Edward Greenwood IX ... 39, said he was dismissed with no notice, and no severance pay, after working there for six years. He earned about $27,000 a year for duties that included sending legislative bills to city agencies and copying and circulating office memos....Is this part of Bloomberg's new lefty politics?
"I expect all city workers — including myself — to work hard," Mayor Bloomberg said during a news conference in Midtown Manhattan. "There's nothing wrong with taking a break but during the business day at your desk, that's not appropriate behavior."
UPDATE: What's with that name? The Ninth? The NYT examines the mystery. Great headline, by the way.
पोस्ट्स
१८ टिप्पण्या:
Hmmm - one would think some less harsh disciplinary action would be in order first, like a written reprimand and warning, possibly a day or two suspended without pay. What's next, doodlers? I wonder what his employee evaluations were like? I got a crisp $20 says he was doing satisfactory work. This won't garnish him many votes from government workers, that's for sure.
That's pretty harsh. If we fired all the employees who we ever saw playing solitaire, I think we'd be left with only the warehouse staff because they don't have desks and computers.
Hmmmm, I wonder what kind of harsh punishment would be meted out for someone who was blogging at work? *shudder*
wv: "viphxs" - the sound of me hyperventilating at the very thought!
I predict a sharp drop in blog posts everywhere.....
I remember a time when I was prohibited from doing any productive development work. I asked my boss what I was supposed to do all day, and he shrugged. I played a lot of Tetris until the contract we were waiting on finally came through. It was one of the stupidest things I've ever endured as an employee of a software company.
Seems a bit harsh to be fired for solitaire playing, especially if there was no evidence it was impeding his ability to do his job.
Who knows what the true circumstances were...but it does seem consistent with Bloomberg's nanny approach to governance.
I prefer a Rudy type, someone who takes care of big things like security and leaves the rest of life's little problems to individuals.
To all you bloggers with the guilty consciences who'll rush to his defense, keep in mind that piecework has gone out of fashion, and was never de rigeur amongst the white collar set.
I think that depends on where you work and what your duties are. If your job provides an endless stream of work, then okay, you should be busy with work all day. But if your job is a job of specific tasks (like distributing memos when they are produced), what is there to be busy with all the time? There will be downtimes--why not play solitaire?
Here's what I don't get - a New York-area resident making less than 30k a year. If I was only earning entry-level salary, I think Solitaire would be the last thing they'd have to worry about on my computer.
That guy made less in a year than Billionaire Bloomie's walking-around money. Cut him some slack.
I actually find a version of solitaire (FreeCell) helpful for thinking. It is not as mindless as regular Solitaire on the computer, but engages just enough of my mind that I can slow it down to concentrate on something.
It may not be that it actually slows down my mind, but rather, that it distracts the left side of my brain while the right side is free to do its thing. Back, 20 years ago, when I was a software engineer, I used to something similar when busting system dumps. I would mindlessly go through a lot of detailed review, engaging the left side of my brain, until the intuitive pattern matching right side came up with the answer. I can't count the number of Aha moments I had then, or, indeed, how many I have had more recently while playing FreeCell.
A friend of mine faced something somewhat similar recently. He was fired for looking at on-line porn on an office computer at work.
His job is of the hurry up and wait type. If there are no customers in the store, there is little to do. So, they really couldn't claim that he was wasting time at work, as this NY guy might have been. And, realistically, there probably weren't any women near him when he did it, so, a sexual harassment claim would also be questionable.
Nevertheless, the reason for his firing was viewing porn at work. Nothing more. There was no company policy prohibiting it (only common sense). He is looking for someone to represent him in a suit against his former employer. I sure won't.
Some of his other employers might have let him go using this as a justification. But here, I think that it was the actual reason for the dismissal - apparently, the owner is fairly straight laced, etc.
Having a game onscreen when a big boss is in the house isn't sharp. Being too stupid to act in your own best interests can get you fired.
But someone has to 'splain it to me: why is firing this guy "lefty politics"?
Elizabeth: The links are there for a reason! There's also a little thing called humor.
Sebastian,
I also think the big pool of desks with no privacy is awful. Even with one or two "roommates" it's impossible; I can't imagine a whole floor.
Macon: "Hmmmm, I wonder what kind of harsh punishment would be meted out for someone who was blogging at work? *shudder*"
Good point. At least he had the option of doing that; try working in the public schools, where sites such as Blogger and Xanga are usually completely blocked.
Hey Macon--small world! I had no idea you were an Althouse fan. (If you can't tell which "Kev" I am, we have a brother-in-law in common, as well as a couple of nephews--one who turned five today.)
Ann, I followed the link! I suppose I'm not informed enough on Bloomberg to get the humor.
Elizabeth: It's not that complicated. There's one article in the NYT saying Bloomberg is adopting a lot of leftish policies and then another saying he's been bizarrely harsh to an employee. It's incongruous. I was being sarcastic. You didn't get it because you make assumptions about my politics.
Ann, what I'm missing is seeing the incongruity in lefty politics and harshness to the employee. I don't automatically equate being a harsh employer with rightish politics. I wasn't assuming anything about your politics; I just lacked the tingle in my funny bone on that one. I'm well aware the left has its schoolmarms and the right has its Puritans and we'd all be better off if they weren't so intent on telling us all how to live. Is this perhaps a telling example that Bloomberg isn't about party or philosophy, and is instead about Bloomberg?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा