Timeline for Is it reasonable for me to complain about an objectionable newspaper being ordered for the office?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 30, 2017 at 16:42 | comment | added | Thorsten S. | @PeterM You should make that more clear. Currently it looks like that "There are unresolved feelings" jumps to the conclusion that "something must be immediately done by HR". I really miss the intermediate steps. Why and when must those feelings be not only addressed, but acquiesced. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 16:25 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | @fredsbend - gotcha. Deleting my comment, based on misunderstanding who you were referring to. I was confused by the "she" reference, since OP's screen name is "Bob." | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 16:24 | comment | added | user15729 | @polo Not the HR manager. The whiney employee complaining about reading material in the break room because she feels it's important. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 16:01 | comment | added | Peter M | @ThorstenS. I said feelings had to be addressed. I never said that feelings had to be acquiesced to. Regardless of what those feelings are if you do not address them and instead sweep them under the rug you are not solving the problem - only hiding it. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 15:54 | comment | added | user15729 | @polo I live in right to work state. She'd be on the radar for firing. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 15:54 | comment | added | Thorsten S. | @PoloHoleSet I think the problem is simply that the given argument is shoddy. Pete M. talks about "feelings that cannot be denied" and "invalidating a person's feelings". The problem is that racists, bigots, crazies and religious fundamentalists have also feelings (and they are often very strong), so neither the mere presence of feelings nor their intensity has any argumentative value. Worse, e.g. a religious fundamentalist could argue that he finds women at work a toxic environment and demand that this feelings are addressed. fredsbend only pointed that out. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 14:52 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | @fredsbend - we can certainly deny they are worth addressing, but HR tends to be completely risk-adverse. If they weigh the idea that a formal complaint was made that they did not act upon opening them up for actions, sanctions and liabilities if some official finding of a "hostile workplace environment" is ever entered in the future, vs. being overly cautious and just removing all reading materials from the lunch room because one was not liked, what is your average HR manager going to do? | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 3:05 | comment | added | Acccumulation | @Statsanalyst So it just goes from Page 2 directly to Page 4 now? | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 19:47 | comment | added | Peter M | @Statsanalyst I haven't seen physical copy for a long time, but their website has a whole section devoted to them. | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 19:41 | comment | added | Statsanalyst | Just for accuracy, the Sun abolished Page 3 a couple of years ago. | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 19:41 | comment | added | user15729 | I disagree. Some feelings are childish and contemptible and should just be dismissed. But this isn't a place for discussion, so I'll leave it at that. | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 19:16 | comment | added | Peter M |
@fredsbend deny that they are worth addressing is invalidating a persons feelings and acts to undermine the relationship that you have with them. The only healthy thing to do is to address them - but that does not necessarily imply concede to them.
|
|
| Nov 29, 2017 at 19:07 | comment | added | user15729 | "These are your feelings and you can't be denied them." Feelings are not inherently legitimate or worth considering for everybody else. Yes, we can't deny you have them, but we can certainly deny that they are worth addressing. | |
| Nov 28, 2017 at 12:56 | history | answered | Peter M | CC BY-SA 3.0 |