Amazing how entitled you feel to interaction with others, whether they want it or not. Guess what? NO ONE OWES YOU SOCIAL INTERACTION. Women who decide not to date you, co-workers who have their own lives and simply aren’t interested in dealing with your “it’s all about ME, the world revolves around ME, entertain ME” atittude, etc., are totally entitled to avoid you.
Frankly, based on how you behave around here, that lack of desire for contact with you is completely, totally understandable.
so i’m interested in hearing what bothers you at work?
He might not have given them a list yet of when they are allowed to be sociable (e.g. keep away from him while he is having lunch! You are required to be sociable when he is in the break room! etc.) Wouldn’t want to break one of his secret rules!
Apparently, since you choose to read my posts. If you’re not interested in what someone has to say on a message board, you can skip over the post or put the poster on your ignore list. Much less intrusion than someone yelling for attention in the break room or pitching bitch-fits over how some woman dared to not fling herself at his feet in worship.
I sent back my red-line of another party’s proposed agreement.
Knowing this is a major deal and opens the door for a nice revenue stream, I only make one minor modification. I notice there wasn’t any “confidentiality clause,” and so I add a very generic “mutual” one - broad enough to protect each party, but not so language-intense that it places undue burden on anyone.
Basically, it comes down to “we won’t share any information you provide us with any other party, without your consent, and we expect the same courtesy.”
They push back, rejecting the clause, and here’s a summary of the follow-up conversation:
“Well, we don’t plan on doing that anyway, so we don’t know why it needs to be in there.”
“If you don’t plan on violating the clause, then why won’t you allow it in the document?”
“Because we aren’t going to share information with third parties.”
“Then inclusion of the clause shouldn’t be an issue.”
“But we’re going to keep the information secure…”
3 days of this.
Meanwhile, our authorized signatory has the capability to sign the document as-is, so long as he is aware of the potential for liability, but a meeting / situation with The Powers That Be has put the fear of God in him, and he’s afraid to take the risk (as minimal as I personally find it).
I’d be sincerely questioning (not to them, of course, but internally) if their word means jack shit if they get offended by adding an agreement not to do what they claim they won’t do anyway.
“So are we going to have issues with any other clauses in this contract? I’m not saying we don’t take it, but we may want to keep a closer eye on compliance than with other contracts.”
Reminds me of a conversation I had with a potential client way back in my freelance programming days.
(paraphrased)
Me: We’ll get the details worked out and I’ll send you a contract for your approval.
Him: I don’t believe in contracts. My word is my bond.
Me: I prefer to work with a contract so that everyone’s responsibilities are clear. Mine as well as yours.
Him: We don’t need a contract. I trust you.
Me: I’m sorry, but I don’t think I’m the right person for this job. Thank you for your time.
I got back from vacation today to find out my coworker of 10 years either walked out or got fired on Friday. No official word from the boss on his employment status but at the very least he’s been suspended for a week. Not a good thing–he is/was one of the best coworkers I could ever hope for.
Update: Had a conference call with the other party’s counsel and she was actually quite reasonable. She, like me, was surprised that there was no confidentiality clause in the document, but then revealed to me that this was provided by a government entity who will be an additional party to the overall transaction.
Basically, any proposed changes would lead to lengthy delays and a great deal of red tape. After discussing it with her, the risk to my company is minimal, as we would not be disclosing any proprietary information. If anything, they are more at risk than anyone, and so based on her representation, I feel much more comfortable signing off on it, as-is.
Meanwhile, if my contact-person here would have provided me all the documentation regarding the agreement and transaction, I could have assessed all this myself, and it could’ve been put to bed days ago, but his vacation for the end of last week combined with his gun-shy attitude after a fairly tedious ordeal earlier that week meant that he did not want to do anything that might cause him to take ownership, lest things go south.
Also, it’s somewhat disconcerting to know that someone at a major government institution is crafting document templates that leave out basic, important clauses. Your tax dollars at work.
There is a rumor going around at the job that we are supposed to get a bonus with our paycheck this friday. The issue I have with a rumor like this is some people will be looking forward to friday and will then be disappointed once it’s discover the bonus check is not with the regular check. I mean if it happens great but I think everyone should just prepare themselves for a regular pay day. I would like to know the fool who started this rumor which is only going to get people’s hopes up come friday.:smack:
I will be very surprised if some ratchet-jawed immature heads don’t roll soon. Ire over the noisy, “wander away from your desk when you’re on Available and SHOULD be at your phone to take calls” contingent of overgrown children in my department is steadily ramping up. Our great-grandboss was getting on people for that today, and they STILL revert within minutes of being scolded.
Totally agree. Having good news leak out early only steals part of the joy it would otherwise bring, and if it’s false… Mega bad for morale.
Dear powers-that-be: if you’re going to send quality inspectors to witness an assembly tear-down, then expect engineering to produce a condition report for the customer based on the inspector’s photos and notes, could you please make sure the inspector in question knows how to use a fucking camera??? Most of what I’m looking at here is either seriously off-center or out of focus. And this goes for the in-house testing department too…the point of taking a picture of a nameplate is so that picture can be placed in a report. A picture of a gray blob with indistinct writing doesn’t do anyone any good. The camera in question is an easy to use Nikon that does exceptionally well with close-up photos in low lighting conditions…if you remember (or know how) to switch it off the automatic setting.
Bonuses? WTH kind of government office drone jobs get BONUSES?
I haven’t seen a bonus since I started working for the state. We do get longevity pay though, but that comes on your anniversary date.
When I worked at the IRS, the data-entry clerks and tax examiners (and maybe others) got “bonuses”, which was performance incentive pay based on accuracy and throughput. IIRC, it came in two stages, an initial amount on each paycheck, and then after tax season ended, there was some sort of extra calculation that was paid separately.
I work as a cashier. The rule is simple: No cell phones at the registers.
So one idiot boyfriend calls the store at least three times a day and asks to speak to his cashier girlfriend.
Is this after he got kicked out of the store for hanging around trying to talk to her, or is that what comes next? 
It’s part of the annual COLA raise
:rolleyes: Okay, those are a thing I know about. In the first place, I’d be very hesitant about calling that a BONUS, even if it includes a retroactive payment (probably negotiated by a union).
In the second place, there’s no reason for there to be any ambiguity about the date that the COLA kicks in. If your office IS represented by a union, check with your chief steward.