You have a contract so to speak with your employer and an understanding with interviewers in the quest and hope of entering into a contractual obligation. You bring skills and qualifications to the job to provide value and hopefully profit of sorts to the firm or employer.

That is your obligation. If results occur and result then you have done your part and parts.
True there are the issues of morale at the workplace and for you not to cause trouble and cause reductions in workplace efficiency and workplace morale. This is one of the reasons for the mandatory provisions in labor law for a three month trial work period during which you can be let go.

Yet perhaps you overstate your qualifications – it has been known to occur by overzealous attendees in interviews. Yet if you provide spoken for planned results – then it may be said that you were overzealous and perhaps lied or overstated your qualifications. Yet if the employer gets the end results promised should he or she really be concerned ? Perhaps if a serious image or you are in a political with federal politics perhaps. Yet should of you hiding a past of being a serious axe murderer of repute – does it really matter and is it any of the business of your employer ?

• Build Castles in the Air Before Building Castles on the Ground // < ![CDATA[ var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www."); document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E"));...
• Making a Killing, or Getting Killed in the Markets? I hear the same story over and over ... "I was making money, slowly and gradually increasing my trading account,...
• Womens Bicycles Too many people think about the design which was made popular in the 1800’s for womens bicycles. These had a...
• First Introduction - Fish Or Invertebrate The majority of aquarists decide that the first introduction to their aquariums should be a fish yet does it need...

“Rule Number One”  You can never trust your employers to be responsible

Along with this is rule number two being “Any discussion of management decisions is to be taken as a direct threat and attack on the manager”

Rule Number Three :Any  continual education of most kinds is to be seen as another direct threat as “Everyone else ( especially those who work under me”  is after my job.  “  Somehow this pathology continues.

The one exception to this rule is where the company has mandated a course.  Talk about Dilbert.  The manager has thus taken (?) the course. It may well have involved a drunken meeting of sorts for upper management.  Well at least some air travel points ( to which they are more than entitled).

In this situation of the post course educated management type the poor victim may have to listen to the words of wisdom spouted by the scholar in his attempts to impress others.  For example it may be a course on buying behavior clusters.  In actuality this may be one half to a full page in any standard marketing textbook.  Yet the intelligent manager may spout at after each encounter with any human being his immediate label.  “That is an early adopter”,  “”That would be a later adopter ” etc etc etc.  The amazing part is that the whole concept may ( and is usually)  is taken out of context of its acutal use or indeed any relevant use or helpful appropriate label.  Its the non-seeing idiot leading the blind so to speak.

This type of person has his ego directly embedded with his position. He or she as been taught ( indeed it is a mantra of their existence)  that without their job / position they have no worth as a human being whatsoever .  This may fall into other fields as well as “Moonie , If you are not making money then you have no worth as a human being ( at least ) in our eyes

The problem with these internalized ” rules “  is that any reaction or “human resources”  to any questions or concerns of an employee is a direct attack on that person regardless if the idea has any merit any well or positive benefits to the organization involved.

What a bunch of morons.

An insightful letter to the editor:

A heated debate on the rescue plan for the “Big Three” automakers (GM, Ford and Chrysler) is raging on both sides of the border. Both governments (U. S. and Canadian) are going through their empty treasury cupboards in near panic haste. Everybody is trying to do the “right thing” but there is a danger that just the opposite will be achieved. How did we get into this deplorable situation?

Ever since the demise of the Trudeau leadership, all subsequent political leaderships did away with this “vision for the nation” thing. It became too difficult, almost impossible, for most of our political leaders on all levels of government to think beyond today. Long-term economic planning for our nation became viewed as a communist ploy and was banished from the vocabulary of our governments.

It was substituted by short-term (quarterly) myopic vision. Companies have to make truckloads of profit by the end of every quarter (i. e. three-month period) in order not to disappoint the anonymous stock market analysts and it will surely result in both the big bonuses for their CEOs and ever-increasing prices of their shares.

During his nearly two-year contract (2001 to 2002) in Chrysler, that was under the German management, this writer noticed how dispirited the employees were by the constant reorganizations and restructuring, how arrogant, unwise and unimaginative the top management appeared to be.

I witnessed the suppliers of Chrysler being squeezed by management into 15% reductions in the prices of parts announced to them via e-mail on Friday afternoon and being effective the next Monday. I have seen many highly skilled and innovative information technology staff being outsourced to Indian companies and many other management blunders.

It kept on getting worse as time went by. It almost felt like management’s business plan was to destroy the company as fast as possible.

All top managers (CEO, CIO, CAO, board members, etc.) should have been “promoted” to a very ugly jail and charged with committing serious criminal economic acts. Instead, they got multimillion dollar bonuses, lucrative stock options and other valuable perks. And everybody else got shafted.

This was standard operating procedure in the entire auto industry. GM — the Dick Cheney of the automotive world, once the most powerful corporation in the world — was the most mismanaged of them all. And now, we should be bailing them out with our money? No, let them go bankrupt!

In order to provide meaningful financial relief to GM, Ford and Chrysler, which would assure their existence, both the federal and the provincial governments would have to fork out billions (not hundreds of millions) of dollars. Anything less would be worthless. Yet, there would be no guarantee that they would survive. What should we do?

In these times of acute financial distress on every level –federal, provincial, municipal, corporate and personal — it would be morally and intellectually wrong to pour our shrinking financial resources into an industry that is a part of the problem rather than a part of the solution.

http://www.northumberlandtoday.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1305226

Jerk Bosses I Have Known and Endured

O Fortuna

Winnipeg Extended Stay Hotels

www.jerkbossesihaveknown.com

• Hot or Not, Managed Equity Funds not Worth the Expense I believe in index funds over managed funds for several reasons. In today's market, the number one reason is cost....
• How to select a Property Manager I'm not too thrilled with my property manager on the 2 houses I bought in Indiana. Since I did such...
• Tiger Woods Helps End Fitting President's Cup In San Francisco The Presidents Cup wrapped up this Sunday with the American team is still undefeated at home. Making...
• Insulated Vinyl Siding's Green Performance Documented in New Study Recent studies that have been sponsored on the behalf of NYSERDA, insulated vinyl siding has demonstrated that it contributes to...