[If you want to enjoy the rest of today, don't bother reading this post...]



I left my house at 8AM this morning. My mother's car was still parked on 
the driveway. She should have been at work an hour ago. Instead, she was 
laying in bed, SOBBING UNCONTROLLABLY. The women was inconsolable. I 
repeat: inconsolable.

Have you ever seen a grown women reduced to the hysterical crying of a 
small child? It isn't pretty.

And what has brought this on, you ask? It seems that after months of 
torment, she can no longer actually bring herself to set foot inside her 
employer's premises. She woke at 2AM, and spent several hours trying to 
convince herself to go to work. But several hours later when I awoke, 
she had given up trying. The thought of returning to that place was 
simply too horrifying.

My mother is, understandably, terrified about losing her job. My 
piffling wages would make a very small dent in the running costs of our 
house. And my mother seems convinced that she will never find another 
job that mays anywhere near the same wages. But after months and months 
of constant pressure, criticism, harassment, bullying, shouting, 
threatening letters, lies and manipulation, she simply can't take any more.

I don't think she's decided to quit. I don't think she's *decided* 
anything. I think it's more that she has lost the capacity for rational 
thought. There are no thoughts any more, only fear. Months of sleep 
deprevation and endless stress have finally crippled her brain beyond 
the point of normal functioning.

All of this makes me very, very angry. You may say "that's life", but I 
do not accept that. It SHOULD NOT BE LEGAL for a commercial entity to 
deliberately DESTROY A HUMAN BEING. It shouldn't be legal to prevent 
somebody from eating and drinking. It shoesn't be legal to threaten to 
fire them unless they stop taking time off sick. And it should NOT be 
legal to make their lives hell in the hope that they'll quit and you 
won't have to keep paying them.

Sometimes I get so angry I want to actually drive over there and give 
those people... not so much a piece of my mind as a piece of my FIST. 
And I'm not a violent person. I am a shy, quiet person. But this crap 
has crossed the line!

...Of course, all that will happen with that plan is that I'll spend the 
rest of my life in jail. Which would pretty much suck. And besides, the 
managers are only doing what they've been told to do; "get rid of the 
expensive employeers, it doesn't matter how".

So, does anybody have any *constructive* suggestions for how to remedy 
this unholy situation?

(UK law applies, remember.)

PS. No, the union doesn't appear to be especially helpful.

Post a reply to this message

I was faced with a similar situation a while back. This was also onset 
by harassment at work (or further back...) Basically I lost all ability 
to make any kind of decision. It seemed there was no decision *to* make 
because all directions lead to the same grim outcome. Action seemed 
pointless and this was terrifying. (Bullies like to make people feel 
this way.) I sometimes compare it to a deer trapped in a car's 
headlights. Over time it progressed to where I was even afraid to leave 
the house, and eventually to schizophrenia now managed by medication.

Money and the influence people can have over you because of it can be 
very frightening.

Mike

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de 
news:4b028f50$1@news.povray.org...

> So, does anybody have any *constructive* suggestions for how to remedy 
> this unholy situation?

She needs professional advice. Workplace bullying is a very serious problem 
that random strangers on the internet won't solve.
The UK has an official Conciliation service with a hotline. You should start 
here.
http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1864
http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=797

There are also some private charities running their own hotlines.
http://www.nationalbullyinghelpline.co.uk/ (there are some links at the end 
of the page)

G.

Post a reply to this message

>> So, does anybody have any *constructive* suggestions for how to remedy 
>> this unholy situation?
> 
> She needs professional advice. Workplace bullying is a very serious 
> problem that random strangers on the internet won't solve.

Agreed.

Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, the union isn't being especially 
helpful. (Seems the union membership fees were totally worth it then...)

> The UK has an official Conciliation service with a hotline. You should 
> start here.
> http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1864
> http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=797
> 
> There are also some private charities running their own hotlines.
> http://www.nationalbullyinghelpline.co.uk/ (there are some links at the 
> end of the page)

The problem is not so much "bullying" in the usual sense of somebody 
with something personal against you. It's more that the whole company 
has decided to mistreat its employees.

Around about the time the financial sector imploded and the jobs marked 
evapourated, the company started being really aggressive towards its 
employees. I mean, after all, if you don't like it, what ya gonna do? 
Quit? You can't GET another job. So now we can abuse you all we like and 
you can't do anything about it. Ha ha.

Later, the strategy appears to have changed. Now they actually *want* 
people to leave. They seemed to be deliberately making the job as 
unpleasent as possible to encourage people to walk out. (If they make 
you redundant, they have to pay. If you storm out... much cheaper.)

My mother is a highly experienced engineer, and she earns quite a lot of 
money. She's an expensive employee, so they want rid of her. Since 
they've been unable to make her quit, now it seems they're trying to 
make out she's incompetent so they can fire her.

We're not talking about one manager with a power complex. We're talking 
about a systematic plan to save the company money by pushing people out 
the door on the cheap.

(When she was sent to see an occupational psychologist, he said that 
while he's contracted to work for about 80 major companies, lately 85% 
of his workload had been employees of this one company. So it's not just 
my mum here.)

The company, of course, will claim that the people standing over my 
mother, constantly watching her, constantly having a go at her, is all 
part of a "constructive program of continuous employee training and 
development" and that they're not bullying her at all. I don't know - if 
you can see that an employee is stressed out, would you spend 20 minutes 
screaming at them at the top of your voice? Does that sound constructive 
to you?

I don't really know what the right course of action here is. But 
certainly this kind of behaviour is unacceptable, and should not be legal.

Post a reply to this message

> My mother is a highly experienced engineer, and she earns quite a lot of 
> money.

She should be in a favourable position to move jobs then, plenty of 
professional older workers move companies, and don't believe all the hype 
about there being no jobs at the moment - monster sends me about 10-20 new 
jobs every day for quite a narrow area of engineering.

> We're not talking about one manager with a power complex. We're talking 
> about a systematic plan to save the company money by pushing people out 
> the door on the cheap.

A lot of companies have been doing that recently, she shouldn't feel it's 
anything personal against her.

> The company, of course, will claim that the people standing over my 
> mother, constantly watching her, constantly having a go at her, is all 
> part of a "constructive program of continuous employee training and 
> development" and that they're not bullying her at all. I don't know - if 
> you can see that an employee is stressed out, would you spend 20 minutes 
> screaming at them at the top of your voice? Does that sound constructive 
> to you?

No, it sounds like she should make a complaint.  At the very least she 
should be recording all such incidents.

> I don't really know what the right course of action here is. But certainly 
> this kind of behaviour is unacceptable, and should not be legal.

There are plenty of avenues to take when making complaints.  I would do it 
internally first, if it's a large company it will definitely have an 
internal procedure which should probably follow first.  If that bears no 
fruit then there are plenty of external options, like tribunals and even 
going to court.

Post a reply to this message

>> My mother is a highly experienced engineer, and she earns quite a lot 
>> of money.
> 
> She should be in a favourable position to move jobs then, plenty of 
> professional older workers move companies, and don't believe all the 
> hype about there being no jobs at the moment - monster sends me about 
> 10-20 new jobs every day for quite a narrow area of engineering.

Ah, but that's the great thing about monopolies, isn't it? Your skills 
are only relevant to the company that holds the monopoly.

Besides, who's going to hire an old fat women approaching retirement age?

>> We're 
>> talking about a systematic plan to save the company money by pushing 
>> people out the door on the cheap.
> 
> A lot of companies have been doing that recently, she shouldn't feel 
> it's anything personal against her.

You and I know it isn't personal. When you haven't slept for several 
months consecutively, it feels like the world itself is against you 
personally.

>> I don't know - 
>> if you can see that an employee is stressed out, would you spend 20 
>> minutes screaming at them at the top of your voice? Does that sound 
>> constructive to you?
> 
> No, it sounds like she should make a complaint.  At the very least she 
> should be recording all such incidents.

When the company itself has decided they want to get rid of you, is 
complaining to the company really going to get results?

Who do you complain about? It's not just one person, it's the whole system.

(I'm not sure whether she's already tried this route. I'd have to go 
find out.)

> There are plenty of avenues to take when making complaints.  I would do 
> it internally first, if it's a large company it will definitely have an 
> internal procedure which should probably follow first.  If that bears no 
> fruit then there are plenty of external options, like tribunals and even 
> going to court.

Oh, they definitely have an internal procedure. I don't know whether 
she's tried it yet. She's tried talking to the union, but they seem to 
be being almost as stroppy with her as the company itself. Not sure what 
else there is. But watching my mother degenerate into a living zombie, I 
find myself thinking somebody should be taking these people to court... 
It surely *can't* be legal to make somebody physically ill.

Post a reply to this message

> Ah, but that's the great thing about monopolies, isn't it? Your skills are 
> only relevant to the company that holds the monopoly.

Seems unlikely, she works for BT IIRC?  It's not like there aren't any other 
companies doing what BT do.

> Besides, who's going to hire an old fat women approaching retirement age?

As I said, I have seen lots of old professional people switch companies, 
I've even seen some take early retirement and then become consultants 
working for the company they left!  If she is really that close to 
retirement then has she considered just retiring now?  Is it really worth 
all the phyiscal and mental pain for having more money for a couple of 
years?  If she's spent a whole career as a highly experienced engineer she 
can't be that badly off.

> When the company itself has decided they want to get rid of you, is 
> complaining to the company really going to get results?

Yes, because usually the people handling the complaints are independent of 
the people making such decisions about getting rid of people.  A lot of 
companies employ 3rd party moderators to assist in such internal complain 
procedures, I'm not sure if that is law or not.

> Who do you complain about? It's not just one person, it's the whole 
> system.

Well if people are doing things like shouting at you for 20 minutes or 
sending threatening letters, then complain about them.  If it's not their 
fault (eg they were told to by their boss) then complain about them instead.

> Not sure what else there is.

http://www.employmenttribunals.gov.uk/

Or go to court.

But be sure you know your rights and have proof of the employer acting 
illegally before you go down those route.  Having evidence of a failed 
internal complaint procedure will greatly help.

Post a reply to this message

>> Ah, but that's the great thing about monopolies, isn't it? Your skills 
>> are only relevant to the company that holds the monopoly.
> 
> Seems unlikely, she works for BT IIRC?  It's not like there aren't any 
> other companies doing what BT do.

Uh... yes it is?

>> Besides, who's going to hire an old fat women approaching retirement age?
> 
> As I said, I have seen lots of old professional people switch companies, 
> I've even seen some take early retirement and then become consultants 
> working for the company they left!

Heh. Sounds pretty impressive...

> If she is really that close to 
> retirement then has she considered just retiring now?  Is it really 
> worth all the phyiscal and mental pain for having more money for a 
> couple of years?

Trouble is, when she does eventually retire, she'll be financially 
destitute. By staying in work, she can put that off for a few more years.

> If she's spent a whole career as a highly experienced 
> engineer she can't be that badly off.

Actually, she's in an almost constant state of financial disaster than 
ranges from mild to severe depending on which month you ask.

> Well if people are doing things like shouting at you for 20 minutes or 
> sending threatening letters, then complain about them.  If it's not 
> their fault (eg they were told to by their boss) then complain about 
> them instead.

> http://www.employmenttribunals.gov.uk/
> 
> Or go to court.
> 
> But be sure you know your rights and have proof of the employer acting 
> illegally before you go down those route.  Having evidence of a failed 
> internal complaint procedure will greatly help.

Trouble is, it's all going to boil down to "we say vs they say". It's 
not like you can *prove* that somebody shouted at you. (And it's lot 
like we have records of the last 2 years or so of abuse.)

Post a reply to this message

>> Seems unlikely, she works for BT IIRC?  It's not like there aren't any 
>> other companies doing what BT do.
>
> Uh... yes it is?

You don't have to tell me exactly which part of BT she works for, but it 
seems *really* unlikely that no other company needs those skills.

> Trouble is, when she does eventually retire, she'll be financially 
> destitute.

Doesn't she have a pension with her company?  Working almost your entire 
life as a professional usually gets you a pretty healthy pension.  I was 
lucky to get in on my company's pension scheme just before they closed it 
off (as did a lot of companies recently), so in theory if I work for 40 
years with them I will get a pension that is equal to 2/3 of my final 
salary, that sort of scheme seemed quite common up until recently.

>> My mother is a highly experienced engineer, and she earns quite a lot of 
>> money.
...
> Actually, she's in an almost constant state of financial disaster

The above two statements don't really add up.

> Trouble is, it's all going to boil down to "we say vs they say". It's not 
> like you can *prove* that somebody shouted at you.

You can prove threatening letters though, and you can at least show the log 
you've made of verbal attacks, plus some hard evidence that the internal 
complaints procedure didn't work.  If someone witnessed the unreasonable 
verbal attacks then say that too.

Post a reply to this message

>>> Seems unlikely, she works for BT IIRC?  It's not like there aren't 
>>> any other companies doing what BT do.
>>
>> Uh... yes it is?
> 
> You don't have to tell me exactly which part of BT she works for, but it 
> seems *really* unlikely that no other company needs those skills.

Last time I checked, BT ownes the entire telephone network. Nobody else 
is allowed to touch it.

>> Trouble is, when she does eventually retire, she'll be financially 
>> destitute.
> 
> Doesn't she have a pension with her company?

Sure. It's just not very big.

> Working almost your entire 
> life as a professional usually gets you a pretty healthy pension.

She's only worked for BT for about 15 years.

>>> My mother is a highly experienced engineer, and she earns quite a lot 
>>> of money.
> ...
>> Actually, she's in an almost constant state of financial disaster
> 
> The above two statements don't really add up.

I mean she earns a lot more than the other staff there. In absolute 
terms it's not a big amount though.

>> Trouble is, it's all going to boil down to "we say vs they say". It's 
>> not like you can *prove* that somebody shouted at you.
> 
> You can prove threatening letters though

All the letter says is "this is your final warning, if your performance 
statistics do not improve, you will be fired". Which is legal, 
technically. (The fact that the performance targets are impossible is 
another matter...)

> and you can at least show the log you've made of verbal attacks

Only if you log them. (It's a bit late to start now...)

> plus some hard evidence that the internal complaints procedure didn't work.

That could work.

> If someone witnessed the unreasonable verbal attacks then say that too.

You'd need to convince a witness to come forward.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> Well if people are doing things like shouting at you for 20 minutes or 
> sending threatening letters, then complain about them.

Maybe it's just me, but if someone at work actually raised their voice to me 
out of something other than momentary anger, I'd just laugh in their face 
and tell them to grow up.

Not to minimize your mom's feelings, but I just can't relate.

Feeling bad over someone being upset I reserve for people I care about. If 
your job is to make me miserable, it doesn't really bother me if you fail at 
it. A disappointing look from someone I respect is far worse than 20 minutes 
of "being called into the boss' office" by someone who's a hack. Especially 
if I'm a skilled worker and I know I haven't done poorly.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Last time I checked, BT ownes the entire telephone network. Nobody else 
> is allowed to touch it.

What sort of engineering does she do? Even in the days of the monopoly in 
the USA, the phone company still bought equipment from other companies and 
so on.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Not to minimize your mom's feelings, but I just can't relate.
> 
> Feeling bad over someone being upset I reserve for people I care about. 
> If your job is to make me miserable, it doesn't really bother me if you 
> fail at it. A disappointing look from someone I respect is far worse 
> than 20 minutes of "being called into the boss' office" by someone who's 
> a hack. Especially if I'm a skilled worker and I know I haven't done 
> poorly.

How about "you will meet these impossible targets I've set you or I'll 
fire you and you'll have to go live on the street"? How does that strike 
you?

Post a reply to this message

>> Last time I checked, BT ownes the entire telephone network. Nobody 
>> else is allowed to touch it.
> 
> What sort of engineering does she do? Even in the days of the monopoly 
> in the USA, the phone company still bought equipment from other 
> companies and so on.

She spent about 10 years installing people's telephones, running 
telephone cables, diagnosing network faults, etc.

Now she just works in a call center where people ring her up to whine 
about their phone not working and demand that somebody come and fix it 
yesterday.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> How about "you will meet these impossible targets I've set you or I'll 
> fire you and you'll have to go live on the street"? How does that strike 
> you?

I'd start looking for a new job. I've been fired often enough before it's 
not a big deal to me, I fear. That comes from working for start-ups for a 
long time. But I've always been financially conservative, so I've never been 
so broke I'd be out on the street by getting fired.

As I said, it isn't a cut on you mom.  I just can't relate.  I'll shut up 
now. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> She spent about 10 years installing people's telephones, running 
> telephone cables, diagnosing network faults, etc.

OK. That would be the monopoly part, yes. :-)

Maybe look at a construction company who wants someone experienced when 
wiring up new buildings?

> Now she just works in a call center where people ring her up to whine 
> about their phone not working and demand that somebody come and fix it 
> yesterday.

Huh. It's hard to believe there are performance targets that can't get 
scammed there, given the number of places you read about (for example) AOL 
customer service reps just hanging up on customers to keep their call volume 
high. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
     Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
       Then he is not omnipotent.
     Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
       Then he is malevolent.

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de 
news:4b02ae34$1@news.povray.org...

> I don't really know what the right course of action here is. But certainly 
> this kind of behaviour is unacceptable, and should not be legal.

This is exactly what has been happening in France with France Telecom (aka 
Orange). It took around 25 suicides (a guy even stabbed himself in the 
stomach during a meeting) for things to become public. It's been a matter a 
national debate in the past months and some corporate heads were cut. It's 
difficult to say if things are really going to change but at least the 
victims are no longer alone wondering what they did wrong.
In any case, it's really a matter of employees banding together, going 
public with this and making as much noise as possible. The harassement 
methods you describe are 100% identical to those used by FT (down to the 
people targeted by the bullying, i.e. senior engineers), so there's a 
precedent for it.

G.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> [If you want to enjoy the rest of today, don't bother reading this post...]
> ...

No advice, but my condolences on your/her situation and I hope she 
quickly finds a place to work which actually treats her well.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> So, does anybody have any *constructive* suggestions for how to remedy 
> this unholy situation?
> 

She could always take a sickie for a while and play the system.

I know this is no proper answer but maybe a few weeks away from the 
workplace would calm her nerves.
One thing she can’t do is to keep going in to work if it has gone this 
far. She needs a break before her health suffers any more. {This is from 
personal (not mine) experience}


-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

First my sympathies for what has happened to your Madam Mother, I'd feel 
the same, and I'd have gone there and made some "aggressive 
negotiations" asking explanation and threatened to sue them to the full 
extent of the law, but that would be me, and maybe I wouldn't do it, 
taking law in your hands is when things start get out of control and you 
make more damage than good, IMO that should be done only when everything 
else fails.

(Dude, no offense, but I really hope this is not a "heavy" joke, that 
would be something extremely stupid to do).

I won't make a long and/or complicated post since is the last thing you 
need. What I would do:

Can the public prosecutor do something for you? Also, If you have a 
lawyer friend consult about suing them, mental and emotional anguish is 
a win card for law suits I think, at least for what I have seen on U.S.A 
trial movies, there you'd have a very solid case and a millionaire 
amount of money after it, for what I had seen and know about U.S.A. 
legal system. Anyway, try to get legal advice, any reasonable person 
would be on your side.

Go to the media, I think some lawyers reinforce these kind of cases this 
way, and is only fair the UK Government and people know what some 
companies are doing with their Countrymen/women. Check with your lawyer 
about it, just in case, but this would be my best bet; imagine it gets 
aired internationally? even if it doesn't, I don't think authorities 
will take any chances and start doing some work on their own to get this 
solved.

Starting is always harder so, it'll get uglier before it gets prettier, 
hold on buddy, this merits a good fight, so the truth can prevail.

All I can say, get all the legal advice you can get, all lawyers you 
know, get them to help you, if possible, notify your friends and 
relatives, I think they should know and probably will help, I'm sure 
such offensive behavior is Illegal. You and your mother, once he can 
recover a little, have to fight this injustice.

BTW, That kind of horrendous amount of stress, suffering and anguish can 
physically damage a person, let alone emotional. IMO your Mother needs 
all the support from your family and friends, psychology and medical 
too, if she can't go to the doctor you go see one, or bring one to your 
house. Get some money man, you'll need it.

Sorry to be harsh on my evaluation of your situation but are solid 
facts, at least I think they are, where you can stand with confidence 
and start building a solution on it.

I wish I could do more for you both.

I'll pray for your Mother and you. Best of lucks.

Saul.

Post a reply to this message

I'd recommend to fight back, as you verified, some bullies won't stop 
until you make them, so fight with all you got if you must and then 
change environment if necessary. Our fears make problems and enemies 
greater than they really are and it what keeps us from progress/change.

I suffered some kind of harassment and I didn't tried to kick my boss' 
ass because of my professional reputation and the respect I have for the 
place I work, but sometimes you need to put people in their place by 
force, or you'll never receive respect from them, so first respect 
yourself more and demand respect as you give to others, everyone needs 
and wants this but some stupid people think they can avoid this rule, 
maybe they can, BUT DON'T LET THEM WITHOUT A GOOD FIGHT!!! Assuming you 
have depleted all other resources. I'm not a friend of taking the law in 
your hands, but if it comes to a point where the law won't help you, 
well you have to help yourself to survive.

Good people suffer the stupidity of some people with small souls.

Your own fears are always the greatest of enemies, so you MUST face them 
first. Don't drink more than you need from the Sea of Violence.

Best Regards.

Post a reply to this message

>> You don't have to tell me exactly which part of BT she works for, but it 
>> seems *really* unlikely that no other company needs those skills.
>
> Last time I checked, BT ownes the entire telephone network. Nobody else is 
> allowed to touch it.

And no other company manages similar (albeit smaller) such networks?  Sorry, 
but I'm just struggling to think what she does that wouldn't be needed in 
any other company in the country.

Post a reply to this message

> Maybe it's just me, but if someone at work actually raised their voice to 
> me out of something other than momentary anger, I'd just laugh in their 
> face and tell them to grow up.

I think I'd just ignore them and make a comment like "are you done now, i 
have to work".

> Not to minimize your mom's feelings, but I just can't relate.

I know a few people (mostly female actually) who I think would react the 
same way as Andrew's mum.  It's not nice when someone you love is feeling 
that way.

Post a reply to this message

>> She spent about 10 years installing people's telephones, running 
>> telephone cables, diagnosing network faults, etc.
> 
> OK. That would be the monopoly part, yes. :-)
> 
> Maybe look at a construction company who wants someone experienced when 
> wiring up new buildings?

...except that she doesn't do that any more. She ended up in the call 
center because she was getting too old for lugging ladders and stuff 
around in all weather.

>> Now she just works in a call center where people ring her up to whine 
>> about their phone not working and demand that somebody come and fix it 
>> yesterday.
> 
> Huh. It's hard to believe there are performance targets that can't get 
> scammed there, given the number of places you read about (for example) 
> AOL customer service reps just hanging up on customers to keep their 
> call volume high. :-)

Well, this is it. The call handling target *was* 500 seconds per call.

It should be self-evident that this is completely impossible.

- If somebody calls you and spends 25 minutes screaming at you about how 
**** your company is before they will even tell you what they're calling 
about, you cannot complete the call in 500 seconds. [Yes, this is 
apparently a *daily* occurrance. Some people apparently think they're 
important or something.]

- If some little old lady calls you, and you have to repeat yourself six 
times before she even hears what you said properly (never mind 
understands what you're asking), you cannot complete the call in 500 
seconds.

- If you have to transfer the call to another department, and they take 
20 minutes to pick up the phone, you cannot end in the call in 500 seconds.

Would you like me to continue?

Of course, earlier this year the target was suddenly reduced to 450 
seconds. And then 420 seconds. And then 390 seconds. And now it stands 
at 360 seconds. It's "always" been 500 seconds, but now suddenly the 
keep reducing it every few months. Oh, you're still expected to do the 
same *work*, just faster.

(I could give you a long list of things you're supposed to do. You're 
supposed to start with a standard greeting. You're supposed to collect 
certain data to verify you're speaking to the authorised account holder. 
If you send an engineer, you're supposed to warn the customer that they 
may be charged. At the end of the call you're supposed to repeat the 
agreed actions. And so on and so forth. In 360 seconds...)

You're also not supposed to hang up. And you're not supposed to 
interrupt the customer, under any circumstances. (Great when they spent 
25 minutes telling you that they consider members of the phylum 
Platyhelminthes to be of greatly superior evolutionary development to 
yourself...)

Apparently the only people more unreasonably than the company is the 
customers. Like the people running a business from their house. Phone 
stops working, they want 4-hour turnaround fixing it, or else £1,000 per 
hour for every hour they're out of service, because that's how much 
money they claim to be losing by not having a phone. But, obviously, 
these people are paying residential phone rates....... Um, yeah, nice try.

Post a reply to this message

>> Last time I checked, BT ownes the entire telephone network. Nobody 
>> else is allowed to touch it.
> 
> And no other company manages similar (albeit smaller) such networks?  

No. That's why it's called a "government-granted monopoly".

> Sorry, but I'm just struggling to think what she does that wouldn't be 
> needed in any other company in the country.

The only company that needs to know about network diagnostics is... the 
company that runs the network. I would imagine.

(It also wouldn't surprise me if her contract forbids her working for a 
competetor for X years - but I haven't actually checked...)

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> I've always been financially conservative, so I've 
> never been so broke I'd be out on the street by getting fired.

I imagine this part is where the difference lies, yes. ;-)

Post a reply to this message

>>> Last time I checked, BT ownes the entire telephone network. Nobody else 
>>> is allowed to touch it.
>>
>> And no other company manages similar (albeit smaller) such networks?
>
> No. That's why it's called a "government-granted monopoly".

Only for the public telephone network, large corporations have similar 
(albeit smaller) internal systems that are not run by BT.  Then there are 
cable TV networks etc, I don't know if what she does is also applicable to 
these.

> (It also wouldn't surprise me if her contract forbids her working for a 
> competetor for X years - but I haven't actually checked...)

I have that for 6 months too, but it isn't legal so you can just ignore it 
:-)

Post a reply to this message

>> (It also wouldn't surprise me if her contract forbids her working for 
>> a competetor for X years - but I haven't actually checked...)
> 
> I have that for 6 months too, but it isn't legal so you can just ignore 
> it :-)

Wait - you mean if somebody is in a contract, it's not necessarily 
enforcible?

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:

> This is exactly what has been happening in France with France Telecom 
> (aka Orange). It took around 25 suicides (a guy even stabbed himself in 
> the stomach during a meeting) for things to become public. It's been a 
> matter a national debate in the past months and some corporate heads 
> were cut. It's difficult to say if things are really going to change but 
> at least the victims are no longer alone wondering what they did wrong.
> In any case, it's really a matter of employees banding together, going 
> public with this and making as much noise as possible. The harassement 
> methods you describe are 100% identical to those used by FT (down to the 
> people targeted by the bullying, i.e. senior engineers), so there's a 
> precedent for it.

In the current financial times, it wouldn't surprise me if quite a few 
companies have taken it into their heads to start doing this kind of thing.

Usually, if you treat your employees badly, they'll just quit, and then 
you have a Big Problem. In the current conditions, people are rather 
unlikely to quit, because there's nowhere to go. Plus the companies 
themselves are presumably feeling the pinch and looking to cut corners 
to save money. What could be cheaper than keeping your current workforce 
and just forcing them to work harder?

What to do about this is another matter... If the comments of the 
psychologist are anything to go by, you'd think there would be a fairly 
strong case to answer.

Post a reply to this message

>> I have that for 6 months too, but it isn't legal so you can just ignore 
>> it :-)
>
> Wait - you mean if somebody is in a contract, it's not necessarily 
> enforcible?

Most clauses in a contract are not laws in terms of things that are illegal 
to do, they are just things that will get your contract terminated (ie 
sacked) if you don't abide by them.  After you have left a company obviously 
the contract is terminated anyway, so the only thing they can do is take you 
to court if they have proof you have done something illegal. Obviously 
working for a competitor is not illegal, but something like telling them all 
the secrets from the previous company might be.

Post a reply to this message

>> Wait - you mean if somebody is in a contract, it's not necessarily 
>> enforcible?
> 
> Most clauses in a contract are not laws in terms of things that are 
> illegal to do, they are just things that will get your contract 
> terminated (ie sacked) if you don't abide by them.  After you have left 
> a company obviously the contract is terminated anyway

Hmm. So once you no longer work for them, they can't make you do anything!

> Obviously working for a competitor is not illegal, 
> but something like telling them all the secrets from the previous 
> company might be.

Really? I didn't know that.



Hmm. So I can't write a contract that says "you have to kill Jewish 
people" and legally force anyone daft enough to sign the contract to 
actually do this?

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> So, does anybody have any *constructive* suggestions for how to remedy 
> this unholy situation?

Yes.  I would contact a lawyer and have him *construct* some paperwork, 
informing the company of their potential liability for extreme emotional 
distress.

If she can document any misrepresentation of a material fact reflecting 
on her character, libel can be established.

Ask around for other people who are the targets of this conduct.  If 
it's really them and not her, she's not the only victim.  She'll have 
corroboration, and her attorney will have more clients.

If the company offers to settle, demand, as the non-negotiable 
conditions of any settlement, the termination (with prejudice) of the 
executive who initiated this campaign of harassment, the termination of 
any employee who cooperated with this campaign, and a full item-by-item 
review of her personnel file, with removal of all documents of her choosing.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> ...except that she doesn't do that any more. She ended up in the call 
> center because she was getting too old for lugging ladders and stuff 
> around in all weather.

Oh. I imagine there's lots of call for call-center work, or for managemen
t 
and training of people to pull wires and such. As long as she doesn't giv
e 
up as easily as you do. ;-)

> Well, this is it. The call handling target *was* 500 seconds per call.
> It should be self-evident that this is completely impossible.

Not at all.

> - If somebody calls you and spends 25 minutes screaming at you about ho
w 
> **** your company is before they will even tell you what they're callin
g 
> about, you cannot complete the call in 500 seconds. [Yes, this is 
> apparently a *daily* occurrance. Some people apparently think they're 
> important or something.]

I really can't imagine why she cares, other than it takes too long. I can
't 
imagine how that could bother you emotionally, to have some loonie rantin
g 
about the company you work for.

> - If some little old lady calls you, and you have to repeat yourself si
x 
> times before she even hears what you said properly (never mind 
> understands what you're asking), you cannot complete the call in 500 
> seconds.

True.

> - If you have to transfer the call to another department, and they take
 
> 20 minutes to pick up the phone, you cannot end in the call in 500 seco
nds.

Sure you can. Watch:   "Here, let me transfer you to the billing 
department."  Then you hang up on them.

Why do you think call centers have such a bad reputation?

> Oh, you're still expected to do the  same *work*, just faster.

No, you're expected to hang up after that many seconds. "Sorry, got 
disconnected."

> You're also not supposed to hang up. 

Not on purpose at least.

> Apparently the only people more unreasonably than the company is the 
> customers. Like the people running a business from their house. Phone 
> stops working, they want 4-hour turnaround fixing it, or else £1,0
00 per 
> hour for every hour they're out of service, because that's how much 
> money they claim to be losing by not having a phone. But, obviously, 
> these people are paying residential phone rates....... Um, yeah, nice t
ry.

It's not unreasonable to *ask*. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
     Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
       Then he is not omnipotent.
     Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
       Then he is malevolent.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Wait - you mean if somebody is in a contract, it's not necessarily 
> enforcible?

Generally, in civilized countries, there are things you can't put into a 
contract and have enforced. You can write them in, but you can't get the 
government to force you to obey them.

For example, in California (since we're so big on start-ups), if I create 
something on my own time with my own money and equipment, it belongs to me 
even *if* it's *directly* in competition with the employer I was working for.

In Pennsylvania (where I grew up), the company was allowed to keep you from 
working for any competitor that sold the same thing to the same customers 
for something like 6 months or a year or so.  I.e., if you sold copiers, you 
could keep me from leaving but still selling copiers to your current 
customers for six months. I could go to a different state and sell copiers, 
or I could sell cash registers, but you couldn't stop me from working elsewhere.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
     Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
       Then he is not omnipotent.
     Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
       Then he is malevolent.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Hmm. So once you no longer work for them, they can't make you do anything!

Well, it depends on the contract. Some parts might be marked "this survives 
the employment", like the trade secret clauses. You have to read it. IANAL.

> Hmm. So I can't write a contract that says "you have to kill Jewish 
> people" and legally force anyone daft enough to sign the contract to 
> actually do this?

Around here, that would be called "hiring a hitman", and you might wind up 
in jail just for asking me to sign it. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
     Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
       Then he is not omnipotent.
     Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
       Then he is malevolent.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> I know a few people (mostly female actually) who I think would react the 
> same way as Andrew's mum.  It's not nice when someone you love is 
> feeling that way.

Oh, I fully agree.   I know quite a few women and a handful of guys who 
would get upset that the boss was yelling.

My wife also gets upset at my in-laws for acting like in-laws.

Heck, I know people who rant about Microsoft doing things with Windows that 
will make them more money at the expense of their customers, as if that 
wasn't their entire job. ;-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
     Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
       Then he is not omnipotent.
     Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
       Then he is malevolent.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> Wait - you mean if somebody is in a contract, it's not necessarily 
>>> enforcible?
>>
>> Most clauses in a contract are not laws in terms of things that are 
>> illegal to do, they are just things that will get your contract 
>> terminated (ie sacked) if you don't abide by them.  After you have 
>> left a company obviously the contract is terminated anyway
> 
> Hmm. So once you no longer work for them, they can't make you do anything!
> 
>> Obviously working for a competitor is not illegal, but something like 
>> telling them all the secrets from the previous company might be.
> 
> Really? I didn't know that.
> 

It is true, these clauses in a contract can’t be enforced or if they can 
it is not worth it for the company to take you to court and risk loosing 
then having costs awarded against them. I did it once when I was working 
via an agency for Guinness, abroad. Then a couple of months later I went 
to Guinness in London as a contractor directly. The agency were p*issed 
off but they still considered me for other jobs.
> 
> 
> Hmm. So I can't write a contract that says "you have to kill Jewish 
> people" and legally force anyone daft enough to sign the contract to 
> actually do this?

Duh!

-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:56:00 +0000, Invisible wrote:

> So, does anybody have any *constructive* suggestions for how to remedy
> this unholy situation?

Talk to a lawyer who specializes in UK employment law.  I don't know 
about in the UK, but many lawyers in the US will do a free consultation.

That discussion alone could help determine a good course of action.  From 
the sound of it (and IANAL in the US, much less the UK) it sounds like 
there may be some things that are actionable.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:20:04 +0100, scott wrote:

> No, it sounds like she should make a complaint.  At the very least she
> should be recording all such incidents.

Yes, as my wife's attorney (in her divorce case before we were married) 
said, "if it isn't documented, it didn't happen.".  Andy's mom needs to 
start keeping a logbook of everything that happens at work that is 
intended to make her want to quit.  Date, time, and what.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:51:14 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>> And no other company manages similar (albeit smaller) such networks?
> 
> No. That's why it's called a "government-granted monopoly".

I don't know what kind of work your mum does, but maybe her skills could 
be reapplied at a mobile phone network of some sort?  BT doesn't own 
those, as I recall.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:15:33 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>> (It also wouldn't surprise me if her contract forbids her working for
>>> a competetor for X years - but I haven't actually checked...)
>> 
>> I have that for 6 months too, but it isn't legal so you can just ignore
>> it
> 
> Wait - you mean if somebody is in a contract, it's not necessarily
> enforcible?

As Darren says, it depends on what it is.  But even in circumstances like 
that, I know people who have been hired by a competitor who had to wait 
out the "waiting period" and their new employer arranged things for them 
to be paid while they took a year off in order to fulfill the non-compete 
clause.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:49:32 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>> She spent about 10 years installing people's telephones, running
>>> telephone cables, diagnosing network faults, etc.
>> 
>> OK. That would be the monopoly part, yes.
>> 
>> Maybe look at a construction company who wants someone experienced when
>> wiring up new buildings?
> 
> ...except that she doesn't do that any more. She ended up in the call
> center because she was getting too old for lugging ladders and stuff
> around in all weather.

Supervisory work would probably be a good option, then - she knows how 
it's done, so she could possibly lead a team, do the actual cable plant 
design work (but have someone else pull the wires), that sort of thing.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:11:43 -0400, Saul Luizaga wrote:

> at least for what I have seen on U.S.A trial movies,

I wouldn't use this as a guide for what's possible in the real world....

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Depends, some cases are fictional so those will stay out of 
consideration but, real-life cases maybe be a good reference. I wouldn't 
call it a guide since it doesn't guarantee any success but I think would 
give you an idea what to expect. But since our friend here is English 
won't be much of a help, probably he knows better about legal outcomes 
in UK.

Cheers.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:37:51 -0400, Saul Luizaga wrote:

> Depends, some cases are fictional so those will stay out of
> consideration but, real-life cases maybe be a good reference. 

There's almost always some dramatic license taken with the cases shown in 
movies or on television.  I'm a huge fan of Law & Order (the TV series), 
but I hold no illusions that their presentations are very highly 
dramatized for effect.  I've been in court a few times (never as a 
defendant, once as an observer and twice as a prospective jurist - and I 
was selected once), and it's generally fairly boring stuff that wouldn't 
make good TV.  (I've also got family in the legal profession and a cousin 
who works as a sheriff's deputy, and they confirm that it never really 
gets that exciting in the actual courtroom).

> I wouldn't
> call it a guide since it doesn't guarantee any success but I think would
> give you an idea what to expect. 

I really don't think so.  My experience is limited, but as I stated 
above, it seems that dramatizations have to add stuff to make it more 
entertaining.

> But since our friend here is English
> won't be much of a help, probably he knows better about legal outcomes
> in UK.

Probably, but L&O UK wouldn't be my choice as a guide, either.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Oh I see, of course you need the appeal factor on everything on TV but 
what I meant was that real-life based TV/movies cases are more likely to 
show what abuse cases are all about, not something you take notes on, 
you know what I mean?

I've never been in court.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:38:50 -0400, Saul Luizaga wrote:

> Oh I see, of course you need the appeal factor on everything on TV but
> what I meant was that real-life based TV/movies cases are more likely to
> show what abuse cases are all about, not something you take notes on,
> you know what I mean?

I'm not sure I follow....

> I've never been in court.

It's an interesting experience.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

> Well, this is it. The call handling target *was* 500 seconds per call.

LOL I love it when people set targets like that, then the person who hangs 
up every call after 499 seconds looks to be way "better" than the person who 
spends the time giving out quality advice when it's needed.

Also I suspect that *most* of the calls are quite easily solved in under 500 
seconds, it's just going to be a few that aren't.  Then it's just going to 
be luck of the draw which operator gets more than their fair share of those 
in a month making their results look rubbish.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> Well, this is it. The call handling target *was* 500 seconds per call.
> 
> LOL I love it when people set targets like that, then the person who 
> hangs up every call after 499 seconds looks to be way "better" than the 
> person who spends the time giving out quality advice when it's needed.

QED.

This, I suspect, is how the managers can claim that "everybody else can 
do it". Um, no, they can't, they're just better at gaming the system.

My mum, on the other hand, is one of those rare people who actually 
wants to help the customer. Every service quality measurement they have 
a statistic for, my mum is above target by a mile. The *only* stat below 
target is call duration. Need I explain further?

> Also I suspect that *most* of the calls are quite easily solved in under 
> 500 seconds, it's just going to be a few that aren't.  Then it's just 
> going to be luck of the draw which operator gets more than their fair 
> share of those in a month making their results look rubbish.

Indeed.

BT seems to have an institutional culture of everybody trying to dump 
work on other people as fast as possible. People will transfer calls to 
totally inappropriate departments just to keep their own stats looking 
good. The faster you transfer the call, the faster it becomes "not my 
problem any more". Heaven forbid that *I* should actually do some *work*...

Post a reply to this message

> My mum, on the other hand, is one of those rare people who actually wants 
> to help the customer. Every service quality measurement they have a 
> statistic for, my mum is above target by a mile. The *only* stat below 
> target is call duration. Need I explain further?

Not to me, but I guess to her manager if he shouts at her.  If I were your 
mum I would simply ask him what to do, simply say would you prefer me to cut 
off callers early in order to reach this target or carry on as I'm doing 
actually trying to solve the problem, or maybe he has another suggestion. 
Get it in writing what she should be aiming to do, as there doesn't seem an 
obvious way to meet the target *and* solve every problem properly.

> BT seems to have an institutional culture of everybody trying to dump work 
> on other people as fast as possible. People will transfer calls to totally 
> inappropriate departments just to keep their own stats looking good. The 
> faster you transfer the call, the faster it becomes "not my problem any 
> more".

Hehe, I guess if your average call duration is 502 seconds and it's near the 
end of the month you need a few 5 second "hang on while i transfer you" 
calls to get under the magic 500!

Post a reply to this message