I posted something about the earlier incidents a week or so ago.
If I worked for The Man, I wouldn't mention work. At all. As in, "long day."
Period.
Why create trouble? If you don't work for yourself, they own you. It isn't right, but that's the way it is--until you find a boss who doesn't care what you do off-site as long as you don't reveal company secrets.
Of course, this works two ways. I didn't have anything up in my office, or on my car, that revealed my political choices--the election was too hot. I did lose one client over it, and that was just for admitting, long before the Dems close a candidate, that I didn't think the president was handling something well.
Thank you for reminding me again why there are plusses to my job. Besides working in the State of California, that is. The union MOU isn't quite as antiquated as the Rulebook, but sections of the rule book ignore radios and just barely mention those new-fangled gas buses (never mind diesel).
We aren't authorized to talk to the press, and are not supposed to discuss Matters of Interest to the Railway, however, a few years back, someone in management put out a memo that restricted that to accident/liability issues (which I kept, of course).
From time to time they write someone up for discussing accidents on a public forum and the charges are always dismissed at the hearing. Mind you that dismissal or suspension is several steps/violations beyond that point.
One mark of Muni's attitude towards internet stuff is the fact that I own the domain SFMUNI.NET and never heard word #2 after assuring the retiring webmistress that I was an employee and wasn't planning on posting anything offensive.
Of course, Muni also has an amazingly laissez faire view of other on the job behaviors, so at least they are consistent.
My company has gone after employees and, iirc, former employees who posted insider info on financial boards, which makes sense. Not sure about matters more innocuous, but I wouldn't be surprised.
You remind me of a conversation I had a few months ago with an acquaintance who works for the state here. He really needed a raise, but his department had no money. So he transferred elsewhere...and was warned by someone who had once worked there to "watch his back."
He found an incredible, backstabbing nut house at the new division, one that was invasive in his private life as well. So much so, that when he found out his old boss was having trouble training someone else for his job, he moved back (after a discreet amount of time) and his old boss struggled to get tiny raises for everyone in the new calendar year.
Atmosphere can make up for a lot. He says he'll look for a temp job on weekends before he jumps into a department he hasn't vetted thoroughly.
After stories like his and these Internet tales, doing the job and salary are the least of my worries. Carrying poison back into my life--that's a worry. But I'm aware I may have to try to find an 8-5 job.
Yeah, that's why I am very discreet about the job on SFFNet (where my name is emblazoned all over everything I post) and, even though I've been careful to remain as anonymous as possible on LJ, I only talk about the job behind a friends lock when posting here.
I remember a friend of friend getting nailed back in 1989 for sharing just a little too much in what was supposed to be a private e-mail (she hit "reply to all" by accident. Ouch). My test for on-line communication is this: What would happen if it was printed out and posted on the lunchroom bulletin board?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
winterfish
no subject
Date: 2005-02-12 04:54 pm (UTC)I posted something about the earlier incidents a week or so ago.
If I worked for The Man, I wouldn't mention work. At all. As in, "long day."
Period.
Why create trouble? If you don't work for yourself, they own you. It isn't right, but that's the way it is--until you find a boss who doesn't care what you do off-site as long as you don't reveal company secrets.
Of course, this works two ways. I didn't have anything up in my office, or on my car, that revealed my political choices--the election was too hot. I did lose one client over it, and that was just for admitting, long before the Dems close a candidate, that I didn't think the president was handling something well.
Fortunately, my vote is still my own.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-12 05:56 pm (UTC)We aren't authorized to talk to the press, and are not supposed to discuss Matters of Interest to the Railway, however, a few years back, someone in management put out a memo that restricted that to accident/liability issues (which I kept, of course).
From time to time they write someone up for discussing accidents on a public forum and the charges are always dismissed at the hearing. Mind you that dismissal or suspension is several steps/violations beyond that point.
One mark of Muni's attitude towards internet stuff is the fact that I own the domain SFMUNI.NET and never heard word #2 after assuring the retiring webmistress that I was an employee and wasn't planning on posting anything offensive.
Of course, Muni also has an amazingly laissez faire view of other on the job behaviors, so at least they are consistent.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-12 06:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-13 05:32 am (UTC)He found an incredible, backstabbing nut house at the new division, one that was invasive in his private life as well. So much so, that when he found out his old boss was having trouble training someone else for his job, he moved back (after a discreet amount of time) and his old boss struggled to get tiny raises for everyone in the new calendar year.
Atmosphere can make up for a lot. He says he'll look for a temp job on weekends before he jumps into a department he hasn't vetted thoroughly.
After stories like his and these Internet tales, doing the job and salary are the least of my worries. Carrying poison back into my life--that's a worry. But I'm aware I may have to try to find an 8-5 job.
It sounds like you are quite lucky!
no subject
Date: 2005-02-13 01:46 pm (UTC)I remember a friend of friend getting nailed back in 1989 for sharing just a little too much in what was supposed to be a private e-mail (she hit "reply to all" by accident. Ouch). My test for on-line communication is this: What would happen if it was printed out and posted on the lunchroom bulletin board?