Secretaries Sacked After Flamewar at Work 644
ross.w writes "Two legal secretaries in Sydney have been sacked after a flamewar over a ham sandwich got circulated throughout the cities financial district. The insults about figures, boyfriends and jobs flew thick and fast and ultimately resulted in the dismissal of both of them for mis-use of the email system."
Hearsay (Score:5, Funny)
Rumor has it that Nugent's lunch was stolen by her ex-boyfriend who is now with Bird.
Warning: Do not pass this on.
Regardless, the person who forwarded these emails to external parties should be fired because company emails shouldn't be forwarded to unintended recipients without original author's consent.
Re:Hearsay (Score:4, Informative)
Oh, the horror of Outlook Express (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember times where people actually quoted relevant material from previous mails, trimmed down unnecessary garbage and answered questions *below* the question itself.
These days you need to sift through millions of lines of excessive "Original Message" quoting without any reference to the actual contents of previous messages. Sucky line breaks, HTML-crap, incoherent writing and idiotic bitmap smileys have made e-mail communication a Pain In The Ass, but certainly not an effective means of getting things done in a coherent fashion.
Thank god there are some lonely islands in usenet with old-fashioned people who take the three seconds to trim down excessive quoting, who put answers *after* the questions and who know how to use an editor to get a message across.
One of these days I am going to start a company that uses a newsserver as its main means of internal communication and I'll fire everyone who doesn't play by the rules of old style usenet posting.
Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express (Score:5, Insightful)
In business politics, someone can get added to the thread after the fact or get the mail forwarded to them, and the presence of a message history greatly aids in their understanding. This is really a work-around for poor tools and processes.
Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express (Score:5, Funny)
Whatever happened to a sane style of communicating with people over e-mail? I remember times where people actually quoted relevant material from previous mails, trimmed down unnecessary garbage and answered questions *below* the question itself. These days you need to sift through millions of lines of excessive "Original Message" quoting without any reference to the actual contents of previous messages. Sucky line breaks, HTML-crap, incoherent writing and idiotic bitmap smileys have made e-mail communication a Pain In The Ass, but certainly not an effective means of getting things done in a coherent fashion. Thank god there are some lonely islands in usenet with old-fashioned people who take the three seconds to trim down excessive quoting, who put answers *after* the questions and who know how to use an editor to get a message across. One of these days I am going to start a company that uses a newsserver as its main means of internal communication and I'll fire everyone who doesn't play by the rules of old style usenet posting.
Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express (Score:4, Informative)
You know what's interesting? I have friends that I have attempted to email the way the GP described and they emailed me backup complaining that they couldn't figure out what I was talking about. Now I just top post - seems to be more readable to the average user.
Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express (Score:5, Informative)
Only because the average user has been *trained* by bad messaging habits to read email that way.
Top-posting is fine (it annoys me, but its tolerable) if you are engaged in a single-threaded, IM-style conversation where you only have to answer one question at a time. When someone asks multiple, unrelated questions in a single email or touches on multiple topics that cannot all be dealt with in a single response, top-posting falls flat on its face.
The division on this issue seems to be squarely along business users and technical users. Most technical users have been trained in Usenet-style posting: trimmed messages, clear annotation, appropriate response. Business users have been trained by Microsoft - fire and forget.
Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, I don't believe the people I am referring to were 'trained' at all. My experience has been in my personal correspondance with friends and family - most of their experience with computers is limited to browsing the web and using Yahoo mail, not sure we can blame Microsoft.
Top-posting is fine (it annoys me, but its tolerable) if you are engaged in a single-threaded, IM-style conversation where you
Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express (Score:3, Insightful)
Well...they were not formally trained. They were trained by the user interface and came to expect that all user interfaces would be similar or they just flat out don't care. In either case, a de facto standard was born. The question now becomes who set that de facto standard: Microsoft with 90%+ of the desktop market (my vote) or web mail (which probably tried to emulate the desktop because it was already familiar to the user and/or desi
Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you hit the nail on the head here. The real difference is the audience. If you and I are corresponding one-on-one we can probably keep track of the conversation even if top-posting is ues. If we are corresponding in a public forum (slashdot, usenet, whatever), mailing list or just CCing in multiple people on a technical or business issue Usenet style replies are much easier for outsiders to follow.
On top vs. below (Score:4, Insightful)
At least one of my friends tries to make this a Unix versus Microsoft Windows holy war, but I set my mail client to reply at the top no matter which one I'm using, because it makes sense to me and apparently to almost everyone else who uses email too.
Sometimes people have ideas and improve how things are done. Just because it's new and different doesn't mean it's worse. I think this is one of those occasions.
OK thanks I'm done now ;-)
Re:On top vs. below (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe that the rationale is that when reading a long, top-posted conversation, everything is in a jumbled, psuedo-reverse order:
Answer 4> Answer 3
> Question 4
>>Answer 2
>>Question 3
>>>Answer 1
>>>Question 2
>>>>Question 1
While, when reading a bottom-posted conversation, everything reads in the correct order, where the answer to a particular question appears directly after said question. (i.e. like a transcript of a real conversation):
>>>>Question 1>>> Answer 1
>>> Question 2
>> Answer 2
>> Question 3
> Answer 3
> Question 4
Answer 4
External Parties (Why wasn't I invited?) (Score:4, Funny)
Why? Was that in the company's acceptable use policy (AUP)? NO?
Many companies have yet to effectively leverage the online employee comportment solutions that are available in the idea marketplace. In the online world, synergies for mitigation of "water cooler" discussions can be harnessed LIKE NEVER BEFORE!
Does your company's AUP need dusting off? Is the disused lavatory that houses the locked Employee Manual filing cabinet just not recieving the foot traffic it deserves because the door is missing its 'Beware of the Leopard' sign? ACT NOW!
Check out some of the quality AUP elements that are at work on my own personal mailbox sender storage space use policy:
- Senders must grant unlimited reproduction, modification, and distrubution of their message contents
- Senders agree to have all AUP-related feedback handled by the on-line erectile disfunction medication retailer that I've received the most spam from this week (currently instant-pharmacy.net, in case you're interested)
Remember: It's quality outsourcing possibilities like these that let me keep my service levels up! Imagine how dissappointed I would be if my customer service workload made me LOSE OUT on the EXCELLENT FREE KARMA available by forwarding little Johnny's request for postcards out to 20 of my BESTEST FRIENDS (who judging by my inbox contents are all direct e-mail marketers)! Now that would just be plain sad.
(Apologies to the late Mr. Adams for blatant fair use of the leopard bit.)
-aT
Re:External Parties (Why wasn't I invited?) (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:External Parties (Why wasn't I invited?) (Score:3, Informative)
They probably say that email is not to be used for non-work related purposes (Every place Ive worked at has had that one) but as a law firm, I'd imagine they'd need a strict policy about internal correspondance leaving the firms internal network.
Whoever sent the email to someone outside the office is probably going to get
Re:External Parties (Why wasn't I invited?) (Score:5, Informative)
Even such a clause can be hard to enforce legally if the defence can show that it is not enforced uniformly. That is the danger of broad contract clause. If the defence can show that EVERYBODY violates the contract, then the courts will question the wisdom of enforcing it in any particular case.
For example, if the windows EULA contained a restriction that said that if you mow your own lawn you agree to give Bill Gates the title to your home, that is technically an agreement to avoid a particular activity. If MS then slectively went after windows copyright violators using this clause it would be likely to be found unenforceable, since it is being used selectively.
The fact is that most companies do in fact tolerate personal use of email despite wording to the contrary in the AUP. If the defence can show that many others send personal emails, and that their managers are aware of this activity, then the court may be likely to question why they are being singled out. Otherwise a company who wants to get rid of all its over-40 employees could just do an audit and fire just these employees for sending personal emails.
Many companies as a result have AUPs that specifically allow personal use of email within certain bounds. A court is more likely to uphold such an AUP if the bounds sound reasonable and has in fact been violated (such as running a personal business on company time, or sending bulk mail or many large emails, or excessive use of company time). Additionally, if an employee is excessively using time at work for personal business it is likely that their performance will suffer and that is clearly cause for termination.
This should not be a firing offense (Score:3, Insightful)
The entire concept of considering all emails at work "business communications" is ridiculous. You ever say something personal to the person in the cubicle next door? Yeah? You ever use your PBX to talk to the person down the hall? Email is just the modern way of doing that.
Now, granted, they shouldn't have got in a
Ouch (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ouch (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Ouch (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ouch (Score:5, Funny)
Wait...
Ooooh! Dennis! There's some lovely filth down here
Re:Ouch (Score:4, Funny)
I agree!
Now flame me if you must, but what happened to the good old days when the secretary was there to bring the boss a cup of coffee, and take his dry cleaning to the chinese place? You know... two wongs can make it white.
Work is not the place for women to be women. Work is the place for women to kiss ass.
Having said that, if I owned an internet porn company, I would try and hire the two of them for some hot firey angry lesbian action. Give them both a whiffle ball bat, tell them there are no rules- hit as hard as you can. because the looser is getting the wiffle ball bat in her ass. Give the winner $1000 and pay their rent for a month while they find a new job. Pay the loser nothing and put her picture on a billboard with the wiffleball bat hanging out her snatch.
Welcome to corporate warfare.
Re:Ouch (Score:5, Funny)
I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter...
Re:Ouch (Score:5, Funny)
best misspelling of loser ever!
Re:Ouch (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sure the tighter will be grateful you said that.
Re:Ouch (Score:5, Funny)
"That's exactly why you use personal email for personal things..."
Though sometimes the upfront and personal approach is best. For example:
"Well, I gotta tell you - I'd be very, very careful who you talk to about that, because the person who stole that sandwich... is dangerous. And this button-down, Oxford-cloth psycho might just snap and then stalk from office to office with an Armilite AR-10 carbine gas-powered semiautomatic weapon: pumping round after round into colleagues and coworkers. This might be someone you've known for years . . . someone very, very close to you."
Re:guns illegal in Australia (Score:5, Insightful)
Guns aren't "banned" in Australia. They're merely not as easy to get as they are in some other countries - and it's highly doubtful the knee-jerk response to Port Arthur has made this country any safer.
Some of the problems in America could not happen in Australia as a result. (Oops probably a flamewar in the making)
They're probably less likely to happen - but it's got nothing to do with guns and everything to do with culture and society. The plethora of examples of countries with high gun ownership rates and low[er] gun crime rates (and vice versa) demonstrate quite plainly that it's got nothing to do with guns, and everything to do with people. As was handily demonstrated by the recent anarchy and violence after Katrina hit.
America is simply a violent culture. If they weren't shooting each other, they'd be stabbing and bludgeoning each other. The problem isn't mechanical, it's social (just to keep those flames burning)...
Re:guns illegal in Australia (Score:5, Informative)
Since you are from Oz I am probably not telling you anything you don't know already, but the truth is alot of firearms available in the US are "banned" over here. The gun in the GP post's quote, (from Fight Club IIRC), would be illegal and near impossible to obtain. Most people only have access to registered single shot rifles and "snap-load" shotguns, pistols must be kept in a secure armory at a registered gun club. Semi-auto rifles are a big no-no, getting caught with a machine-gun will give you your 15 minutes of fame in the media.
A few studies have been published showing the laws have made a slight improvement in the rate of shooting deaths but it's harder than you think to measure. Common-sense says a nut can no longer go hunting humans on a whim, the nuts now have to plan ahead, not to mention the extreme difficulty in finding the firearms and ammo on our island continent. Making it difficult for a nut to shoot multiple people in a short space of time is what the Port Aurthur laws were designed to accomplish and I think they have worked well.
"America is simply a violent culture. If they weren't shooting each other, they'd be stabbing and bludgeoning each other. The problem isn't mechanical, it's social"
I have to agree that gun control is largely a cultural thing, but not all of it. Mechanics can play a significant part in some common senarios. For example, statistically (in the US) shootings are roughly 5X more lethal than stabbings so more "heat of the moment" events (including suicide) end in death when there is a loaded gun in the top draw of the dresser. Those who survive a gun shot wound are 20X more likely to be permenantly disabled in some way compared to a stabbing victim. (Ref: old Scientific American magazine on my bookshelf).
I have lived in Oz for 40+ years and I think the Gun laws have kept pace with our culture over that time. I am usually the last to praise politicians but I think our Government has done a pretty good job at finding sensible bi-partisan compromises over the years. I can't walk into k-mart and buy ammo anymore but I can still go and shoot rabbits if I want to. I have nothing against responsible hunting and target sports, personally I just don't feel the young man's urge to blow furry things apart anymore, even if they are a tasty pest for the dog.
Re:mod this +5 (Score:5, Insightful)
NOLA is south east US, not south west. The problems in NOLA were due to the culture of entitlement, and lack of personal responsibility that the new deal has created among the poorest of the US. Hell there are poverty advocates who say that looting it ok because they are poor. This was not in response to food and water this is while they were watching a clip of a guy stealing stuff from a high end electronics store. If looting is OK because they are poor why not violence against another person.
we all have poor politicians, though few of us have whole police forces that run
NO and LA are the most poorly run state/major city in the Union and its been that way for some time. The best example is a parking lot full of flooded busses that could have been used in the hours before the storm hit (or the levees broke) to get some more people out of there.
Re:guns illegal in Australia (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:guns illegal in Australia (Score:3)
So, if
Re:Ouch (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ouch (Score:5, Insightful)
Sometimes management (and staff) is just waiting for the office bitches (male or female) to violate a policy so they can fire the annoying bickerers.
Or it could be overreaction, but I have a hard time believing a really valuable employee who is otherwise well-liked, hard-working, and useful would get fired for this.
Re:Ouch (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ouch (Score:5, Interesting)
Having said that this won't stand up a minute in an industrial court unless there is a long and documented history of abuse and counselling.
So they'll either get a huge payout or be back real soon.
Everyone's a winner except the precious partners of the firm and they won't notice the spare change.
Re:Ouch (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Ouch (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, switching to an outside mail system would require exactly the kind of foresight flame warriors never show. If they were abl
Re:Ouch (Score:5, Funny)
Preemptive strike (please don't add any missing ones):
But do they run linux email clients?
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those
1. Flame co-worker via email
2. ???
3. Profit!
I don't have email access you insensitive clod!
I, for one, welcome our new email-flaming overlords.
Rude emails at work? Won't somebody think of the children?!
Well, in my day we used real flamethrowers to flame each other, and we liked it that way!
Ecpecting a dupe post in 5, 4, 3, . . .
Netcraft confirms, email flaming is dead . . .
All your jobs are belong to email flamewar.
George Bush is responsible somehow.
I have email flamewars at work all the time and there's never been a prob%^%@13#^$3@#$*^&^NO CARRIER
Re:Ouch (Score:5, Funny)
But don't you see? Bush is responsible. This sort of thing didn't happen when Hillary Clinton was president!
George Bush is responsible somehow. (Score:3, Funny)
That's what the Commie / Greenie / Hippy / Unwashed / Socialist / Liberal / Lesbian / Girly men at the NYT want you to think.
******>> Puts on tinfoil hat and sticks toy US flag ontop of the monitor.
Re:You forgot! (Score:5, Funny)
Amazing (Score:5, Insightful)
Though they were fired over email, I doubt this is material worthy of the "Your Rights Online" section. They were both in the same office, cursing each other during work hours, except via email rather than verbally. Then they forwarded the emails to the rest of the office to get everyone involved, rather than working like their supposed to.
Re:Amazing (Score:2)
Who the hell cares about a couple of bitchy secretaries having an email fight? Reading it isn't even funny.
The worst thing about this story will be tomorrow when it's posted up on slashdot again. I don't want to hear about this constantly for
Re:Amazing (Score:2)
Are we living in a more beligerent society these days? I know it's off-topic slightly but it's a side note worth mentioning.
Re:Amazing (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Amazing (Score:5, Informative)
http://radar.smh.com.au/archives/2005/09/cutting_
LOSER AUSSIES! (Score:4, Funny)
Stupid doesn't begin to describe it. Try pathetic. They wouldn't last 30 seconds on alt.flame.flame.flame.
Foward your email (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Foward your email (Score:3, Interesting)
From TA (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe the economy would be a little better if businesses would focus on business instead of finding new and interesting ways of scanning and banning personal Internet use (or a dozen other irrelevant employee-control functions that cost money and time without producing product...)
Re:From TA (Score:3, Insightful)
Why should the email equivalent be any different?
This isn't about monitoring of email anyway, if you'd read even the summary(!) you'd have seen that this was a very public affair, with the emails ending up being forwarded all over the city. Most companies take a rather dim view of their employees publicly behaving like truculent children.
OMGLOL (Score:5, Funny)
All I want to know is... (Score:4, Funny)
That would make my day (night)
Re:All I want to know is... (Score:5, Informative)
A more detailed pic (Score:5, Funny)
Re:All I want to know is... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:All I want to know is... (Score:3, Funny)
Helloooo dude... remember why they got sacked? They acted like a pair of harpies. You WOULDNT like to get involved with ANY of them.
Sorry. (Score:5, Funny)
Stuff like this... (Score:5, Insightful)
not so bad for a bloke... (Score:4, Insightful)
Now, 15 years older, I find myself in a male only IT dept and long for: 1. that old work envrionment, 2. the knowledge of the "fairer-sex" that I have gained in the 15 years since, and 3. To be 19 again!
Nah... (Score:4, Insightful)
Most guys aren't that interested in clothes or other stuff in department stores. Not enough to draw blood anyway...
Maybe if it were some other stuff say a BMW at 90% off, then you'd see some kicking and shoving. But clothing? Shirts or trousers? Nah...
Also most guys know that there's a significant chance that the other guy would kill or severely harm you if you really piss them off. "Damn the consequences" is a common guy thing - just look at the newspapers of people killing and being killed. Mostly guys involved.
So for guys, shoving around other guys is a bad idea.
Ladies/girls often get away with shoving/smacking guys. We tend to be more bemused or sometimes even amused when that happens.
Cheap tragedies... (Score:2)
Aight (Score:5, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Lack of social skills (Score:5, Funny)
The worse part was that the husband told me about it over IM during their fight. And the wife got even more pissed since she heard him typing...but not to her. I heard later that their argument basically started all over again because of the extra IM to me.
Obviously a geek couple.
Re:Lack of social skills (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Lack of social skills (Score:5, Insightful)
My wife and I have been together for > 10 years. A long time. But there have been a few times where we were so enraged with each other, that verbal communication broke down.
In these very few cases, it has helped tremendously to be able to write out all our thoughts out and send them via e-mail back and forth. The somewhat impersonal touch afforded by email lets tempers cool, and lets the shouting-match argument fall back into being a reasonable debate.
I remember twice this happening - once when my wife was upstairs and me downstairs on the porch, and another time we were in the same room, and were openly polite to each other, both agreeing not to talk about it until we both agreed we were ready to, stepping in and out of the seat where the computer was in our bedroom.
It was really quite effective!
Re:Lack of social skills (Score:3, Insightful)
Another use of the technique is to try it out with non-conflict related topics to stir up feelings and inspire conversations. It sounds dumb, but if you
Re:Lack of social skills (Score:3, Funny)
Reminds me of a tale about a deaf couple arguing. They were signing to each other, and the woman was signing something when the man shut his eyes.
Apparently, the woman tried to prise his eyes open in an effort to get him to see what she was saying...
Re:Lack of social skills (Score:3, Insightful)
Hmm... comments like that have a nasty tendency to reappear or get missed even when you think they've been removed.
That's why I'd never put anything in my code that was liable to cause major embarassment, even if I was sure it would be removed later on. And if I was the boss in that office, I'd certainly DP the programmers in question for (a) Risking the above happening, and (b) Being gross
Slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
Copy of the e-mails? (Score:2)
Re:Copy of the e-mails? (Score:5, Informative)
Incidentely (Score:3, Informative)
Katrina Nugent
Yesterday I put my lunch in the fridge on Level 19 which included a packet of ham, some cheese slices and two slices of bread which was going to be for my lunch today.
Over night it has gone missing and as I have no spare money to buy another lunch today, I would appreciate being reimbursed for it.
Melinda Bird
Katrina, There are items fitting your exact description in the level 20 fridge. Are you sure you didn't place your lunch in the wrong fridge yesterday?
Katrina Nugent
Melinda, probably best you don't reply to all next time, would be annoyed to the lawyers.
The kitchen was not doing dinner last night, so obviously someone has helped themselves to my lunch. Really sweet of you to investigate for me!
Melinda Bird
Katrina, since I used to be a float and am still on the level 19 email list I couldn't help but receive your rediculous email - lucky me!
You use our kitchen all the time for some unknown reason and I saw the items you mentioned in the fridge so naturally thought you may have placed them in the wrong fridge.
Thanks I know I'm sweet but I only had your best interests at heart. Now as you would say, "BYE"!
Katrina Nugent
I'm not blonde!!!
Melinda Bird
Being a brunette doesn't mean you're smart though!
Katrina Nugent
I definitely wouldn't trade places with you for "the world"!
Melinda Bird
I wouldn't trade places with you for the world...I don't want your figure!
Katrina Nugent
Let's not get person (sic) "Miss Can't Keep A Boyfriend".
I am in a happy relationship, have a beautiful apartment, brand new car, high pay job...say no more!!
Melinda Bird
Oh my God I'm laughing! happy relationship (you have been with so many guys), beautiful apartment (so what), brand new care (me too), high pay job (I earn more)....say plenty more.....
I have 5 guys at the moment!
haha.
Re:Incidentely (Score:2, Funny)
She should be fired just for that misuse of quotation marks.
Re:Incidentely (Score:5, Funny)
Now, if I was in this flame war (and if I was a woman), it would read more like this:
Me: You stupid bitch, I ate your sandwich. I thought it would save a few pounds off your fat ass and I hadn't eaten in two days.
Her: At least I'm not blonde!
Me: Your pussy hairs don't lie you little slut.
Her: What?!
Me: That's right. I got pictures. When my dog was licking you in your "sweet spot", and your pussy hairs are blonde alright!
Her: Well, at least I have one!
Me: One what? One brain cell? One ovary? One tit? You're so fat...blahblah
Get the idea?
I don't know what's worse, being incompetent, or getting fired over a lame flame war.
What a stupid thing! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What a stupid thing! (Score:5, Funny)
No they're not. Let's not get carried away...
Re:What a stupid thing! (Score:5, Funny)
" Melinda Bird: Oh my God I'm laughing! "
Melinda Bird: OMG LOL!
Re:What a stupid thing! (Score:5, Funny)
mediocrity-r-us.au (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Incidentely (Score:5, Funny)
Brunette182: Wher my samich U theving asshats?
Blondie69: dood you left it on 20 floor Yur stupid
Brunette182: F U! Ur teh stupid blonde here!
Blondie69: Your ugle
Brunette182: Im teh coolist.
Blondie69: Ur jelous of my coolnees
Brunette182: Wahtever
Is this The Onion? (Score:2)
Its stories like this that dare me to troll. I literally thought that I was reading an Onion spoof...
Its even worse that this is presented as "big news", when the true banality of this revelation is oft-repeated throughout the world every day, without the use of anything "high tech" as *email* :
"Two Co-Workers Get in Office Scrap. Both Now Neither Co nor Worker."
"Senior Accountant Fired After Overheard Making Fun of Boss at Office Party"
"Sales Engineer Canned For Slander After Voicemail of Superviso
Here are the e-mails, and pictures! (Score:2)
I knew a better link [news.com.au] was sure to be found. And dammit, now I'm hungry...
Can't wait for.. (Score:2, Interesting)
I still wonder why it has never happens over the years?
Greatest. Online. Catfight. EVER. (Score:2)
Cough it up (Score:2)
Lost opportunity (Score:3, Interesting)
her name is katrina (Score:5, Funny)
brilliant (Score:3, Funny)
Read between the lions (Score:3, Insightful)
Slow learners (Score:4, Insightful)
It would be tempting to call these secretary's slow learners, but I can remember reading a slashdot article about men in an IT company plotting to take other personnel ( and customers ) with them to form their own breakaway company. They used company blackberries for these communications!
So, it isn't about being tech savvy, it is about common sense or the lack of it.
Unfair? (Score:5, Insightful)
However, other people in the company, lawyers, were the ones who passed the email exchange onto people outside of the firm.
If you ask me they have equal responsibility in embarrassing the company and should get an equal penalty.
If they haven't my guess would be because they are more valuable to the company or the company is like most in being cowardly and does not want to risk firing lawyers.
These guys ( in addition to the secretarys ) should be ashamed of themselves.
As a manger... (Score:3, Interesting)
As a manager, such a tepid 'flamewar' hardly rates my attention, much less the actual FIRING of two full time employees. Please. People have personalities, and they won't always be a wonderful happy always-loving bonded group of soulmates. Sometimes they'll fight, sometimes they'll fight over really, really STUPID things.
But to fire them?
I'd have them both in my office, show them the now-public email, and discuss with them the appropriate use of email and work time. Maybe I'd make a little issue over the embarrassment to the company of the public email. It probably wouldn't hurt to remind them that company emails are monitored, and theirs in particular would be up for scrutiny.
I'd also make a departmental or, (if I was high enough in the management) companywide point about the forwarding of obviously personal emails of others. I agree with the posters here that the schmuck that forwarded it 'out' is also a bit culpable.
But FIRING them? That's overreacting entirely, IMO.
Re:As a manger... (Score:3, Informative)
Australia has pretty strict laws around "unfair dismissal", making it tough for employers to sack someone for just being bad at their job, unsociable, personality clash etc.
Chances are there was other motives, and this was just a good formal excuse.
Re:You can get sacked for that? (Score:2)
Re:You can get sacked for that? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
urban legend? -- sad, but no. (Score:3, Informative)
News Ltd [news.com.au] affiliates (tabloid bog paper) came out a day later with a full page story, photos, names.
The spirit of Fleet Street is alive and well and living in Sydney.
Re:In A.D. 2005 (Score:4, Funny)
Brunette: What happen?
Blonde: We get signal.
Brunette: What !
Blonde: Microsoft Outlook turn on.
Brunette: It's You !!
Boss: How are you women !!
Boss: All your jobs are belong to us.
Boss: You are on the way to destruction.
Brunette: What you say !!
Boss: You have no chance to survive make your office empty.
Boss: HA HA HA HA ....
Brunette: Take off every 'email' !!
Brunette: You know what you doing.
Brunette: Move 'email'.
Brunette: For great justice.
(Okay, I could have done better, don't mod me down for rushing :) and thanks for formatting the last one so nicely, Slashdot)