Must be allowed to speak Spanish?
Which amendment is that, I wonder?
"Members of several civil rights groups are protesting in front of a Taos hotel where Hispanic employees have clashed with the new owner. Whitten Inn owner Larry Whitten forbade employees to speak Spanish and ordered some to Anglicize their Hispanic names when he started making changes at the hotel in July. Taos officials and organizers say the number of protesters on Saturday ranged from 60 to 75.”
Source
It seems to me that a private employer is entitled to run his business in any legal way he wants. If people don't like his conditions of employment, they don't have to work for him.
41 comments:
I would imagine Mr. Whitten could avoid the whole problem simply by hiring American citizens, and also by reporting his current employees to ICE. That would be a win/win for America
Taos is Spanish in origin (founded ca.1600) before the United States was founded!
ANOM 2:57 So, this IS America now!
"Bobby the bigot rises again."
---I'm not a bigot, why you calling me that? Bigot against whom?
The owner of the hotel can tell the employees how to communicate when working. It is no different than saying "all suggestions must be in written form." He pays them and has the right to determine the way they work.
---Actually, I saw this issue debated on The O' Factor and the two lawyers O'reilly had agreed that while you can demand employees speak English to the customers you can't demand they speak English to each other. So if Paco and Manuel are having a cigarrette break, you can't demand that they only speak in English.
"He does not have the right to determine their names, however. There is no legal basis for that."
---I thought you believed employers are slave masters that can determine everything.
The reality is that this employer is a douchebag, he probably thinks his employees are talking about him in Spanish, he needs to see a shrink, the world does not revolve around him.
2:59 AM - Yes, "America now" - the imperialist United States sweeping all before it - native americans, mexicans, spanish, hawaiians, pacific islanders, alaskans, caribbeans, even past attempts on Canadian soil, etc., etc. - such is "manifest destiny"!
And that's only in the western hemisphere - its military and "big business" is all over the planet aping a global empire.
The heir and successor to the global British Empire that gave it birth - ??
People should be allowed to use their own language when speaking with each other. That's just common sense and good manners. The employer doesn't need to know what the employees are talking on their coffee breaks and it's none of his business.
The name thing goes beyond crazy. Should an atheist employer be allowed to fire a Christian employee named Jesus for not changing his name into something less biblical?
"ANOM 2:57 So, this IS America now!"
And what's the official language of America?
And what's the official language of America?
C++
And what's the official language of America?
C++
Actually, that is C#
---I'm not a bigot, why you calling me that?
Typically a bigot cannot tell when they are a bigot.
---Actually, I saw this issue debated on The O' Factor and the two lawyers O'reilly had agreed that while you can demand employees speak English to the customers you can't demand they speak English to each other.
I saw part of the same discussion and you are misrepresenting what was said. The employees may speak whatever language they wish when they are on a break, but when working, the employer still has the right to demand they speak in whatever language he chooses. There are several reasons for this, namely safety and harassment laws that would hold the employer responsible for the employee's actions. Once again, you just don't listen well, do you?
So if Paco and Manuel are having a cigarrette break, you can't demand that they only speak in English.
They are on break, and not working and therefore the employer has no jurisdiction over them.
---I thought you believed employers are slave masters that can determine everything.
Nope. Not at all. Just another case of you trying to throw accusations without basis in fact.
The reality is that this employer is a douchebag, he probably thinks his employees are talking about him in Spanish, he needs to see a shrink, the world does not revolve around him.
As I said, he has a legal basis and concern for having the employees speak English when working. Once again I bet you won't like that, but that is the way it is.
Anon 4:29, Just exactly what is a Native American? There is no such thing. It is an invention by misguided liberals. Next, you talk about manifest destiny, has there never been war in any other part of the world? Most every country has its present borders because of past war. Get over it!
No, that's Objective-C
Typically a bigot cannot tell when they are a bigot.
---The difference between you and me is that I never insult the people I disagree with. Besides, if you're so conservative you should remember that it's liberals who love calling their enemies "bigots."
"I saw part of the same discussion and you are misrepresenting what was said. The employees may speak whatever language they wish when they are on a break, but when working, the employer still has the right to demand they speak in whatever language he chooses."
---If Juanita is telling Rosita, "we're out of toilet paper, can you go get some" does it matter if she says it in English or Spanish?
"There are several reasons for this, namely safety and harassment laws that would hold the employer responsible for the employee's actions. Once again, you just don't listen well, do you?"
---If harassment occurs the two employees will discuss the incident with their manager, it doesn't matter in what language the incident occur.
"As I said, he has a legal basis and concern for having the employees speak English when working. Once again I bet you won't like that, but that is the way it is."
---You know, I live in Miami, when I go to a restaurant I see people speaking English, Spanish or Creole. I've never seen an employee disciplined for speaking to me or to a coworker in Spanish.
And let's not forget that American workers in foreign countries will speak to fellow Americans in English. It's only in America that some people are suspicious of languages they can't understand.
Seriously, the manager is being a dick. These are poor employees doing a miserable job, I don't give a damn what language my workers speak as long as 1. They do the job. 2. I can understand them when they speak to me and my customers. Asking anything beyond that is asking too much.
---The difference between you and me is that I never insult the people I disagree with.
Saying someone is a "douchebag" and a "dick" is not insulting?
Besides, if you're so conservative you should remember that it's liberals who love calling their enemies "bigots.
No, liberals like calling people bigots without basis. When conservatives call someone a bigot, it generally has a basis in fact.
---If Juanita is telling Rosita, "we're out of toilet paper, can you go get some" does it matter if she says it in English or Spanish?
If the management has a policy that English be spoken, then yes it does matter.
---If harassment occurs the two employees will discuss the incident with their manager, it doesn't matter in what language the incident occur.
Part of the responsibility of a manager is to make sure the harassment doesn't occur. It is more than discussing "the incident with their manager."
---You know, I live in Miami, when I go to a restaurant I see people speaking English, Spanish or Creole. I've never seen an employee disciplined for speaking to me or to a coworker in Spanish.
So?
And let's not forget that American workers in foreign countries will speak to fellow Americans in English. It's only in America that some people are suspicious of languages they can't understand.
So?
These are poor employees doing a miserable job,
Proof please.
I don't give a damn what language my workers speak as long as 1. They do the job. 2. I can understand them when they speak to me and my customers.
As we have discussed before, you have no idea what it takes to run a company. If part of their job is speaking English, then not speaking it is not doing their "job."
On the other hand, if speaking a foreign language is so important to them, then maybe they should find other work.
Yeah the owner probably has the right to establish the rules.
But this is the stupidest thing I have heard of since that last time I saw the Obamao bowing video.
We really don't want to get on this English-only bandwagon.
(I'm OK with requiring English-facility, but not English only.)
Pointless polarizing.
People around here speak German, Greek, Sudanese, Danish, and on down the list--a very long list.
English only is not a ditch worth dying in.
Bobby has a name. Does Anonymous?
Hey annonymous, why don't you take Larry's advoice, click where is says Name/URL and give yourself a name. We have too many annonymouses here.
"Saying someone is a "douchebag" and a "dick" is not insulting?"
---That guy is not here, he's a stranger. When I debate people on Tongue Tied 3 I don't call them names like that.
"No, liberals like calling people bigots without basis. When conservatives call someone a bigot, it generally has a basis in fact."
---The most Bill O'reilly will call you is a pinhead, the worst thing Rush Limbaugh called Obama was a halfrican-American, and it was meant in jest.
"If the management has a policy that English be spoken, then yes it does matter."
---Let's turn things around, say the new owner only speaks Spanish and is jealous of people that speak English, that's that give him the right that only Spanish be spoken by his employees?
"Part of the responsibility of a manager is to make sure the harassment doesn't occur. It is more than discussing "the incident with their manager."
---That's like firing all Christian employees to prevent gay employees from being harassed. What you're advocating doesn't make any sense, besides, harassment can occur in any language, so forcing people to speak english is not gonna stop it. Moreover, the workers at this hotel have known each other for many years, they're like family, so the only one harassing them is the new boss.
So?
---So a workplace where people speak Spanish doesn't translate into harassment.
Proof please.
---Do I need to bring proof or do you really think hotel employees at the cleaning level make decent wages?
"As we have discussed before, you have no idea what it takes to run a company. If part of their job is speaking English, then not speaking it is not doing their "job."
---That's not part of their job, you don't need to speak English to make a bed, clean a toilet or throw out the garbage. Besides, the workers there already speak English, they are bilingual and if the customer doesn't speak Spanish he will be addressed in English. You really need to get out more, I took a Carnival cruise that had workers all over the world, all of them spoke English, the workers I didn't see whose English was poor probably did jobs outside the customers view.
"On the other hand, if speaking a foreign language is so important to them, then maybe they should find other work."
---Is being a Christian important to you? Are you going to remove the cross when your Satan-worshiping boss feels offended? Do you think companies own the employees that work for them? Do you think a boss can make any demands he wants with no impunity? I'm pro-business but unlike you, I'm not anti-employee.
---That guy is not here, he's a stranger. When I debate people on Tongue Tied 3 I don't call them names like that.
So you feel better insulting people behind their backs or when they don not respond. Classless and gutless.
---The most Bill O'reilly will call you is a pinhead, the worst thing Rush Limbaugh called Obama was a halfrican-American, and it was meant in jest.
None of this has anything to do with the fact that conservatives use the term when there is factual basis for doing so.
---Let's turn things around, say the new owner only speaks Spanish and is jealous of people that speak English, that's that give him the right that only Spanish be spoken by his employees?
Yep. Next?
---That's like firing all Christian employees to prevent gay employees from being harassed.
Of course it's not. Management has a legal responsibility to monitor employees make sure that the workplace is safe from harassment.
What you're advocating doesn't make any sense, besides, harassment can occur in any language, so forcing people to speak english is not gonna stop it.
What part of "monitor" do you not understand.
Moreover, the workers at this hotel have known each other for many years, they're like family, so the only one harassing them is the new boss.
Please prove your assertion that the people have known each other for years and are like "family." There is no indication of that from any article on the subject. Once again, you are making things up.
---Do I need to bring proof or do you really think hotel employees at the cleaning level make decent wages?
Yes, you need to prove it. You made the assertion. Once again, you make stuff up to try and prove something and the only thing you prove is that you are a liar.
---That's not part of their job,
The boss requires that they speak English. That makes it a part of their job.
You really need to get out more, I took a Carnival cruise that had workers all over the world, all of them spoke English, the workers I didn't see whose English was poor probably did jobs outside the customers view.
So? How Carnival runs their business has no bearing on how this company chooses to run theirs.
---Is being a Christian important to you? Are you going to remove the cross when your Satan-worshiping boss feels offended?
Once again, you simply demonstrate an ignorance of the law. That is all this comes down to. You lie and hope that the world is the way you feel it should be rather than the way it is.
Do you think companies own the employees that work for them?
Do you think that employees have the right to disobey a legal directive from a supervisor?
Do you think a boss can make any demands he wants with no impunity?
We've discussed this before. In this case, the boss is making a demand that is well within the law. If it were outside of the law, he would face consequences.
I'm pro-business but unlike you, I'm not anti-employee.
Bull. You are as anti-business as any liberal. You believe that you as a worker have the right to tell employers, who put their money on the line, what they can and cannot do within the laws of the land. You have advocated unions for white collar workers so you too can join the ranks of thuggery like the SEIU. All the time you type, insult people that won't respond, lie about facts, make baseless accusations and then proclaim your magnificence.
You couldn't run a company if your life depended on it. First of all, you don't have the knowledge. Secondly, you don't have the skills. Thirdly, you don't have the guts.
"So you feel better insulting people behind their backs or when they don not respond. Classless and gutless."
---What about all the posters who said nasty crap about Paris Hilton on this very site? The point is you don't attack the person you're debating directly.
"None of this has anything to do with the fact that conservatives use the term when there is factual basis for doing so."
---Then I don't know which conservatives you're talking about, I sure haven't met them here, with the exception of you of course.
"Of course it's not. Management has a legal responsibility to monitor employees make sure that the workplace is safe from harassment."
---Why not tape their mouths when they come to work or better yet, hire only mutes?
"What part of "monitor" do you not understand."
---Have you ever worked at those places where they have closed circuit cameras spying on their employees? I'm sure you'd like that kind of work environment.
"Yes, you need to prove it. You made the assertion. Once again, you make stuff up to try and prove something and the only thing you prove is that you are a liar."
---It's hard debating with someone who has no common sense. I guess if we where talking about Bill Gates I would need to prove to you that he's a millionare. So here's a clue, being a cleaning person doesn't requiere a college education or the ability to speak English. In fact, in hotels you don't even get to tell the maid how to clean the room, she will do it the company's way.
"The boss requires that they speak English. That makes it a part of their job."
---Can the boss require them to pray at the begining of the work day? Can he requiere them to lose 10 pounds? Where does it end?
"So? How Carnival runs their business has no bearing on how this company chooses to run theirs."
---Yes it does, the irony is that because Carnival boats are registered in foreign countries they're not bound by American labor laws, which means they can make a worker do 14 or 18 hour days and have all kinds of crazy requierenments, not to mention the miserable wages they pay (for proof you can read "Cruise Confidential"), yet Carnival understands that when one Romanian employee talks to a comrade from Romania, they will speak to each other in Romanian. It makes perfect sense.
"Once again, you simply demonstrate an ignorance of the law. That is all this comes down to. You lie and hope that the world is the way you feel it should be rather than the way it is."
---You haven't answered my questions, apparently you think the law applies when it comes to poor hispanics making minimum wage but not when it comes to the people that you like. If an employee told you to remove that cross you'd be crying "freedom of religion," too bad you don't give a damn about freedom of speech.
---CONTINUING-----
"Do you think that employees have the right to disobey a legal directive from a supervisor?"
---Yes, if the legal directive is wrong they can. America doesn't have an official language, so I can exercize my first amendment in any language I choose. If the owner doesn't like hispanics he has no business in New Mexico, that's like David Duke opening a bakery in Harlem.
"Bull. You are as anti-business as any liberal. You believe that you as a worker have the right to tell employers, who put their money on the line, what they can and cannot do within the laws of the land."
---Not true, I'm a big supporter of the oil industry, gun makers, the steel industry, etc. What I don't support are the robber barons that make you work 14 hours while paying you for 8, or make unreasonable demands.
"You have advocated unions for white collar workers so you too can join the ranks of thuggery like the SEIU."
---Not so, while I don't support the beating SEIU brownshirts gave a black guy distributing the don't threat on me flag, I have experienced exploitation in the white collar level. At my last ad agency I was fired, the little people had to take a 10% paycut while the big shots gave themselves a raise while making people work 9 to 9 more often. My previous employer was even investigated by the Department of Labor and they ended up paying the art directors for any extra hour after 6pm, however, the copywriters didn't get squat.
At most workplaces the 9 to 5 has become 9 to 6, and at some places they give you dirty looks if you live at 6. Frankly, it has to end, if companies paid hourly wages they wouldn't be making you work 12 hours, I know that because a friend of mine used to work at a factory and whenever he worked extra hours one day they made him work less hours the next day.
"All the time you type, insult people that won't respond, lie about facts, make baseless accusations and then proclaim your magnificence."
---When have I ever proclaimed my magnificence? Now you're making stuff up.
The point is you don't attack the person you're debating directly.
It is not an attack to tell the truth.
---Then I don't know which conservatives you're talking about, I sure haven't met them here, with the exception of you of course.
Then you need to hang out with real conservatives, not RINO's and liberals.
---Have you ever worked at those places where they have closed circuit cameras spying on their employees? I'm sure you'd like that kind of work environment.
Once again, you fail to address the issue that the employee has a duty to protect his employees from harassment. Your "camera" example is just a red herring because as we know, you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.
---It's hard debating with someone who has no common sense.
I am well aware of that. It is harder when that same person lies, invents things, or doesn't have the maturity to admit they are wrong.
So here's a clue,...
Once again, you fail to address what you asserted.
---Can the boss require them to pray at the begining of the work day? Can he requiere them to lose 10 pounds? Where does it end?
No to the first and yes in some cases to the second. Don't like it? Don't work there.
---Yes it does,
So you want the same laws that a company that you admit treats their employees "miserably" to be the model for employee relations here in this country.
What was it that you were saying about "common sense?"
If an employee told you to remove that cross you'd be crying "freedom of religion," too bad you don't give a damn about freedom of speech.
No, I'd legally say that the employer had no basis to remove the cross. There is a legal basis to require employees speak a language. Once again, your ignorance is showing.
---Yes, if the legal directive is wrong they can.
Then legally, the company can terminate them. The directive is legal. That means that failure to comply is insubordination. Congratulations. In your (lack of) wisdom and (lack of) knowledge, you just got people fired for cause and no recourse.
---Not true, I'm a big supporter of the oil industry, gun makers, the steel industry, etc.
Thanks. I needed a laugh today.
---Not so,
Clearly you don't read the very things you write.
---When have I ever proclaimed my magnificence? Now you're making stuff up.
See the above paragraphs. See the discussion on how great "creative people" are. See the discussion on the printer you threw away.
It also doesn't escape my notice that you agreed to lying and making things up. Is that part of your moral code? Why should anyone hire a liar like you?
"Then you need to hang out with real conservatives, not RINO's and liberals."
---I don't hang out with RINO's, I hang out with conservatives and right-wingers, the kind of people more intersted in discussing the issues than in attackign each other.
"Once again, you fail to address the issue that the employee has a duty to protect his employees from harassment. Your "camera" example is just a red herring because as we know, you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about."
---My camera example is real, your implied duty against harassment isn't. And employer can't prevent harassment because no employer watches his employees every second of the workday. An employer can only react to harassment and other crimes as they occur.
"No to the first and yes in some cases to the second. Don't like it? Don't work there."
---I see, so if your company ever tells you "go to the gym 5 times a week or you're fired" you will simply quit or comply. It's amazing how clueless you are, unless you're working as a showgirl or male dancer in Las Vegas where your weight is part of your job, demanding an employee to lose weight is a violation of his privacy, no different than demanding a pregnant employee to have an abortion.
"So you want the same laws that a company that you admit treats their employees "miserably" to be the model for employee relations here in this country."
---No, I want employees to enjoy the freedoms guaranteed by our constitution. In Oklahoma for example workers won the right to keep firearms in their cars, why? Becuase their safety and second amendment rights shouldn't be compromised by people who hate the constitution.
"No, I'd legally say that the employer had no basis to remove the cross. There is a legal basis to require employees speak a language. Once again, your ignorance is showing."
---Exactly, there's no legal basis because America doesn't have an official language, thus you can speak any language you want unless your job description involves dealing with the customer.
Tell you what, since freedom of religion is the only freedom you care about, perhaps those hispanics should invent the Church of Jesus Christ Hispanic and tell their employer that their faith compells them to speak spanish to fellow believers.
---I don't hang out with RINO's, I hang out with conservatives and right-wingers, the kind of people more intersted in discussing the issues than in attackign each other.
Unless of course, that person can't respond to you, and then you feel perfectly comfortable attacking them. As I said, that is gutless.
---My camera example is real, your implied duty against harassment isn't.
So your position is that if a supervisor hears a person sexually harassing another employee, the supervisor has no duty or obligation to stop it?
You couldn't be more wrong.
An employer can only react to harassment and other crimes as they occur.
You mean like hearing the employee harassing another? Gee, you just made the argument for me.
It's amazing how clueless you are, unless you're working as a showgirl or male dancer in Las Vegas where your weight is part of your job,...
I'm sorry, what part are you responding to here? The part where I said "in some cases" or the part where I said "in some cases?"
It is hysterical to see you make up stuff that eventually has you arguing with yourself.
---No, I want employees to enjoy the freedoms guaranteed by our constitution.
So you felt that a company like Carnival that does not comply with the Constitution and labor laws because their ships are of foreign registry would be a good example of how a firm in New Mexico should be run?
That's just funny.
---Exactly, there's no legal basis because America doesn't have an official language, thus you can speak any language you want unless your job description involves dealing with the customer.
Exactly wrong. The employer has the right to demand that speaking a language is a part of the job.
There is no law that says otherwise.
Tell you what, since freedom of religion is the only freedom you care about, perhaps those hispanics should invent the Church of Jesus Christ Hispanic and tell their employer that their faith compells them to speak spanish to fellow believers.
That would be fine with me. Then I would be able to terminate them as they have changed the parameters of the job without my agreeing to it.
(And before you even try to go there, there is case law on that as well.)
But isn't it amazing how you, a supposed believer in business, always are looking for ways to show how evil businesses are? How employees should run the company? How employees are better than management?
You said in your post that you don't hang out with RINO's. I guess that means that you are schizophrenic because that is the only way you can't hang out with yourself.
"So your position is that if a supervisor hears a person sexually harassing another employee, the supervisor has no duty or obligation to stop it?"
---No, my position is you punish actual acts of harassment rather than censoring everyone. It's just like the gun thing, so-called "gun free zones" don't prevent criminals from carrying guns, they only stop law-abiding citizens from defending themselves. What you're basically saying is "if nobody can speak Spanish harassment won't happen." That's bullshit, harassment will end up happening in English.
"You mean like hearing the employee harassing another? Gee, you just made the argument for me."
---Do you think most employees are so stupid as to do that in front of the boss?
"So you felt that a company like Carnival that does not comply with the Constitution and labor laws because their ships are of foreign registry would be a good example of how a firm in New Mexico should be run? That's just funny."
---No it's not, it's simply proof that Carnival has more common sense than that new owner in New Mexico.
"Exactly wrong. The employer has the right to demand that speaking a language is a part of the job."
---Even when the job has nothing to do with speaking to the public? You know, here in Miami I will speak whatever language my waiter speaks best, so if his English is horrible, I will talk to him in Spanish, it makes things easy.
"But isn't it amazing how you, a supposed believer in business, always are looking for ways to show how evil businesses are?"
---Evil is evil, if an agricultural enterprise is hiring mexican illegal aliens, I'm not gonna defend their right to lower costs and make a bigger profit.
"How employees should run the company?"
---I have never said it. I do believe however that if airline executives spoke to their flight attendants they would understand why passengers don't like being stuck in small seats for 8 hours on a tarmac.
"How employees are better than management?"
---Are you saying all managers are good? Have you not heard of horrible managers that come late, leave early, and get away with murder?
I just finished reading a book about how to deal with awful managers and how to deal with awful employees, what was fascinating is that most managers haven't studied management nor have a clue as to how to deal with people.
The New Mexico hotel owner is the perfect example of this, even if the law agrees with him, his employees do not. So in a way, I am being pro-business because a happy workforce is a productive workforce. That's why some companies offer childcare and let you bring your dog to work, they know that if you're happy you're less likely to quit. That translates into big savings since low turnover means less expense hirign and training new employees.
anonymous 2:57
and WE (The United States) were founded BEFORE Mexico.
If you believe in Free Speech. Speech comes in any language. Who said speech has to in English. When you get a job, it doesn't mean you leave your Constitutional Rights at the door. What if the boss was Latino and said you can't speak English. Try the shoe on the foot.
---No, my position is you punish actual acts of harassment rather than censoring everyone.
Speaking a certain language as a job requirement is not censorship.
---Do you think most employees are so stupid as to do that in front of the boss?
If "most employees" are like you, yes they would. You have no clue as to what goes in a harassment complaint and yet here you are, trying to tell everyone how it would happen.
---No it's not, it's simply proof that Carnival has more common sense than that new owner in New Mexico.
As I asked if you believe that Carnival was a company that should be emulated, and your answer is "no," I guess we agree.
---Even when the job has nothing to do with speaking to the public?
Asked and answered. I am not going over this again and again simply because like a petulant child you don't like the answer. There is no law that prohibits an employer from demanding a employee speak English.
---Evil is evil, if an agricultural enterprise is hiring mexican illegal aliens, I'm not gonna defend their right to lower costs and make a bigger profit.
The only problem is that all companies are evil to you and all profits are evil.
---I have never said it.
Just another indication that you have no idea what you actually write.
---Are you saying all managers are good? Have you not heard of horrible managers that come late, leave early, and get away with murder?
Which has NOTHING to do with your mistaken belief that you can do better than they can. Of course there are bad managers, just like there are bad employees. Bad employees usually think they can do things better than real managers. Kind of like what you think.
The New Mexico hotel owner is the perfect example of this, even if the law agrees with him, his employees do not.
So what happens when the employees learn that the manager's demand means that there is less harassment, less turnover, a more professional atmosphere, and a better over all staff performance?
That is the problem with employees. They see only what is in front of them. You yourself do it here. You cannot fathom that there are good foundational issues that this manager based his decision upon. They don't see the P&L's. They don't see the comments from customers. They don't see evaluations with employees. All they see is what they hate and they feel they can do better.
It is clear that you see things the same way. You have no idea what it takes to run a company and you are always saying at how lousy every manager in the world in. You lie, fabricate and shift goalposts which only serve to show how clueless you truly are. You never back the managers because you hate them. They have achieved something that you are clearly incapable of.
Gregory said, and WE (The United States) were founded BEFORE Mexico.
Yeah, so?
"The only problem is that all companies are evil to you and all profits are evil."
---Now you're making stuff up, when have I said that all profits are evil? There are lists on the internet about the best companies to work for in America, I'm obviously not speaking of those. But if a company makes you work 12, 14, or 18 hours while paying you for 8, yes, that is evil, that is exploitation, that is simply wrong.
"Which has NOTHING to do with your mistaken belief that you can do better than they can."
---How the hell would you know my abilities based on my postings on a blog? That's stupid, why do you make assumptions of people you don't even know? I don't go around questioning how you do your job because I've never even met you.
"So what happens when the employees learn that the manager's demand means that there is less harassment, less turnover, a more professional atmosphere, and a better over all staff performance?"
---That's what it means to you, but to Juanita and Lolita it means that they have to put their culture in the closet everytime they come to work. "Look out Juanita, here comes that spanish hater, speak English."
"They don't see the P&L's. They don't see the comments from customers. They don't see evaluations with employees. All they see is what they hate and they feel they can do better."
---And who's responsibility is to communicate that information? Management. But I guess you like Hitler's style of management where you give an order, don't tell people why, and expect blind obedience without questioning. Well, the real world doesn't work like that.
"You never back the managers because you hate them. They have achieved something that you are clearly incapable of."
---Bullshit, my first boss was a saint, he wasn't just a manager, he was a mentor, he took the team to lunch almost everyday and almost always paid with the company account, he took us to the auto show, to museums, art galleries, he inspired us and we where willing to work the hours he wanted us from us. I was an inexperienced junior copywriter and he treated me like an equal and encouraged my growth. And before you criticize him someone you haven't even met, let me tell you that he's very succesful at what he does both as a salesman and as a creative, there are agencies begging him to be their creative director.
So I know good management when I see it, I know the difference between working at Aushwitz Advertising and a decent company where managers actually care about the needs of the employees instead of treating us like a bunch of company slaves.
2:41 PM
---Now you're making stuff up, when have I said that all profits are evil?
Every time that you have mentioned companies you have mentioned that they are profit driven and wrong. Why is it that you can't remember what you say and what the implications of that are?
---How the hell would you know my abilities based on my postings on a blog?
Because you are ignorant of companies, company philosophies, management, laws, and customer service. You cannot communicate effectively. You do not take responsibility for the things you say. You lie and fabricate things to try to get out of the messes that you make. You blame others for your failures. That is how I know your abilities are suspect.
---That's what it means to you, but to Juanita and Lolita it means that they have to put their culture in the closet everytime they come to work. "Look out Juanita, here comes that spanish hater, speak English."
Once again, you just proved my point. Employees tend not to see past their own noses. Just like you.
---And who's responsibility is to communicate that information?
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT! Thank you for playing. The answer is "no one." Management is there to provide direction to the employees and direction to the company. There are times when those goals meet, but more often they do not. Your answer shows just how much you lean to the left. You think that a company should let employees know everything that goes on in the workings of a company including letting employees know the heretofore confidential employee evaluations or others.
You are clueless.
---Bullshit, my first boss was a saint, he wasn't just a manager,
And you are working for this saint now, right?
Case closed.
Bobby said, "--And who's responsibility is to communicate that information? Management. But I guess you like Hitler's style of management where you give an order, don't tell people why, and expect blind obedience without questioning. Well, the real world doesn't work like that. "
When all else fails, use Godwin's Law.
"Every time that you have mentioned companies you have mentioned that they are profit driven and wrong."
---That's not true, I'm the biggest defender of profit, but I also defend employees. You need to read "The Jungle," maybe then you'll understand how workers can be exploited.
"Because you are ignorant of companies, company philosophies, management, laws, and customer service. You cannot communicate effectively. You do not take responsibility for the things you say. You lie and fabricate things to try to get out of the messes that you make. You blame others for your failures. That is how I know your abilities are suspect."
---What a person says on a blog and how that person acts in real life are two very different things. I based my abilities to manage people by my experiences as a teacher who had to assign projects, ensure deadline compliance, analize the quality of the work, demand and supervise revisions, etc. Besides, even if I was all the evil things you say, I've worked with people with such characteristics in the real world.
"Once again, you just proved my point. Employees tend not to see past their own noses. Just like you."
---That's because management hites the information. At one advertising agency however, management had a deal with us, we could get a bonus if we increased revenues by a certain percentage. At that agency we had several meetings during the year, we saw income, expenses, and the general costs of operating the agency, thus we had an understanding of what was going on and what we had to do.
It's not that mangement can't dictate rules, they just do better when they make sense. For example, if weight loss is optional and those who lose weight receive some kidn of reward, that is acceptable and employees will welcome it. But if companies demand weight loss without offering anything in return other than the politically correct notions of weight, that's not acceptable. You ever seen "Mutiny on the Bounty?" You can only mistreat your employees so much, eventually they will rebel.
"BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT! Thank you for playing. The answer is "no one." Management is there to provide direction to the employees and direction to the company. There are times when those goals meet, but more often they do not."
---So by providing direction you mean "barking orders" that employees will obey without question. You ever heard of the word "morale?"
"Your answer shows just how much you lean to the left. You think that a company should let employees know everything that goes on in the workings of a company including letting employees know the heretofore confidential employee evaluations or others."
---That's funny, all my ad agencies where dominated by Obama-loving liberals, all of them where PC, yet you accuse me of being leftwing. As for employee evaluations, I'm not interested in those, I am interested in knowing if my company is doing well or not, that way I can plan my future instead of getting fired by surprise.
Remember the people at ENRON? It was their manager who retired with golden parachutes, sold stock before it became worhtless and saved their asses while thousands of people showed up to work to find out there was no work anymore.
"And you are working for this saint now, right?"
---Well, we lost the client not for anything he did but due to the dirty dealings of upper management. What did they do? The client gave the agency $10 to spend in media, $1 million was leftover and the agency put it in a bank to earn interest, when the client found out the million dollars was returned but not the interest. See? Management screwed the client, so the client decided to put the agency on review and pretty soon everyone left.
---That's not true, I'm the biggest defender of profit, but I also defend employees. You need to read "The Jungle," maybe then you'll understand how workers can be exploited.
It is true. And I have read "The Jungle." It is a shame that you didn't learn the lessons from the tome.
---What a person says on a blog and how that person acts in real life are two very different things.
Really? How enlightening that the things you espouse on a blog are not the things you actually believe or put into action in your personal life.
I based my abilities to manage people by my experiences as a teacher who had to assign projects, ensure deadline compliance, analize the quality of the work, demand and supervise revisions, etc.
I just want to make sure that I understand you. You think that supervising kids is the same as managing adults? You think that being a teacher gives you the practical knowledge of the laws, rules and regulations of the workplace?
---That's because management hites the information.
No, a good manager gives you the information you need. You don't need to see everything and know everything.
It's not that mangement can't dictate rules, they just do better when they make sense.
Make sense to who? You can go to any construction site and listen to an OSHA briefing and every worker will tell you they are a waste of time. The management of the company knows that the briefings are required by law, help prevent accidents, lower insurance premiums, and make for a better, safer environment. The workers don't care. Your problem is that you think that workers are always going to see things the way management should. That myopic view of business shows how clueless you are in the real world.
You ever seen "Mutiny on the Bounty?"
The one where the workers paradise collapsed because no one would lead or follow directions? The one where upon return to England, the mutineers were found guilty of mutiny? THAT "Mutiny on the Bounty?"
You learned one lesson from that film and ran with it because it fit into your world view. There are other lessons there and you don't want to see or examine them because you don't like them.
That is another reason you would never make it as a manager - you don't have the guts to examine things that challenge your viewpoints. You are intellectually dishonest.
-cont.-
- cont -
---So by providing direction you mean "barking orders" that employees will obey without question. You ever heard of the word "morale?"
Once again, your myopic view of the world sees that "direction" can only mean "barking orders."
---That's funny, all my ad agencies where dominated by Obama-loving liberals, all of them where PC, yet you accuse me of being leftwing.
All I said was that you lean to the left. Your friends are probably more left leaning than you, but you still lean to the left.
As for employee evaluations, I'm not interested in those, I am interested in knowing if my company is doing well or not, that way I can plan my future instead of getting fired by surprise.
You don't have the tools to know whether a company is doing well or not. Frankly, if it is a public company, look at the shareholder's report. If it is a private company, it is none of your business.
Remember the people at ENRON? It was their manager who retired with golden parachutes, sold stock before it became worhtless and saved their asses while thousands of people showed up to work to find out there was no work anymore.
And remember how they had broken the law and went to jail? The fact of the matter is that the workers were fat and happy when the company was "profitable" and when it collapsed, suddenly they abandoned ship. Enron proves the point that workers cannot and do not have the ability to see beyond their noses and most don't care to.
Management screwed the client, so the client decided to put the agency on review and pretty soon everyone left.
"Management" would include your sainted boss, right? The one that was taking everyone out to lunch on the client's dime? Or did that escape your notice as well?
And by the way, if you were such a great employee, and your sainted manager is highly thought of and highly sought after, he would have kept you around.
He didn't.
That says more than I think you are willing to examine.
"I just want to make sure that I understand you. You think that supervising kids is the same as managing adults? You think that being a teacher gives you the practical knowledge of the laws, rules and regulations of the workplace?"
---I was supervising ADULTS, my youngest student was 23. I think teachers are natural managers, not only they have to hold the attention of a captive audience but they have to teach them, supervise them, help them learn from their mistakes, etc.
People tend to love managers who are mentors, if your sales manager demands you increase sales but never takes the time to teach you how to do it, do you think he will be that effective?
"No, a good manager gives you the information you need. You don't need to see everything and know everything."
---Well, then that's a subjective decision. It is one thing to tell your employees that they're wasting too much money in office supplies, it's something else to tell them that office supplies is costing them X number of dollars and if the employees reduce waste by X percent they will get X benefit.
"Make sense to who? You can go to any construction site and listen to an OSHA briefing and every worker will tell you they are a waste of time."
---Well, some of it might be a waste of time, OSHA is a government agency, right? Some of the stuff that comes out of the government is a waste of time.
"The one where the workers paradise collapsed because no one would lead or follow directions? The one where upon return to England, the mutineers were found guilty of mutiny? THAT "Mutiny on the Bounty?"
---Yes, but I was more focused on the cruelties of Captain Blight which led to the mutiny in the first place. Maybe the mutineers where found guilty, but if the magistrates had been in that boat they would have joined them in their disobedience.
"That is another reason you would never make it as a manager - you don't have the guts to examine things that challenge your viewpoints. You are intellectually dishonest."
---At every job I've had my viewpoints are constantly challenged and I have to separate what I think from what is expected of me.
-cont.-
cont -
"If it is a private company, it is none of your business."
---Fine, legally is none of my business, but if you want me to care about your company then you should let me know what's going on.
"And remember how they had broken the law and went to jail?"
---Some went to jail, not all, and a lot of good people got burned in the end.
"The fact of the matter is that the workers were fat and happy when the company was "profitable" and when it collapsed, suddenly they abandoned ship."
---They didn't jump ship, the ship hit an iceberg and they drowned.
"Enron proves the point that workers cannot and do not have the ability to see beyond their noses and most don't care to."
---How could they see? Unless they where the ones cooking the books they had no idea this was happening.
""Management" would include your sainted boss, right? The one that was taking everyone out to lunch on the client's dime? Or did that escape your notice as well?"
---No, my boss didn't handle the financials of the agency, he was the Creative Director. And no, our client didn't pay for those lunches, the agency did. Managers often have corporate credit card with limits, his limit was $500 a month so if there was $200 left he would spend it on us. You may think that's unethical, but I see it as an expense on team building, and the agency never complained.
You know, a lot of the practices he preached are dying, nowadays people bring their lunches to work or go outside just to pick up lunch and bring it back to work. People are forgetting how to enjoy life, how to socialize with their coworkers.
"And by the way, if you were such a great employee, and your sainted manager is highly thought of and highly sought after, he would have kept you around.
He didn't."
---That's the problem with you, you barely know about my situation and yet you're so quick to pass judgement. The account was on review and the possibility of us saving it was zilch since rumor was that the client hated the CEO of our company, the man who coordinated the scheme to gain interest on the client's money. My boss was tired of agency politics, angry with the CEO and looking for a change. After years of making money for others he wanted to start his own agency, eventually all the employees started to leave. A new boss came, she didn't like me, office gossipers told me she was out to get me and I was able to find another job before she fired me.
---I was supervising ADULTS, my youngest student was 23. I think teachers are natural managers, not only they have to hold the attention of a captive audience but they have to teach them, supervise them, help them learn from their mistakes, etc.
The first part of mentoring is to be honest. You clearly do not have that skill.
---Well, then that's a subjective decision.
You were the one that said management hides information from employees and should always let them know everything. Now you are changing your story. Once again, you demonstrate why you could not manage anyone - you are fundamentally self centered and dishonest.
---Well, some of it might be a waste of time, OSHA is a government agency, right? Some of the stuff that comes out of the government is a waste of time.
So, the company saving money on insurance and fines is a waste of time. Got it.
Ho hum. Just another case of your cluelessness.
---Yes, but I was more focused on the cruelties of Captain Blight which led to the mutiny in the first place. Maybe the mutineers where found guilty, but if the magistrates had been in that boat they would have joined them in their disobedience.
That's funny. That is really funny. You are once again projecting your views on something without any basis at all. You wouldn't have lasted on a sailing ship like the HMS Bounty. The mutineers were found guilty because they were guilty. They, like you, thought they would be better captains and better at running the ship and it turns out they weren't.
---At every job I've had my viewpoints are constantly challenged and I have to separate what I think from what is expected of me.
So, you don't have the ability to stand up for what you believe? See, this is where you consistently fail. You follow along, never taking a chance and just demanding that others do your dirty work in life. You don't have the guts to sit in the big chair. You keep saying how your real life is not the same as your online life. You talk a big game here, and as you say that you are not the same in real life, that means that you are simply a little coward who is afraid of the big time, the big decisions and the big responsibilities.
---Fine, legally is none of my business, but if you want me to care about your company then you should let me know what's going on.
Morally it is none of your business. Managers should let you know only what you need to know because people as ignorant in business as you are will clearly foul things up.
---They didn't jump ship, the ship hit an iceberg and they drowned.
No, they jumped ship. They were happy making money but when the ship started to flounder, they all decried how evil the company was. Just like you do. You are happy to go along until things go wrong and then you make up lies to try to prove how great your opinion is.
---No, my boss didn't handle the financials of the agency, he was the Creative Director. And no, our client didn't pay for those lunches, the agency did. Managers often have corporate credit card with limits, his limit was $500 a month so if there was $200 left he would spend it on us. You may think that's unethical, but I see it as an expense on team building, and the agency never complained.
I guarantee your sainted boss saw the books. If someone is responsible for an account, they see the books. As for the lunches, where do you think that money came from? Some credit card making magic fairy? This is why you are clueless. You don't see that a company expenditure comes from the money the company takes in. It didn't matter to you. You were literally fat and happy while people were spending money from an account.
---That's the problem with you, you barely know about my situation and yet you're so quick to pass judgement.
It is judgment to say that the sainted boss didn't keep you around? Wow. I guess I misunderstood.
My boss was tired of agency politics, angry with the CEO and looking for a change. After years of making money for others he wanted to start his own agency, eventually all the employees started to leave.
I'm sorry, I thought you were saying that you were still under his direction. Certainly he took you to his new agency, right? Certainly he called you and offered you work?
Oh wait....
A new boss came, she didn't like me, office gossipers told me she was out to get me and I was able to find another job before she fired me.
So not only did you leave, you left on your own accord because of "rumors?" And you didn't go work with your former supervisor?
Gee, if the rumors were true, I wonder why she didn't like you? Could it be that you were a whiner? A suck-up? One who was afraid to step out and take a stand? A weasel that worried about office politics instead of doing his job?
Like I said, you don't have the background, resources, or understanding to sit in the big chair.
Stay on the porch where you belong.
I'm done with this.
This topic started out with your whining that a manager didn't have the right to make a legal request of his employees.
Throughout, you have shown more and more ignorance of business. You continue to lie and fabricate. You continue to refuse to take responsibility for you actions. It is always everyone else.
Goodbye.
I'm only going to reply to this paragraph because the rest is an exercize in futility.
"guarantee your sainted boss saw the books. If someone is responsible for an account, they see the books."
---Creatives don't see books! Account managers, finance director, media people, they see books. Creatives see and present IDEAS. Get it?
"As for the lunches, where do you think that money came from?"
---Well, from the agency. Here's how it works, an advertising agency has several clients, they all pay a monthly fee plus the hours of each employees. Out of that money different funds are allocated for different things, such as the lunch budget which the creative director can use at his discretion.
So it was the agency money. Tell me, if you have a bakery and you sell lots of bread, the profits belong to you, right? Well, the same with an ad agency, our job is to create ads, we do that job, we get paid, and the agency spends the money as they wish.
Oh, and regarding the Mutiny on the Bounty, I'd like to see you survive a captain that ties you up in a mast and whips you like a dog.
There are many reasons why a crew might become mutinous, poor leadership, unnecesary cruelty or the madness of a captain can turn any crew against their captain. But you can't understand that because to you management is always right and the employee is always wrong.
It's like the airline industry, it doesn't matter if I hate my seat, the lack of legroom, the lack of magazines, the endless hours on the runway or any number of things. My concerns don't matter because I don't have an MBA from Harvard unlike so-called "management." I'm only the customer or the employee, and while I get to experience the product you'd rather listen to some asshole from Harvard. Frankly, you're just like the people who criticize Sarah Pallin, you hate common sense.
You need to be raised again by some parents that are not as ignorant as you! I feel sorry for you because the only reason you came out the way you did was how you were raised. The color of your skin has not one thing to do with who you are. Yet how your parents raised you does. God bless. If you don't believe in god too BAD!
Post a Comment