Canadian Woman Gets Fired via Facebook
I read recently that we all have public lives, personal lives, and private lives. This and the prior article I posted about a UK teen getting fired for indicating on her Facebook status is just that much more reason to keep these things separate.
Love this quote from the supervisor: "Her former boss, Susanne Woerhie, defended the Facebook firing by saying that she had tried to call Bell after she skipped the staff meeting but couldn't reach her.
'I just wanted to have it dealt with that evening,' Woerhie told the Kelowna Daily Courier. 'I didn't want to deal with it at the shop when other people were around.'"
How lame.
Ink Paper Words' Profile
- ~j~
- Pacific Northwest, United States
- In elementary school, I desperately wanted my mother to order books for me from those flyers Scholastic hands out to kids. She refused, citing the "perfectly good library down the street." I exacted revenge by becoming a card-carrying ALA accredited reference librarian. Ha! Take that!
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Friday, May 1, 2009
Rejection Has Never Been Sweeter
Mainly because I was the one doing the rejecting. I received email last night requesting an interview from someone whose posting on Craigslist I had replied to. I was excited until I got to the part where they said that before they could confirm an interview time I would have to obtain something called an “employee score,” and I was referred to site www.freeemployeescore.com. Since I had never heard of such a thing and having a hinky feeling about the proposition, I went to the site. Yes, I am well aware that many employers run your social through a vetting service to make hiring decisions, but I have certainly never been directed to conduct this part of the job screening myself. Sorry people, but I do not work for you. If you want to check on a potential employee, do it your own damn self.
Sure enough, the URL in question offers an employment background checking service, purportedly “free.” I was redirected to site www.consumerdirect.com which wanted to charge a fee on a credit card to provide me this “free” service. Perhaps this is so much semantic quibbling, but any charge is not “free.”
I have never understood the logic that says bad credit history = bad employee. It simply does not follow. What is does indicate is that a job is needed, and the person who actually needs a job seems more likely, IMO, to try to hold on to that job. God forbid unemployed people dare to find work. Isn't it more likely that this is a corporate urban legend foisted upon employers by people hawking this service? Come on, be realistic. If an employee were of a mind to commit a crime to obtain money to avoid having a bad rating, this person would, on the basis of his employee score, be preferable to someone who had not thought to do likewise and therefore had a bad score. It occurred to me during the Reagan administration that in that cultural atmosphere, no crime was as bad as the crime of being poor. I understand that the financial industry leaders who so recently needed a government bailout to avoid going belly up probably have excellent credit. That did not prevent them from bilking taxpayers out of millions.
Why does Craigslist attract so many bogus employment ads? Why don't they consider charging a small fee to employers to make sure that postings are for actual jobs and not phishing scams or attempts to charge people for the information on how to start a work at home business? This kind of crap annoys the bejesus out of me precisely because it exploits people who are desperate. Craigslist is a great resource for local information, but these kinds of posts under the guise of offering employment lessens its effectiveness and relevance.
The more I dug for information on getjudgment.com (the mail I received was from the domain getjudgement.com, which begs the question why I should consider them a legitimate employer when they can't even spell “judgment” correctly – I know, I'm a spelling snob. So sue me). Real businesses come up with something when you google them. Real businesses aren't afraid of a little transparency. Real businesses do not refer you to a phishing site before they will consider your candidacy for a legitimate job. Oddly, my outgoing mail client, which hangs on to everything I send until I manually delete it, shows no record of mail sent for this position title either to the various spellings of getjudgment or a Craigslist anonymous email. Ah, well, just one more red flag out of many.
Long story short, I sent my regrets to this “employer.” I am not a fool and value my privacy too much to surrender it on the off chance that I'd cop an interview out of it. Sorry, Janice @ getjudgement.com. Thanks for playing. Try again with some other chump.
Oh, and a whois lookup yields the following data on consumerdirect.com
Registrant Contact:
David Coulter
Pathway Data, Inc. ()
Fax:
3187 Red Hill Ave #100
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
US
Sure enough, the URL in question offers an employment background checking service, purportedly “free.” I was redirected to site www.consumerdirect.com which wanted to charge a fee on a credit card to provide me this “free” service. Perhaps this is so much semantic quibbling, but any charge is not “free.”
I have never understood the logic that says bad credit history = bad employee. It simply does not follow. What is does indicate is that a job is needed, and the person who actually needs a job seems more likely, IMO, to try to hold on to that job. God forbid unemployed people dare to find work. Isn't it more likely that this is a corporate urban legend foisted upon employers by people hawking this service? Come on, be realistic. If an employee were of a mind to commit a crime to obtain money to avoid having a bad rating, this person would, on the basis of his employee score, be preferable to someone who had not thought to do likewise and therefore had a bad score. It occurred to me during the Reagan administration that in that cultural atmosphere, no crime was as bad as the crime of being poor. I understand that the financial industry leaders who so recently needed a government bailout to avoid going belly up probably have excellent credit. That did not prevent them from bilking taxpayers out of millions.
Why does Craigslist attract so many bogus employment ads? Why don't they consider charging a small fee to employers to make sure that postings are for actual jobs and not phishing scams or attempts to charge people for the information on how to start a work at home business? This kind of crap annoys the bejesus out of me precisely because it exploits people who are desperate. Craigslist is a great resource for local information, but these kinds of posts under the guise of offering employment lessens its effectiveness and relevance.
The more I dug for information on getjudgment.com (the mail I received was from the domain getjudgement.com, which begs the question why I should consider them a legitimate employer when they can't even spell “judgment” correctly – I know, I'm a spelling snob. So sue me). Real businesses come up with something when you google them. Real businesses aren't afraid of a little transparency. Real businesses do not refer you to a phishing site before they will consider your candidacy for a legitimate job. Oddly, my outgoing mail client, which hangs on to everything I send until I manually delete it, shows no record of mail sent for this position title either to the various spellings of getjudgment or a Craigslist anonymous email. Ah, well, just one more red flag out of many.
Long story short, I sent my regrets to this “employer.” I am not a fool and value my privacy too much to surrender it on the off chance that I'd cop an interview out of it. Sorry, Janice @ getjudgement.com. Thanks for playing. Try again with some other chump.
Dear Ms. Walsh:
I wanted to thank you for your interest in interviewing me for your Administrative Assistant position as advertised on Craigslist. I must however regretfully decline your invitation.
The reason for my refusal centers on my belief that any employer who finds it necessary, in the middle of an economic depression, to conduct a credit check prior to employment or even further consideration is, quite simply, unworthy of my abilities.
I wish your office the best of luck in locating a master-level incumbent with over 30 years of work experience for your position.
File copy: adsl-68-121-22-201.dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net
Oh, and a whois lookup yields the following data on consumerdirect.com
Registrant Contact:
David Coulter
Pathway Data, Inc. ()
Fax:
3187 Red Hill Ave #100
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
US
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Why I Homeschool My Child
This article is from Salon. Interesting points, but ultimately none of those are the reason why I decided that homeschooling was the best option for my (somewhat problematical) teen. Why I Homeschool My Children
My traditional stance on homeschooling was that some things are better left to professionals, and teaching is one of them. Plus, this kid was going to present a challenge to whomever received the privilege of having Fester in his class. His ADHD creates havoc with inability to remain on task. He is frequently disruptive. With his diabetes, the schools have a responsibility to monitor his blood sugar. It seemed as though at least once a week I got a call to come pick him up from school so we could deal with his hyperglycemia at home. Now that I have more time to spend with him, we can be much more flexible in terms of managing his sick days -- and he has fewer of them.
But if there were one ultimate determining factor, it would be that the public school was in the process of referring him to "alternative school." I didn't see the usefulness of sending Fester to a place full of other boys looking for trouble.
We began by checking out a couple of GED study guides with sample tests from the library to get a baseline idea where Fester is, academically speaking. He was 15 1/2 at the time, not yet old enough to take the GED. Based on the scores from the sample test, he would have passed. He watches quite a bit of The Discovery Channel, The History Channel and CNN now. We talk about things and use those conversations as a springboard to research papers.
Since we decided to home school, the stress level is down and our relationship is better. Sure, Fester still does a lot of crazy things, but he's not so consistently in trouble. He spends less time hanging around people who will encourage him to find trouble. Even the way we're doing it, which is somewhat impromptu, home schooling is a lot of work but so far the results seem to make it worthwhile. He may well be a misfit and dropout but I still see his worth as a person. Fester is smart and funny and intuitive. He has a natural curiosity about the world and presents himself quite articulately. The public school system in two states has not served him well.
My traditional stance on homeschooling was that some things are better left to professionals, and teaching is one of them. Plus, this kid was going to present a challenge to whomever received the privilege of having Fester in his class. His ADHD creates havoc with inability to remain on task. He is frequently disruptive. With his diabetes, the schools have a responsibility to monitor his blood sugar. It seemed as though at least once a week I got a call to come pick him up from school so we could deal with his hyperglycemia at home. Now that I have more time to spend with him, we can be much more flexible in terms of managing his sick days -- and he has fewer of them.
But if there were one ultimate determining factor, it would be that the public school was in the process of referring him to "alternative school." I didn't see the usefulness of sending Fester to a place full of other boys looking for trouble.
We began by checking out a couple of GED study guides with sample tests from the library to get a baseline idea where Fester is, academically speaking. He was 15 1/2 at the time, not yet old enough to take the GED. Based on the scores from the sample test, he would have passed. He watches quite a bit of The Discovery Channel, The History Channel and CNN now. We talk about things and use those conversations as a springboard to research papers.
Since we decided to home school, the stress level is down and our relationship is better. Sure, Fester still does a lot of crazy things, but he's not so consistently in trouble. He spends less time hanging around people who will encourage him to find trouble. Even the way we're doing it, which is somewhat impromptu, home schooling is a lot of work but so far the results seem to make it worthwhile. He may well be a misfit and dropout but I still see his worth as a person. Fester is smart and funny and intuitive. He has a natural curiosity about the world and presents himself quite articulately. The public school system in two states has not served him well.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
The Sudden Squeamishness is Surprising
The Palins, The Johnstons, And Republican Class Politics
Frankly, I'm baffled. Isn't this the same milieu that Bullwinkle-shooting, field dressing Palin worked so very hard to portray herself a part of during the presidential campaign?
And here is the Levi Johnston the RNC wants us to believe in:
The RedState Blog weighs in here.
Ah geez, I registered there just to comment but the forum keeps telling me I haven't been registered long enough. Fine, here's my comment:
Below is the actual Levi — no preppy clothes. No polish. Just good old boy who knocked up the Governor’s daughter. ...
Frankly, I'm baffled. Isn't this the same milieu that Bullwinkle-shooting, field dressing Palin worked so very hard to portray herself a part of during the presidential campaign?
And here is the Levi Johnston the RNC wants us to believe in:
The RedState Blog weighs in here.
Ah geez, I registered there just to comment but the forum keeps telling me I haven't been registered long enough. Fine, here's my comment:
LOL Funny post, thanks.
To start, Erickson obviously has little knowledge of television. Of course cheesy talk show hosts want you to think about their guests in this manner. It titillates and grabs the viewer. Television earns money based on numbers of viewers, not content.
No, the left can't be bothered with the issue now; that's because it's old news. It's the proverbial dead horse. Don't accuse the other side of apathy now simply because your opinion at the time was proven wrong. They've moved on. Be a little quicker on the uptake and perhaps you won't feel so left out.
Liberals will not regard Mr Johnston as a “hero because he hurts Palin.” Palin's own party ditched her when she helped sink the ticket. Johnston's actions really have no effect on the left – except that he is now the poster boy for fathers' rights to visitation. Man, it must really kill conservatives now that their political tradition which is supposed to be about “family values” is now preventing a father from carrying out his responsibilities as a parent ... while those godless "lib'ruls" think he should be granted access until a court order prevents it.
Call him whatever you like now, but that cannot alter the many photo ops in which both the Palins and the RNC trotted Johnston out and presented him as suitable husband fodder. If the Palins found him to be so distasteful, how is it that he managed such access? Sure, he's a dunderhead, but what does it say about the Palins that he was able to get one over on them? Epithets such as "white trash" flung at Johnston now will ultimately come back to haunt the baby...the only one in the entire scenario who is not in some way guilty. Yah, I know: more of those good old "family values."
As for Tyra Banks, I could not begin to tell you what her politics are. Somehow, hers is not the first name that comes to mind when discussing the subject. Oh, and Erick Erickson might reconsider his definition of ethics when decrying anyone making money off the sad situation of these three children, considering that there is advertising on his blog right next to the article.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
My Reply...5 Years Later
Ronald Reagan and the National Day of Mourning
I am only making a comment about this now because it has come up on another board I participate in and I referred to the quote in question. Rather than being a "roach coming out to express my opinion," I was specifically asked for it. Hating hypocrisy, I gave it without sugarcoating or spinning. To my amazement, the local paper picked it up, then some blogs and then some industry-related journals.
The thing I find particularly amusing is how the author of the Conservator Blog (or something similar, apparently now inactive) decided that he knew me well enough to describe my political leanings and acted as though he knew me. Now that's a laugh. No one cites him, so he must therefore cite people he writes about, Sorry Charlie. Or Jack or Brian or who the hell are you anyway?
On a human level, I certainly understand the pain his widow and children must have felt at his passing. No doubt similar to what I felt when my father died in 1986. But I also remember his many unfortunate political gaffes and can now only be described as poorly advised positions. Homelessness is a lifestyle choice. Ketchup, for purposes of school lunches, is now a vegetable. And that is only the beginning. One can only hope that when their relative, a former world figure not known for being an intellectual giant dies, that some people might have opinions and that they will voice those opinions.
Personally, I believe that Reagan would hate the idea that government employees would have a day off because of his passing. Those who think I should have elected to spend the day in genuflection rather than fixing my hard drive don't know me very well. I don't think Reagan would have wanted people of my class to have anything more than what we already got. I wasn't planning for the day and didn't expect it. A reporter asked me what I thought I told him without guile or any desire to "spin" my opinion. That bloggers decided to do it for me afterward was outside my ability to control.
I do think, however, that this experience serves to show why one must be guarded when speaking to reporters for any reason and be careful about what they say. Had I to do it over again, I probably would elect not to make any comment. The many bloggers who thought they had amusing comments to make reagarding my comment would have one less thing to remark upon.
I am only making a comment about this now because it has come up on another board I participate in and I referred to the quote in question. Rather than being a "roach coming out to express my opinion," I was specifically asked for it. Hating hypocrisy, I gave it without sugarcoating or spinning. To my amazement, the local paper picked it up, then some blogs and then some industry-related journals.
The thing I find particularly amusing is how the author of the Conservator Blog (or something similar, apparently now inactive) decided that he knew me well enough to describe my political leanings and acted as though he knew me. Now that's a laugh. No one cites him, so he must therefore cite people he writes about, Sorry Charlie. Or Jack or Brian or who the hell are you anyway?
On a human level, I certainly understand the pain his widow and children must have felt at his passing. No doubt similar to what I felt when my father died in 1986. But I also remember his many unfortunate political gaffes and can now only be described as poorly advised positions. Homelessness is a lifestyle choice. Ketchup, for purposes of school lunches, is now a vegetable. And that is only the beginning. One can only hope that when their relative, a former world figure not known for being an intellectual giant dies, that some people might have opinions and that they will voice those opinions.
Personally, I believe that Reagan would hate the idea that government employees would have a day off because of his passing. Those who think I should have elected to spend the day in genuflection rather than fixing my hard drive don't know me very well. I don't think Reagan would have wanted people of my class to have anything more than what we already got. I wasn't planning for the day and didn't expect it. A reporter asked me what I thought I told him without guile or any desire to "spin" my opinion. That bloggers decided to do it for me afterward was outside my ability to control.
I do think, however, that this experience serves to show why one must be guarded when speaking to reporters for any reason and be careful about what they say. Had I to do it over again, I probably would elect not to make any comment. The many bloggers who thought they had amusing comments to make reagarding my comment would have one less thing to remark upon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)