View previous topic | View next topic

Where else........

Page 5 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

'yorz
913896.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:21 am Reply with quote

Ah Arcane, I wish I had your restraint. But you see, the situation at hand had reached a critical point, as I read it; a legal adviser was called for, and even the Official Body acknowledged that. Where they lose any right to any polite treatment is when they deliberately malleated the situation to such effect that the meeting went ahead without the required legal advice.
They fought dirty.
So - yes, in the past I may have lost out on whatever I was rightfully due, but at least I could hold my head up and look at myself in the mirror with pride. Not 'pride' as in with swollen chest, but pride as in knowing that I had stayed true to myself, my values, and my principles.
And that is much more important to me.

 
'yorz
913897.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:35 am Reply with quote

Arcane wrote:
With regards to the work place; there are shitty bosses and workplaces and it won't matter what you do or say. Get out while you still have your dignity (if you can salvage some sort of decent reference from them it will help) and once you have a new job THEN tell everyone that the place is to be avoided at all costs.

And that's where we differ. 'Getting out still having my dignity' is impossible for me. I can only keep my dignity when I confront the situation there and then. Shitty bosses have superiors, too. Although I rarely was the only one who suffered from my boss's behaviour, I often was the only one prepared to speak up, stick my neck out.
I would go to whoever higher up was in charge, and lay out the situation. Only after I had tried every avenue available to me to change the situation/attitude, would I bow out - dignity still intact. I won't say that I wasn't hurting.
Asking arseholes for a reference has always been beneath me.
I have always managed to find different employ on my own merits.


Last edited by 'yorz on Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:57 am; edited 1 time in total

 
Arcane
913899.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:46 am Reply with quote

I'm glad you think I have restraint XD. At times I have let my frustration take over and I am still trying to curb that.

There is still the outstanding situation with Arcanettes dance school that I am stewing over. what irks me is the deception and mistreatment dished out to us and a bunch of kids and the liiieeeees. Oh I hate being lied to!

I was always told to be polite no matter what but I do blow my stack and I just found it got me nowhere except angry and upset. And people will play dirty and be unjust, all I can say that is a level rational head in possession of the full facts will always win no matte in the side of right or wrong... And all you can do is not back down.

 
RLDavies
913932.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 6:09 am Reply with quote

Sometimes it comes down to the choice of which is more important: solving the problem or having the satisfaction of erupting.

If you want to solve the actual problem, then your best course is to exhibit the behaviour that's most likely to bring about the desired outcome. Which usually means staying calm and sticking to the facts. You can always blow off steam in private.

 
'yorz
913939.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 6:34 am Reply with quote

With the case at issue, it was too late to get to a desired outcome, thanks to the machinations of the employer.
Why is it deemed improper to blow a fuse when one is the victim of abuse of power? Come on - we're not robots.
This idea that a stiff upper lip should be maintained at all times is ridiculous.
Besides, I consider myself literate. I can very well express myself. Just try to imagine when you're not that literate, when you feel you're being bamboozled, being treated with disdain, and you are feeling helpless, ridiculed. That is what I'm talking about.
In the end, even my literacy didn't save me from being bullied and insulted.
It's the exploited unevenness that is so infuriating.

 
PDR
913945.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 7:02 am Reply with quote

'yorz wrote:
...when you feel you're being bamboozled, being treated with disdain, and you are feeling helpless, ridiculed. That is what I'm talking about.


You're talking about marriage? I thought we were talking about another of Bob's fictitious adventures.

PDR

 
'yorz
913946.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 7:13 am Reply with quote

I really do not envy you if my description reminds you of your home situation, PDR.
Perhaps that would explain your need to behave like this.

 
exnihilo
913951.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 7:24 am Reply with quote

I don't think a 'legal advisor' was required at any point, my reading is that the person was entitled to have someone with them. That's standard practice. It's not the organisation saying 'you'd better bring a lawyer' it's them saying if you want someone as a witness and or moral support then you can bring someone along. If there 'wasn't enough time' to organise anyone for that purpose over a weekend and a bank holiday would an extra working day have made that much difference?

 
'yorz
913963.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:29 am Reply with quote

Even if you are right and a legal advisor was not (yet) required, a bank holiday weekend is not really a brilliant time to find somebody available to accompany you as a witness or for moral support. You wouldn't pick just anybody, would you?
And there's a big chance that the person you would like to have with you cannot take a day off work right there and then; or s/he might be otherwise unavailable on such short notice. I would have liked to have somebody from my Union to accompany me; these people tend to have full diaries. So - yes, an extra working day may have made a difference, but not necessarily.
A week from Friday May 4th would at least have been an improvement.

 
exnihilo
913967.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:46 am Reply with quote

bobwilson wrote:
The notification letter contained an explicit statement that the recipient might like, indeed had a “right”, to arrange a “friend” to accompany them to the interview.


No idea why bobwilson put "right" in quotes. However, the complaint letter indicates that the person went to the meeting on his own and didn't bring anyone. The complaint letter makes no mention of this as being part of the problem being focused instead on personal abuse.

I too have to conclude that whomever wrote that letter is an arsehole of the first order and their complaint should be treated with the absolute minimum of required courtesy and with no urgency whatever.

That having been said, I don't even know why we're discussing this, or why some people are getting so worked up about a situation I, for one, don't necessarily believe to have ever taken place and about which none of us know anything except what bobwilson is drip feeding us.

 
'yorz
913981.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 9:18 am Reply with quote

I took those quotation marks to indicate that these words were actually quoted from the hand-delivered letter.

 
exnihilo
913984.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 9:26 am Reply with quote

Even so, it does not say that he must bring someone. The complainant did not bring someone and did not make his inability so to do part of his complaint. So why are we focussed on that?

 
CB27
914023.  Mon Jun 04, 2012 12:56 pm Reply with quote

'yorz wrote:
Would you mind awfully if I don't mince my words?
The above is utter bollocks. If an official body fucks me around, pretending to follow the correct rules by suggesting I bring my own cavalry at the next interview, and then deliberately manoeuvres me in a position where I can't, do you seriously expect me to remain polite and civil?! Come off it, CB. The Official Body has all the means to orchestrate and manipulate, and uses them to their own advantage. And don't forget, for you and your colleagues it's just 'doing your job', working in the safe knowledge that your back is being covered. When you are at the receiving end of these kinds of machinations, believe me - remembering your good manners is the last thing you care about.
Of course letters like that will not be as effective as a polite, courteous, respectful one, but how the hell can you expect someone not to lose their rag when their adversary is abusing their power?

I don't mind words not being minced if you don't take it personally back either.

That being said, I don't give a blind bit of crap what someone who is being abusive in their letter/phonecall/other thinks. I still haven't read the letter in the OP, I don't give a damn, so I don't know what the "cavalry" mention is, I don't care. The point I'm bringing into this thread is not to defend the actions of the DWP or any other public body, it's to point out that such a letter will not be dealt with in a quick manner because it will not be dealt with by the appropriate person in the first place (the abuse in the letter being dealt with first), and that it can have a detrimental effect if the abuse is being dealt with and any genuine complaint is ignored in the process.

I can't speak for everyone in the public sector, but for myself and plenty of colleagues I knew, it was more than a job, it was about helping improve the lives of people. I worked in housing for years, and in various councils and HAs, and in every single office I've ever worked in there were several people who worked past their hours (with no overpay), plenty who volunteered for various unpaid work outside the office, and in each and every one there were collections of cleaning materials, kitchen equipment and various bits of furniture donated by staff for residents who were struggling. These were not "little hitlers", these were people who went above and beyond their duty in the face of incredible abuse by people who thought everyone was as selfish and greedy as they were. The reason why "zero tolerance" worked was because it helped staff deal with more people instead of getting mired in petty arguments, it reduced staff turnover because of the reduction of stress in the workplace, and it improved trust.

This might seem like utter bollocks to some, but it improves the lives of most people.

'yorz wrote:
During my working career I have been on the receiving end of such disgusting partices, several times. And yes - I did let rip. Perhaps my letters were a tad more constructive than the one quoted in the OP, and contained all the relevant details for the recipient to understand what went wrong but I most certainly used language that made perfectly clear what level of lowlives I thought they were, "with all due respect".
And I wrote the letters in the full knowledge that it most probably wouldn't get me anywhere, but I was pleased to know that at least quite a few of the abusers' colleagues would read them and they would know what I thought of it.
And perhaps I even would make their day in the process.
Right little Hitlers tend to behave as such towards their underlings, too.

As I said in previous posts, if there are relevant points of plaint in your communication, then once the abuse is dealt with, I expect the complain element to given to the appropriate person, but this causes delays and can even cause the complaint to be lost in all the mess. The only person this affects badly is the person who is complaining. The fact you even mention you know it probably won't get you anywhere shows you that this is something you either experienced or are aware of.

The point about zero tolerance is that such abuse is not dealt by the person responsible with dealing eith the complaint, nor their colleagues, it's first dealt with by a department who's responsibility is to deal with abuse. Whatever satisfaction you think you have in upsetting someone or embarrassing them, the truth is they're more likely think the person behind such an abuse an idiot and forget about it as it's passed on. Excuse the passive aggressive nature of this comment, but the last laugh is on the abuser, their sad need to upset someone else has backfired on them.

The only little hitler in this scenario is the person making the complaint in such an abusive manner.

 

Page 5 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group