Post #99,003
4/27/03 11:05:50 PM
|
What difference does it make?
Either a person is qualified for a job or they are not. If the person creating the job deems certain educational requirements, then so be it. I've argued against them in the past (having no degree myself) for programming, but I understand how they are beneficial in many areas.
Your various analogies are certainly heartfelt, but they do nothing for the situation.
Let me give you my own analogy of the week.
We have a bunch of computers (Linux, Solaris, MF) on our network.
I identified a performance problem which our systems group attempted to resolve.
The goal was to move data faster between computers over the network.
The Unix sysadmin (not the one I've spoken about in the past, another newer one) suggested enabling jumbo frames.
I declined, since our Sun boxes were incapable of it, and when you enable jumbo frames on a box, ALL boxes on the physical net need to use them or they can't talk to each other.
He wanted to experiment on the Linux boxes, just to see how fast they would go. We agreed on 2 boxes, ones in development, that could be isolated for the test.
The next day I came in, my primary production SAS box had been rebooted, and it did not come up cleanly.
Why?
Because the sysadmin decided that the 2 boxes weren't working for the test, and he thought he could make the changes on this box without anyone noticing. Which then caused it to hang and need to be rebooted.
So as the emails escalated between myself and him and I realized I was about to start lecturing, I stopped and forwarded all to my boss, his boss, and his boss' boss.
The Systems Director called me:
Him: Wasn't the sysadmin working on a performance problem for you? Me: Yes. Him: Didn't he "in good faith" try something for you? Me: Huh? Good faith? What the hell does that have to do with it? He broke a production box and didn't even tell anyone.
I'll spare you the next 10 repeats of the above exchange.
I ended the "good faith" bullshit with:
Me: OK, so I've asked you to remove a splinter from my finger. You've decided "in good faith" that the best way to do it would be by going through my eyeball.
I was told by the sysadmin during lunch that he was hit by Hurricane Barry that morning.
|
Post #99,007
4/27/03 11:31:21 PM
|
I can't really understand your analogy
--possibly because I lack technical competence.
I'm not defending Ms. Dipshit U. Homecoming Queen. Maybe she's scum. Perhaps she should be taken down.
What I'm against is the one-size-fits-all Google-informed condemnation. Because Ms. DUHQ may be the kind of scum who has deprived Todd_Blanchard of a job, but maybe--maybe--she just...stole...a loaf of bread...twenty years ago. But Todd wants her jailed.
I'd want to know more. And I wouldn't set my bots out to bring her down until I knew it. Sorry if this stance convicts me of moral turpitude. It used to be known as "presumption of innocence," and extended even when the initial evidence seemed grave indeed. From what I've seen in this forum, presumption of innocence doesn't seem to carry much weight these days.
cordially,
"Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
|
Post #99,009
4/27/03 11:49:59 PM
|
People who BS into jobs should be fired
This guy has NO business touching my systems. I've picked up some stuff from the original interview as compared to current performance that shows some discrepencies. Not enough to fire, but enough to set off the warnings.
So now it is a matter of slowly taking enough hits to justify getting rid of him. Enduring pain, downtime, and possible lost data as the wheels of HR slowly turn.
In the case of the BS degrees, that is a smoking gun. The "loaf of bread" was a calculated act designed to lie to a potential employer. And while employed, this person is NEVER to be trusted.
Positions requiring degrees are not closely managed. Which means this person is going to cause more and more pain for those that depend on him. These are "trusted" positions. And are being given to untrustworthy people.
|
Post #99,013
4/28/03 12:14:25 AM
|
Re: People who BS into jobs should be fired
In the case of the BS degrees, that is a smoking gun.
We still grant a trial even when the smoking gun is Exhibit A. Is this such a foreign concept here?
cordially,
"Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
|
Post #99,031
4/28/03 6:34:44 AM
4/28/03 6:43:30 AM
|
Different protections from different punishments
Loss of liberty is different from loss of job.
No trial necessary. Just enough evidence that the responsible person (boss, owner, board of directors) can make a decision.
The person holding the smoking gun would be placed in jail, freedom deprived, possibly without bail until the trial. If the BS resume person was suspended, no pay, no access to do any damage, while there income was freed up to pay someone to do their job, maybe an immeidate firing would be avoided. But due to the issues of employee turnover, training, long ramp up time for projects, institutional memory, etc, I'd say the company should not be burdened.
Edited by broomberg
April 28, 2003, 06:43:30 AM EDT
|
Post #99,020
4/28/03 2:01:40 AM
8/21/07 5:58:08 AM
|
Analogies weak all around I think
"maybe--she just...stole...a loaf of bread...twenty years ago. But Todd wants her jailed."
Hmmm. I had a college roomie my last year who had a wife a year older than him and a couple babies. She graduated one year earlier and moved 80 miles away to the big city. Buddy lived in our house during school week and drove up to the city to be with her on weekends. Buddy was a physics major who got into EMI hardening in a big way on a summer internship and had a standing job offer waiting when he finished his BS.
Buddy came up against the instructor from hell in a sorry assed one credit class and flunked it. No diploma. Much effort was made to try to work something out since he needed to get working and get with his wife and kids. Prof was unreasonable and unyielding (and thus, karmaically died in a car accident 2 years later).
Meanwhile, Buddy gets a call from his company and they say "so are you ready to get to work"? He says "yes". OK, its an entry level job and there's your stolen loaf of bread. Buddy gets pretty good at his specialty (and its a tiny niche) and starts doing original research - publishes a few papers in scientific journals - and even goes back to the university to try to work out a deal to get that one credit out of the way via submitting original research papers or something. The U won't deal. They insist he quit his job, move 80 miles south, and do the class for a semester. They won't take a transfer credit from the state university near where he works, nor will they let him do a project. "Fuck em" he says.
Buddy switches jobs 18 months later using his current resume, and published papers as credentials, then comes clean a couple weeks after he starts work and forever strikes the name of his university from his resume/bio. End of theft. '
I can sort of forgive this one because it was entry level, there is a desperation quotient, and it was rectified before he moved to any position of authority.
OTOH, advanced degree fraud I have a much harder time with. By using a fake advanced degree to gain a senior position she's not just stealing a loaf of bread, she's continually depriving a village of food for the sake of greed.
The punishment should be proportional to the spoils.
Of course, its inversely proportional these days. Steal a slice of pizza and get 20 years, do a white collar crime embezzling millions and get 18 months. But that's another topic.
"Packed like lemmings into shiny metal boxes. Contestants in a suicidal race." - Synchronicity II - The Police
|
Post #99,023
4/28/03 2:30:23 AM
|
Draconian R'Us
I can sort of forgive this one because it was entry level, there is a desperation quotient, and it was rectified before he moved to any position of authority.
OTOH, advanced degree fraud I have a much harder time with. By using a fake advanced degree to gain a senior position she's not just stealing a loaf of bread, she's continually depriving a village of food for the sake of greed.
The punishment should be proportional to the spoils.
Of course, its inversely proportional these days. Steal a slice of pizza and get 20 years, do a white collar crime embezzling millions and get 18 months. But that's another topic.
Ye gawds & Little Fishes, man.. as you've described it - a psychotic Martinet refuses to cut this guy *Any Slack* despite his earnest efforts to 'make things right' and a genuine personal dilemma that is not contrived. ... followed by an Entire-Anal-retentive-University! ... YEARS! Later and - You can "sort-of forgive" ?? in this case. (If he were canonized first - would that help you budge?) Shit: dissembling, duplicity, unreasonableness is rampant. And you (and others) want to make this entire issue - a fucking simplistic DIGITAL one - still !? I don't get it; it sounds like purest mechanical sophistry - especially in the case you cite. And no little flavoring of Foulwellian far-Righteous sanctimony. Each case / person is NOT some simple Yes/No table IMO. (Not until the entire society grows a long way from present adolescence and its tacit acceptance of mandated bizness duplicity. Because: THAT is the Norm of today's Disneyland kultur.) Ashton
|
Post #100,186
5/3/03 11:29:31 PM
|
Eh? He rebooted the prod box, it didnt come up
then started whining about it? He should at least have been dazzling you with BS(brilliance) while heroicly trying to get the crap straightened out. Was the box brought up into production status and you noticed after the fact that it didnt come up clean or was it still fubared when you got in. In the second case, ride his ass, in the first case HE is the sysadmin and is responsible for the prod box, and being the responsible party you can do any thing you like "as long as it doesnt impact production" thanx, bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
Carpe Dieu
|