Tank dps harrasment

[ElHeggunte]

[...]

Come on. Just... stop. You're going to start finding fossils if you dig that hole any deeper.

[HyoMinPark]

snip

I once worked with a woman (we worked for a grocery store chain) who got into an argument with another person in a different store. Said other person knew this woman worked for our store (she had actually been in the store earlier that week, and been denied a return by the woman I worked with; an argument had commenced about this because people always got uppity when we denied returns), called up our store, told the manager about what had happened in the other store, and there was a huge incident over it. My co-worker lost her job because the other person knew she worked for the store, and her behavior reflected badly on her, which reflected badly on the store/company.

Sometimes you don’t have to say “I work for X, and I can say you’re just an arse.” If you go out somewhere wearing your work uniform, if someone calls your store and says “Well, I encountered Sarteck in X store, and they were completely rude to me. I know they work for your store, and I’m going to make a big deal about her behavior”, your company can choose to take punitive action against you for your behavior while wearing their uniform. A lot of companies tell their employees this: if you’re out and about in our uniform, remember that you’re a reflection of our company. The same thing goes for ALL social media sites: yours or someone else’s. If bad pictures of questionable behavior are linked back to you, and your company finds out about it, they can choose to let you go over it, per their social media policies. It doesn’t matter if it was just one incident. Sometimes one is just enough.

Again, your analogy is not working for you. Best to just admit that, and pick another one. As people have advised you to do.

[Sarteck]

snip

I see the analogy as perfectly apt.

It's people judging someone on a bit of information, out-of-context, that may or may not be representative of their lifestyle.

Your own analogy is anything but--it's a specific situation that happened while the person was working, and had everything to do with how she conducted herself while on the job.

[HyoMinPark]

I see the analogy as perfectly apt.

It's people judging someone on a bit of information, out-of-context, that may or may not be representative of their lifestyle.

Your own analogy is anything but--it's a specific situation that happened while the person was working, and had everything to do with how she conducted herself while on the job.

No, the subsequent confrontation was when the woman was off the clock at a completely different store. The person she was in an argument with just happened to be a frequent customer at the store we worked at. An off-the-clock confrontation/situation directly led to her being fired. Because that customer knew she worked for our store. Please read my post again.

Again, your analogy doesn’t work. Companies do perform background and social media checks for prospective employees. And even for current employees. They give you the social media policy when you talk to them about being hired. Next time, take the time to go over it and read it.

It doesn’t matter if it’s an accurate representation of a person’s “lifestyle”—if it’s something that reflects badly, a company can choose to not have that person work for their company. Because even one bad off-shot is one too many for some.

[Sarteck]

No, the subsequent confrontation was when the woman was off the clock at a completely different store. The person she was in an argument with just happened to be a frequent customer at the store we worked at. An off-the-clock confrontation/situation directly led to her being fired. Because that customer knew she worked for our store. Please read my post again.

And she was arguing on your company's behalf, from something that did happen while on-the-clock. I'm not really seeing much of a difference there.

Again, your analogy doesn’t work. Companies do perform background and social media checks for prospective employees. And even for current employees. They give you the social media policy when you talk to them about being hired. Next time, take the time to go over it and read it.

Again, my analogy works perfectly fine. Of COURSE companies are going to do background checks. What they will NOT do is base evrything off of you from a few drunken images that someone else happened to post.

I don't get what's so hard to understand about that concept.

[HyoMinPark]

And she was arguing on your company's behalf, from something that did happen while on-the-clock. I'm not really seeing much of a difference there.

She wasn’t actually—the two had bumped shopping carts, and a bickerment started from that.

Again, my analogy works perfectly fine. Of COURSE companies are going to do background checks. What they will NOT do is base evrything off of you from a few drunken images that someone else happened to post.

I don't get what's so hard to understand about that concept.

Yes, they will. And their social media policies say as much. I don’t know what’s so hard to understand about that.

[HoodRat]

And she was arguing on your company's behalf, from something that did happen while on-the-clock. I'm not really seeing much of a difference there.



Again, my analogy works perfectly fine. Of COURSE companies are going to do background checks. What they will NOT do is base evrything off of you from a few drunken images that someone else happened to post.

I don't get what's so hard to understand about that concept.

Probably because of the fact that people won't judge you on a few bad parses...unless they're people that you probably wouldn't want to play with anyway. Now if you have multiple parses that are consistently bad or multiple pictures of you being a drunken fool, that's a different story.

[Sarteck]

She wasn’t actually—the two had bumped shopping carts, and a bickerment started from that.

Okay, and...?

Yes, they will. And their social media policies say as much. I don’t know what’s so hard to understand about that.

I'd certainly love for you to show me a company that will fire (or even not hire) you based on someone else uploading a drunken picture of you.

Please, do share these companies' social media policies and let me know where they say that. If you can do that, I'll concede defeat.

[HyoMinPark]

Okay, and...?

I'd certainly love for you to show me a company that will fire (or even not hire) you based on someone else uploading a drunken picture of you.

Please, do share these companies' social media policies and let me know where they say that. If you can do that, I'll concede defeat.

The burden of proof actually lies with you. Prove to us that a company won’t care about you having pictures of yourself on social media websites of being a drunken slob.

[Sarteck]

The burden of proof actually lies with you. Prove to us that a company won’t care about you having pictures of yourself on social media websites of being a drunken slob.

I'm not sure you know what "burden of proof" is.

If you are making a claim, you are the one that has to support it.