Ditto. I am Father fucking Mulcahey here!
Yeah, this is a big one to me. It’s a sign that the person isn’t very good at their job, and spends a lot of time either slacking, or downplaying errors, or pre-emptively trying to build up goodwill to compensate for their screwups. Also people who are excessively social, who will probably be striking up chitchat even though I’m wearing saucer-sized headphones with my face in my monitor. I am not particularly fun or interesting to talk to, so anybody who wants to talk to me has highly suspect judgment and/or motives.
As I see it, my mission is to put in my 8 hours and go home to my friends, family, and hobbies. Co-workers need to be kind and helpful to one another, and I am glad to assist or coach anyone with work tasks. But if you distract me from work with sportsball chitchat for 30-60 minutes a day, you are interfering with my goal of getting shit done and going home to my real life.
How was her fake orgasm? Did she carry it off convincingly?
Yup yup yup.
Holy carp, I never even thought about that. Thank you for ruining a perfectly good movie scene!
This. Because if you reply in any way that affirms whatever they are telling you, your “validation” will get back to management, sometimes by the very person who initiated the conversation. One type of workplace creature I cannot stand is a snitch. In my younger days I was naive and much too trusting, and I learned a bitter lesson from it.
Not sure what happened, The quote was blank so I scrolled back and put in the name manually. It looked like yours.
Yes, possibly a sign they’re escaping a problem department.
It’s good to keep in mind that about 1 in 8 people scores high in one of the dark triad traits. So if you work in a workplace with 100 people, then in theory there could be 12+ people with dark triad traits there.
Narcissism is characterized by grandiosity, pride, egotism, and a lack of empathy.[10]
Machiavellianism is characterized by manipulativeness, indifference to morality, lack of empathy, and a calculated focus on self-interest.[11][12]
Psychopathy is characterized by continuous antisocial behavior, impulsivity, selfishness, callous and unemotional traits (CU),[13] and remorselessness.[14]
High scores in these traits have been found to statistically increase a person’s likelihood to commit crimes, cause social distress, and create severe problems for organizations, especially if they are in leadership positions.[15] They also tend to be less compassionate, agreeable, empathetic, and satisfied with their lives, and less likely to believe they and others are good.[16] However, the same traits are also associated with some positive outcomes, such as mental toughness and being more likely to embrace challenges.[17]
That’s a good one. We had an HR director who insisted they were the expert on everything. While it’s true that you would expect the director of HR to have a good grasp of benefits, compensation, employee relations, recruiting, employment law, etc., etc., our director had to make it clear in every meeting they were the smartest person in the room. It was the first thing I noticed about them and all of us were happy to see them go.
It’s really difficult to fire people here in Japan and I had someone like this.
He would lie about everything. This was the first time for me to run into someone who would lie through their teeth on mission critical stuff, such as if he had checked something or not.
I’ve worked mostly for smaller companies and one red flag are the people who come in from brand name corporations without a really good reason for the change. This may not be as big a deal in the West, but in Japan your identity is tied up with the company. Also, the person is dumping lifetime employment that large companies offer but small ones can’t.
Most of the people I’ve seen do this were real screw ups who didn’t realize how bad they were.
Hey, as an aside, @TokyoBayer, have you seen this related thread? Work and work culture around the world
Would love to hear more about the work culture in Japan if you care to share there.
I would like to start commending you all for not being a problem. Not one of you. I guess the ones that were have already been BANNED, self regulation works. Congratulations.
Then I just will mention in passing that life as a free-lancer is different from life as an employee. You have to be hard when your fellow interpreteres are incompetent or bad colleagues because it will fall back on you and it will make your day miserable. Call it being a problem, arrogant, even being an asshole if you want: no way I am going to suffer a pain in the booth gladly.
I had a boss who was genuinely a pathological liar. Or seemingly so, I guess - I’m not qualified to pass professional judgement. But he’d lie about everything, even when it clearly to his detriment to do so. It just seemed reflexive. In addition to taking credit for everybody else’s work, he had a remarkable ability to synthesize what several subordinates (like me) explained to him and parrot it back to higher ups in a way that made him sound intelligent and on top of things. Which he very, very much wasn’t. He also worked very hard at trying to be personable, but would throw you under the bus without a moment’s hesitation.
I am not surprised he was hired - I’m sure he was a fantastic interview. I’m not surprised he seems to have hopped from job to job every few years for decades. Eventually people figured out he was not half so competent as he initially sounded. A genuinely remarkable, quick-thinking man - in a negative, always-working-an-angle, grifter sort of way. I found him fascinating, even as I couldn’t stand him.
He was good facilitator in a minor crisis though, I’ll give him that. Thought quickly on his feet, acted decisively and though he didn’t know how personally to deal with any crisis, he was good at enabling those that did to do their job.
I could be lazy some days, I certainly wasn’t a big go-getter 
.
I just took care of business to the extent it was necessary to do so. My work ethic was less internally generated than it was based on external fairness and long-term thoughtfulness. I didn’t want to make things harder on my co-workers by not holding up my end and I didn’t want to make the system worse to the extent it would rebound on me and make my job harder later. If I had thought I could dodge unpleasant, tedious tasks without doing any of the above, I probably would have 
“The people here are sort of my family…”
(Okay, I’ll get ready for the dysfunction.)
These people are really interesting to me. I had a boss like this. As far as actual knowledge, his head was a complete empty slate. To his credit, he didn’t pretend to know or even recall factual information. But the man was a wizard at manipulating people, communications, and situations. He had this uncanny knack for listening to people have a conversation and figuring out exactly what needed to be said, who needed to be pushed, and exactly how to push their buttons. He had no trouble lying, but it was always in some way where he couldn’t get caught, or if he did, it wouldn’t matter because the outcome was more important than the lie.
He was “nice” enough, but had no empathy, grace, or generosity. Anything you requested from him, you couldn’t expect fair treatment by default. You needed to be prepared to haggle upward from a lowball offer. Just as one example – our company had “unlimited PTO”, but when I requested a month off for paternity leave, he countered with 2 weeks. That’s 2 weeks parental leave for twins. So I said fine, I don’t need paid leave, I can go to HR and get 3 months unpaid FMLA, and you can figure out the business continuity issues on your own. He didn’t want that, so I got my paid month. Naturally, I was passed over for a promotion the next cycle I was due with a comment about “motivation” which of course was too vague to be connected to parental leave.
It would be a stretch to say I liked or respected him at all, but I was fascinated by this example of a human brain that seemed to have no pride, no anger, no shame, no discernable emotions except a small amount of fake friendliness. Otherwise it was 100% manipulation and hardball, all day, every day, pure and simple. His only joy seemed to be in coercing people to do things. He’s now the CIO of a large financial services company, so the skillset seems to have served him well, but it makes me wonder how many other C-suite executives are of that same lizard-brained mold of pure manipulation, or power-seeking, or other behaviors that in ordinary people would cause too much shame or anxiety to be sustainable.
In my view, such people have limited utility in most real-world software development situations. They’d likely work best if assigned to a small one-person project, or equivalently, in the context of a larger system, to coding an independent module for which the functional design has already been documented and for which the interfaces to the rest of the system are already defined. And should be required to document their code, which should be subject to code review to make sure that they do so.
If they’re truly brilliant “geniuses” they may (or may not) be capable of a lot more than coding. They may be able to conceptualize an excellent high-level system architecture for a complex system. They may even make good project managers (or not). The point being that a rigorously disciplined development methodology, with appropriate documentation written and signed off at every phase, is absolutely crucial to the successful development and deployment of any software system of any significant size and complexity. And lone-wolf “geniuses” tend to be very bad at those things.
But without them, the system eventually becomes difficult or impossible to maintain. Indeed, without an appropriate and disciplined development methodology, the system may even be useless right from the start because all that efficient and elegant code doesn’t properly meet the client’s true requirements.
Jesus. That is quite the coincidence.
The guy I’m talking about tried to pull a very similar stunt with a later co-worker of mine, then newly transferred in from a different section and on probation for the new gig. Only he tried to deny him paternity leave completely for the period he was requesting. However my co-worker, no dummy and already an employee of several years, knew his legal rights in the state of CA. He laughed at him and went straight to senior management and HR and our man had to back down and issue a groveling apology. This was in the context of a unionized job where open retaliation from management was difficult against good employees and my co-worker also was a charismatic guy who got along well with upper management generally.
But amazing how morally vacant bullies can think similarly.
Subtle -or not so sublte- signs of misogeny during an interview is a big red flag - and even more problematic because it can be easily missed or denied by men who are not its target.
I once interviewed a candidate for a highly technical job who would report to me. The CEO of our small company co-interviewed with me. The candidate shook hands, sat down, turned his back to me and spent the next hour kissing up to the CEO while ignoring me. Afterwards, said CEO gushed over how great he was. I strongly disagreed, stating he’d be a problem, and why I thought so. CEO did not get it at all. I was overruled.
We hired him, and sure enough he was a huge problem and a bully to everyone in the company, me included. He treated the women with complete contempt and disdain, but his arrogance grated on the men as well. He lasted about a year before even the CEO had had enough and fired him. He lasted that long because he kissed up to our clueless boss, painting any complaints about him as coming from incompetent whiners. I was glad to see him go but irritated no end that my concerns about the interview were dismissed.
Misogenistic candidates will cause trouble. Most fields employ women; a candidate who openly disdains them is a huge problem.