Was I wrong?

[asterix]

Feel free to converge onto another thread if you don't understand this one.

Thing is, even if I think I understood it (and I do) there is always the possibility I didn't and my comments on it would then be misconstrued and used against me.

That said, you colleagues action sounds sneaky and underhand.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

If you came out of the meeting confused about what you were accused of then the meeting has failed, as Snorri said, take advice, or go to HR and ask for clalification.

I still don't see that the company should be involved with anything outside work, if they did they would have to start monitoring facebook. I know one of my work mates posts some racist any mysoginist stuff whilst being entirely grown up and reasonable at work. My HR dept wouldn't go any where near that.

An increasing number of employers will fire you for inappropriate remarks on social media.

Ask yourself this... if your employer had sight of your colleague's racist/misogynist comments on facebook in advance of employing them would they even get an interview?

 

[asterix]

..and not being in a 'workplace' myself these days, it does sound as if things are much closer to George Orwell's vision than they were when I was. Which seemed bad enough.

 

[vernon]

Feel free to converge onto another thread if you don't understand this one.

You are Mrs Malaprop AICMFP

 

[vernon]

Reading this posting makes me glad I am retired, because I would have certainly been sacked or taken to court along with 90% of the people I worked with and we were considered to be a moderate easy going bunch.

Reading the posting makes me glad that in my new educational posts, I no longer have to deal with the day to day squabbles of school kids who claim to have been wronged by their teachers. After their indignant claims of major injustice and insistance of total innocence on their part, persistent questioning slowly leads to the unravelling of the major injustice/wrong doing and that there was a major contribution to the chain of events that was not mentioned in the original claim and furthermore that there was a lot of other evidence suppressed in the retelling of the tale which supports the initial claims of being wronged. Very rarely was there a need to take the matter further.

I'm just wondering if the full scene and 'history' has been cast by the original poster, deliberately or inadvertantly.

 

[Cush]

Waiting for SWMBO to come back from walking elderly bossy dog before going out on the bike. First of all I am not against females in the work place but two - maybe three things spoil't our place of work and maybe they could not be avoided. 1) Females were brought in to a mainly semi manual environment, most mixed in and accepted what was there but two or three wanted vast change very quickly 2) H&S came in, enforce 3) Both Female and certain male activists, along with some elements of management deliberately misinterpreted H&S to suit their own narrow ends and used it to argue cases that it was not designed for. This caused enormous unrest where before their had been reasonable harmony. I hear SWMBO coming back so I am off up to Longtown on the bike before the wreathe changes again.

 

[Cush]

Are you sure it wasn't a gentlemen's club?

It was no gentleman's club and women were welcome to come as equals Strange thing is that most of the men were gentlemen by nature. (but not all the women were ladies) Yes some swore like troopers but some never uttered a profane word in their life but 99% of them spoke their mind whether it was to a fellow worker of either sex or too a gaffer of either sex and they expected them to do the same, they / we could just not understand somebody threatening to report them for being outspoken or as happened with some of the women who came in, mixing up welfare with H&S.

 

[Over The Hill]

Something IS offensive if someone is offended by it. So she seemed to be offended (enough to complain) so really it is self fulfilling.

Boss should be able to see through the fog and go away thinking that you were not really out of line (in the context of the conversation) and that she was rather odd in raising it as a complaint.

Perhaps more to it than we can see.

 

[postman]

The best complaint i ever heard at Royal Mail,Was one women took one of my mates to task over a simple request.She went straight to the top shift manager,on her own,not via the Union.
Her complaint was,my mate was working on a 'Forward Road'.On her side of the fitting was the mail bags for the city of Bristol.Trouble was Bristol also had a large depot for book returns,so these bags took a hammering,and if you were on that side of the fitting,you were always taking off and replacing the Bristol bag.Well my mate being a helpful guy wanted to help with the weight,so he asked how were her BRISTOLS.She went ballistic,he was interviewed and nothing was done.She was a trouble maker and didn't last long.Some people just go looking for trouble ,there will be something else behind your problem.Don't let it get you down.

 

[buggi]

According to my sechdule it went under as a HR meeting. That being said I have no idea of company policy but I can look it up.

one time my boss had a meeting with me. He had given me a piece of work and he said "although its fine it lacked imagination" so bcoz i didn't have any experience he was going to coach me and develop me and we would meet once a week. i thought this was great coz i hadn't worked in the dept before. The next day when i was at the main office, he sent me an email to outline what had happened in our PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) meeting.

Now a PIP is ENTIRELY different to a development plan let me tell you!! its for people who can't be arsed and need the sack. I was mad as hell and also just happened to be sitting in HR that day.

lets just say after a quick chat with HR and arming myself with the PIP policy i informed my boss i wanted to see him next day.
our meeting started by me asking him if the piece of work i did for him was not up to standard. His answer was "it was fine, it just lacked imagination, but it delivered what I asked". So i very firmly told him that i wouldn't be going on a PIP bcoz a PIP is for people who underperform only and not even for "average" performers, and also he hadn't given me notice of the meeting, nor given me the choice of having a union rep or colleague there, and under the rules of a PIP he could only meet once a month to discuss my progress, with a union rep, not weekly (which is tantamount to harrassment for which we also have a policy). He was adamant i was on a PIP so i gave him a copy of the policy and told him to revise it and we would discuss it the next week.
the next week he told me that as my work had improved so much in the week he wouldn't be putting me on a PIP afterall. . Strange that, coz i definitely did not particularly make an effort that week to improve my performance.

 

[Cush]

The best complaint i ever heard at Royal Mail,Was one women took one of my mates to task over a simple request.She went straight to the top shift manager,on her own,not via the Union.
.

One of our lads came on to shift and was pulled over the coals for something he admited he said to a woman, she wasn't present on that shift but when he seen her the next shift, he asked why she had complained, she denied she had complained. Both went to see the shift manager and it turned out that some other person (a male acting manager) had overheard the conversation and had reported the lad. Women then turned round and told acting shift manager exactly what she thought of him in a manner that would have made a Drill Pig blush with pride.

 

[tadpole]

Maybe in 1980. Not in 2014.

Must have re-written the rules since I left Union Collage Matsa/GMB (lifetime shop steward). He's done nothing to Bring his company in to disrepute, so that would exclude " detrimental use of social media" All you have to do is imply that Subject X had a reason or motive to conceal or misrepresent what was really said and you can flip the table on to her.

 

[pauldavid]

Today I was brought in by my team leader.
Main reason was subject X in our team complained about me on something I said about council estates of which Subject X found offensive.
When questioned on it I simply didn't have a clue what my team leader was going on about.
I had to think a while after as to what I said, I simply didn't remember.
After about 1 hour thinking on the event I suddenly remembered what the conversation was about.


We were talking about the troubles we have with offshore in terms of our work. She brought up how she hates people who come over and work, further more SubjectX added how to they claim benefits and have no right.
My reposnce was that they have a valid and valuable place in the economy and played there part. In regards to those who claim benefits and don't work it is small minority however it does annoy me as well . That being said I wouldn't consider those who are nationals whom lived in a house owned by the local government (council housing) and claiming the same level of benefits while in the same social position to be with the ability or right to criticize. In real terms its not one rule for one and different for another which was the point I tried to make.

Subject X didn't say anything about my response so I changed the conversation into Social Economic groups in relation to what we were and how our parents fitted into the categories.

Turns out she fitted into that statement or simply took offence too it, I don't know. So I got pulled for it.

What do you lot think? Was I wrong to say that?

Restrict conversations at work to discussing the ferocity of and laughing at loud obnoxious farts. Between farts you could discuss the events in reality tv shows like emmerdale and coronation street if you like.

That way you'll never have to pretend you don't know why you've offended a colleague again.

 

[Arjimlad]

Today I was brought in by my team leader.

The main reason was that subject X (in our team) complained about me, about something I said about council estates which Subject X found offensive.

When questioned on it, I simply didn't have a clue what my team leader was going on about.

I had to think a while after as to what I said. I simply didn't remember.
After about 1 hour thinking on the event, I suddenly remembered what the conversation was about.

We were talking about the troubles we have with offshore in terms of our work. She brought up how she hates people who come over and work. Furthermore SubjectX added how, too, they claim benefits and have no right.

My response was that they have a valid and valuable place in the economy and played their part.

In regards to those who claim benefits and don't work, it is small minority, however it does annoy me as well.

That being said, I wouldn't consider those who are nationals who lived in a house owned by the local government (council housing) and claiming the same level of benefits (while in the same social position) to have the ability or right to criticize. In real terms its not "one rule for one and different for another", which was the point I tried to make.

Subject X didn't say anything about my response, so I changed the conversation into Social Economic groups - in relation to what we were and how our parents fitted into the categories.

Turns out she fitted into that statement, or simply took offence too it, I don't know. So I got pulled for it.

What do you lot think? Was I wrong to say that?

I have added some punctuation and spacing to make it easier for me to follow what happened. I think the complaint is a load of tripe. Her comments were racist, for all she knows your parents might have been immigrants or refugees. I'd not bother talking to this person much in future.

 

[rich p]

I'm still baffled and intrigued that somebody goes under the name X.
That alone seems pretty suspicious to me.
FWIW, I don't think that's their birth name but I could be wrong.