of her biological condition. Unless she's been doing this sort of thing repeatedly and habitually, I consider it grossly over-reactionary to fire her.

I don't.

She costed them thousands of dollars, she violated a known and well posted policy, and she potentially put other peoples jobs at risk and could have damaged sensitive product that was used for medical and military devices.

 

[Plecostomus]

Where's the fun is they have a warning? All the better that a few get fried as an example to others.

wooooowwwww... *wank wank wank wank*

...and apparently you can't tell when we're kidding. Of course we're not going to fry workers with electric shocks.

Electricity is expensive, can't be wasting it on trivial matters.

 

[CordrazineOD]

Where's the fun is they have a warning? All the better that a few get fried as an example to others.

wooooowwwww... *wank wank wank wank*

...and apparently you can't tell when we're kidding. Of course we're not going to fry workers with electric shocks.

Electricity is expensive, can't be wasting it on trivial matters.

By getting "fried" I assumed he meant "fired" and that he was sincere about making an "example". And that's the basis for my criticism. If he was being sarcastic or was parodying such a position Steve Colbert-style in order to advocate it's opposite, then I apologize. I just obviously get very worked up over labor issues. But considering the overall tone of a lot of the posters on in this thread regarding employment termination and older people, I don't think my assumption was unreasonable.

 

[Plecostomus]

Actually the tone comes from the fact we can't have someone causing a disruption of that magnitude in this economy, not that I'm anti-labor. Far from it.

My new position here at Job Is Job requires me to straddle the fence when it comes to what the owner wants VS the workers.

 

[SeerSGB]

Actually the tone comes from the fact we can't have someone causing a disruption of that magnitude in this economy, not that I'm anti-labor. Far from it.

My new position here at Job Is Job requires me to straddle the fence when it comes to what the owner wants VS the workers.

Well there's also the safety of the people this stuff will get used on. Is it worth a second chance is some soldier or patient in a hospital ends up dead cause a few microns of error slipped in cause someone one was pissing with the thermostat?

wooooowwwww... *wank wank wank wank*

...and apparently you can't tell when we're kidding. Of course we're not going to fry workers with electric shocks.

Electricity is expensive, can't be wasting it on trivial matters.

By getting "fried" I assumed he meant "fired" and that he was sincere about making an "example". And that's the basis for my criticism. If he was being sarcastic or was parodying such a position Steve Colbert-style in order to advocate it's opposite, then I apologize. I just obviously get very worked up over labor issues. But considering the overall tone of a lot of the posters on in this thread regarding employment termination and older people, I don't think my assumption was unreasonable.

I think the meaning was clear; consider I was quoting a response made about electrical current

You need to calm down. No one is going to start frying employees or sniping them. Bullets and electricity cost money. And damn customs won't let honest American import Ceti-Eels anymore.

 

[Guartho]

Had I been working there I'd lose any respect I had for management for NOT showing some understanding for this lady's condition and giving her a second chance.

I have a feeling that if you had been working there you'd have been fired long before her. Anyone who thinks causing more than $100,000 of real loss in a single day by willfully disregarding posted policies is not sufficient justification for employment termination has got to have a seriously screwed-up work-ethic.

 

[Plecostomus]

Had I been working there I'd lose any respect I had for management for NOT showing some understanding for this lady's condition and giving her a second chance.

I have a feeling that if you had been working there you'd have been fired long before her. Anyone who thinks causing more than $100,000 of real loss in a single day by willfully disregarding posted policies is not sufficient justification for employment termination has got to have a seriously screwed-up work-ethic.

I understand where he's coming from believe it or not. People need jobs. People need to earn an income.

However you are not entitled to a job. Or benefits. Or any sort of special treatment other than what the government outlines.

If you aren't useful to the company, if you aren't making the owner money you will get fired.

Look at the legacy costs that are dragging down the auto companies. Look at how paying idled workers affects the bottom line.

If you aren't adding to the bottom line you are subtracting from it.

To be fair, I fully understand that "my day will come," It has before and it will again. As soon as I stop being useful and productive or cause a big enough fuckup I'll be gone too.

 

[Trekker4747]

In the last store I worked in these two guys would horse around in the communial department head office all of the time, many times with the thermostat usually setting it to an extreme heat setting.

I'd go in there early in the morning and the damn thing would be set to 80 from them goofing around the afternoon before.

So glad I've got my own office now with its own temp. controls.

 

[Crusher Disciple]

So glad I've got my own office now with its own temp. controls.

The meat locker?