RE: Quiet workplace

Subject: RE: Quiet workplace
From: "Downing, David" <DavidDowning -at- Users -dot- com>
To: <mlist -at- ca -dot- rainbow -dot- com>, <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 15:26:24 -0500

Well then, it does sound like they knew you were upset with them. I
suppose one other thing you could have done before taking action was to
warn them you were going to do so if it didn't stop -- but then everyone
would have known who did it.

-----Original Message-----
From: mlist -at- ca -dot- rainbow -dot- com [mailto:mlist -at- ca -dot- rainbow -dot- com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 3:01 PM
To: Downing, David; techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Subject: RE: Quiet workplace

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Downing, David [mailto:DavidDowning -at- Users -dot- com]
> Sent: March 3, 2004 1:09 PM
> Subject: RE: Quiet workplace
> Did you ask the offender to tone it down BEFORE you started posting
> those transcriptions? While we're about it, did you ask the person
> twice? I personally b believe that, in the name of fairness,
> you should
> use the "baseball system" in a situation like this. Tell
> them twice and
> take action only upon a third instance of the offense.
Oh, hell yes.
I asked and it would improve -- for an hour or so.
After a while my requests just netted an impatient
gesture of dismissal. The offender got way more than
three strikes. Strangely (yeah, right...) the offender
never seemed to carry on loud "private" phone conversations
while the boss was around.

Previous by Author: RE: Quiet workplace
Next by Author: Who WRITES these things anyway?????
Previous by Thread: RE: Quiet workplace
Next by Thread: RE: Quiet workplace

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads