SACKED February 6, 2007
Posted by wmmbb in Life Experience.trackback
It is not everyday you get sacked, but I got sacked from my casual call centre job today.
Naturally, when I came home I asked for the blow by blow account. I am by nature more given to male grunts than female elaboration. The story is something like the following. A property owner rang me up about his property, specifically saying that certain rights applied to some portions of his total property but not to all. I then went to the question and answer information and gave the standard response about those rights, that after the 2005 legislation they are not considered part of the land value. That is the only information we had. I suggested to the caller there were two ways to go: I could take down the details of his enquiry and pass the matter onto the relevant people – critically I did not know the time-frame involved to obtain a response, believing it might be days – or I give his local office number, where I imagined he might speak to people more familiar with his circumstances. Both courses of action would lead, I imagined to the same result, and I suspected the latter would be more immediate, and that is what I suggested, which the caller accepted.
The company I worked for, is contracted to the relevant body. And as fortune has it, a liasion person was visiting that local office, who then rang the owner of the company. The owner then called me off the floor and started upbraiding me before we had assembled in the boardroom. I did not think that was courteous and I subsequently said so in a polite manner.
We sat at the board table, and the owner did not let me explain what had happened. Being me, and I forget myself, I said it is natural justice to give me the opportunity to explain what happened. I have experience dealing with customers on the phone, I am used to dealing with people who may be angry and perhaps irrational.
In this operation there is no quality assurance. Sometimes the initiative can be egregious and put the contract at risk, and their has been a recent example of this occuring, so I suppose that fact adds to the context. In my view stepping out of the narrow confines of the given questions and answers is inevitable, and is not the fault of the employees, but the absence of appropriate management. That is why not knowing the time frame of the response would be important.
My understanding is that I was the object of a Machiavellian tactic to be made an example of, and thereby to create apprehension. My recollection is something to the effect that Nicoli said, the Prince can create fear, if not affection, and that is the best way for him to act. Machiavelli did not, as far as I am aware, believe in acting justly.
Of course, given this treatment, I could respond in kind, but to do that would possibly unnecessarily place others well being at risk. There are, for example, a number of people I could think of writing who may be interested in what I had to say.
I am given pause to reflect on the Federal Government’s policy of withdrawing worker’s rights is conducted in a partial one-sided fashion. It does not acknowledge the possibility that a small business person can be venial, ignorant and vicious, as much as any worker might be, or in more general terms both parties might be less than perfect as a human beings, while giving one side all the power, and to the other no redress. In that situation there can be no fairness or justice.
[...] gives new meaning to all those stories about babies swapped at birth, Duckpond gets sacked from his McJob, and Kim has an impressive piece on John Howard’s deafness (and how his [...]
Sheesh. I hope this is not a blow to the wallet and the stability of chez Duckpond..
Of course, David, the income helps to cover, if partially, the remorseless outgoing tide of expenses. The duckpond is a ecological system with inflows and outflows, and equilibria, which works well unless there is some ill-advised intervention. The wild ducks are migratory following the seasonal patterns.Like all living systems they are adaptive, and like all adaptations they have limits.
Still there are other reasons for getting out and getting onto the train to meet the contingencies of the callers. It is not usual to find the mix of actors, musicians, and others, such as myself, that was typical of this workplace.
I realize now that aside from any other consideration, I was lied to, the consequences did not take place as they were represented to me, and that gives me a sense of being wronged.
Mismanagement, might I suppose, be described as a misunderstanding of the processes and systems, and more generally a failure to relate processes and systems to outcomes. The intention, I understand, was to make me an example, if successful, and that will be a temporary one, will create procedual paralysis based on fear.
The problem is that these jobs, under these conditions, require us to be cynical and uncommitted. If you do more than that, you make a huge mistake. One might suppose it is a work environment designed, with the word used loosely, for psychopaths by psychopaths. Good on Johnny Howard, and his band of mates, for adding to the misery.