The Corporate Asylum: Acceptance Speeches

11 February 2000 - 30 September 2000

30 September 2000

I'm back, at least temporarily. There are four reasons why I took a two-month vacation from The Corporate Asylum. First, I just wanted a break. I was getting that obligated feeling about updating the site and I hate that feeling so I followed it to its conclusion: a two month vacation. Secondly, things at work are going well, at least for me. I like our new station manager, I like our two new supervisors, I get along with everyone I work with closely and Cheetah Express has, for the most part, only exhibited those absurdities that I'm so used to I hardly think about them anymore. Thirdly, I had some other writing I wanted to do, mainly a couple of short-stories I've been working on, and when I feel a strong motivation to write I try to go with it as long as it lasts. Fourth, I've been working more hours lately because we need the money. The practical is always attempting to conflict with the ideal. I do believe, however, that in reality there is no conflict, that the conflict is caused by the way we look at life, not so much by life itself. Life is what it is. You have to do what you have to do. So, I've been working a lot of Saturdays. Hopefully, that will change in the near future. If I ever start a religion it will be based upon the premise that part-time work(less than 30 hours a week) is a vital necessity. Anything more than that will require that the work be meaningful.

I listened to The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck in September, a book I highly recommend for both its literary value and for what it has to say about work. An excellent read.

15 June 2000/The New Head Warden

For those of you who care, my review with the Idaho Warden went well. Very short and to the point. The Idaho Warden approached it in a practical manner and I was out of there in 15 minutes. As I have so often said in The Corporate Asylum it makes no sense to waste time with good employees. If you know they are good let them do their job and spend more time with the employees who really need "guidance." This Warden seems to understand that. He did say he plans four checkrides with me this year--a Cheetah Express policy that has never occurred in all the time I have worked here. But again, I see no reason for this with someone like me. It seems to me The Idaho Warden's salary could be spent(pun intended) more productively. After fourteen years do I really need one checkride per quarter?

I have refrained from writing about our new Head Warden but will now venture into the depths of that somewhat paradoxical topic. Upon meeting the Head Warden I had a favorable first impression. Nice guy, seemed like a real guy, not the typical corporate suit, but genuinely friendly and unassuming. I was on vacation during the first few days he was here so I don't know if he gave any speeches, but if he did I didn't hear anything about them. Good sign.

Another thing that impressed me was his presence in the warehouse during our sort. Not only was he present but he stepped in and helped, asked lots of questions and was genuinely interested in what was going on. So far so good.

We then had our first meeting with him--which entailed his first speech or at least the first one I heard. Astute readers of this continuing critique of corporate life will remember the first rule about meetings and speeches: DON'T!(see Re: Management Speeches: Some Advice) One of my ongoing complaints about corporate culture and management is that so often those who do the job everyday and for year upon year are rarely asked their opinion about how to do things. In this meeting the Head Warden basically told us what changes were going to be made. Now, to his credit, he said these changes could change, but this is what he had planned. What I resented about this is that many of us with lots of experience(me 14 years, others around 10, etc) were not asked our opinion before this meeting on how to improve the sort. If I was a manager, and I never will be unless it becomes a part-time position with 8 weeks of vacation, one of the first things I would do is not only ask people who do the job how they thought it could be improved, but let them institute their ideas--give them the responsibility--not to "empower" them, not to "make them feel good about themselves," but for the purely practical reason that they have been doing it and they know best how to improve their jobs. They are, however, so rarely asked their opinion or allowed to control what it is they do everyday, that they(and I include myself here) become apathetic and cynical about suggesting anything.

A couple of us voiced our reservations concerning the new plan and were treated to one of the most infamous corporate clichés ever to pollute the language. The Head Warden said, "No body likes change. Change is difficult, but sometimes it's needed . . ." First of all, the statement is not true. Plenty of people like change. The irony about his statement is that his plan was not innovative or a big change--it was, in fact, no change at all. I had seen this done before he got here and if he would have asked some us to begin with he would have found that out. The statement is really a subtle way to thwart criticism. What it is really saying is that if you criticize this you are just one of those little people who cannot handle change. I'm not saying that the Head Warden consciously did this--I'd wager a lot of money that he did not(which indicates the insidious nature of corporate culture)--but it is a cliché that has evolved out of corporate culture and that is its underlying meaning. So, the Head Warden violated the second law of speeches: don't use corporateclichés. If only he had read The Corporate Asylum he might have avoided the blunder. I left the meeting with that common employee sentiment: "Here we go again."

However, and here comes the paradox, once these things began being instituted we often voiced our opinions and were allowed to do it our way. The Head Warden came down to the airport with us, asked some questions, threw out some ideas, we all talked about it and we even tried an idea suggested by the Idaho Warden. I was reluctant about its merits, but after seeing it in action, after thinking about it and after talking to the Basketball Inmate, I liked it. I thought the Head Warden did genuinely listen to us when he was with us in the field. After trying the idea today I told the Idaho Warden that I thought this was going to work. "Good," he said. We traded words on its merits and continued on. When I saw the Head Warden I mentioned the same thing because he also thought it was a good idea. It was his reply that disturbed me. He said something like, "The numbers are looking better, we should be getting off the dock quicker and ultimately servicing the customer better and thus, Lord willing, get more business. That's what it's all about." Honestly, I just don't think about it in those terms--I doubt, that deep down, he does either. I don't know what all of this has to do with the Lord. I figure he has better things to do than worry about our "pieces per man hour."

So, the Head Warden, ultimately, seems to listen, is willing to change and yet these clichés that come from his lips, at least in my mind, detract from his actions. The meeting was a disaster--his time with us in the field, beneficial. Like the two new underling Wardens, I like him. He's personable, can joke around and yet, at times, he sounds like a corporate incentive program. Just when my respect begins to grow, he shatters it with corporatespeak. I just listened to Kurt Vonnegut's Hocus Pocus and the narrator of the story does not use profanity. Many think this is because he is very religious, but he's an atheist. When asked why he doesn't use profanity he replies that it is because it gives some people permission not to listen to what he is saying. So, instead of saying "when the shit hits the fan" he says "when the excrement hits the air-conditioning." Not a bad idea.

30 May 2000

Good news from my wing of The Asylum. We have a couple of new morning supervisors who are doing a good job. The Idaho Warden and The Warden Biff(he asked me, if I mentioned him on this site, to call him Biff) seem to have a practical view of things. One morning they were unloading the truck and I jokingly said to them, "What are you guys doing? You're not supposed to be working. This is not a very good example." I also heard that during my vacation they actually went out on the road and made deliveries because we were short some people. Bravo! Part of what impresses me is also the fact that they do not seem to have this "I'm in charge" mentality. We sort the morning material, there's no yelling and screaming and we get on the road and do our job. In my job the goal is to get your material sorted as quickly as possible and get on the road--sometimes there are problems and one doesn't need yelling and screaming to remind oneself of that.

Initially, I wasn't impressed with the Idaho Warden. I told him after he had been here a few days he should ride with me to see downtown San Diego and Coronado, two good areas to know. He decided that this would be a checkride--he was going to evaluate me. I jokingly, but somewhat cynically said to him, "So you're not coming to observe and learn--this is going to be a real checkride?" He responded, "Don't worry, I'll go easy on you." I looked at him and said, "No, I'll go easy on you." We both laughed. After fourteen years of doing this job in the same area no less, you would think that someone who hasn't even done the job half as long as I have and who is new to the area might want to observe things. When he got in the van for the checkride he said, a little too earnestly, "I looked at your last evaluation and I'm going to be focusing on the things that your last supervisor said you needed to work on." I had planned just to lay low and see how he was going to handle this, but a beginning like that deserved a response so I asked him if he really thought, practically speaking, that he could tell me anything that would matter to me concerning how I did my job. Maybe something, he said. I then proceeded to tell him about two horrendous checkrides I had with previous supervisors. The reason I wish I had not jumped on him so quickly is because he didn't evaluate me for the rest of the ride. We just talked--which was good--I enjoyed it. I found out about his family, his reading habits and part of his philosophy about management. But I wonder if I had not said what I did in the beginning if he would have proceeded evaluating my "weaknesses" as pronounced by my previous supervisor. I didn't have a good feeling about him after that.

However, as I said, I have grown to like The Idaho Warden mainly because of how he handles the mornings. He works hard, is organized and doesn't spend a lot of time trying to be a leader. We know what we're doing and he seems to understand this. Leadership books and seminars ruin good managers.

I was, however, a little disappointed to find a note in my box a few days ago with three stick figure judges sitting at a table holding up "10's." The note read:

Glen, You're Invited![I love those exclamation marks.]

I have scheduled your review for Tuesday May 30, 2000. If this day is satisfactory, please see me at the conclusion of your AM route.

I ask that you please complete the attached self assessment so I have an understanding of how you feel you did over the past year. Please be honest and fair. . . .

Be prepared for this is a collaborative effort!![I love those double exclamation marks even more.]

I don't know. Am I over-reacting? I just don't respond to this kind of thing. It just seems so juvenile to me. Just tell me when my review is--I don't need little cartoon figures urging me on to greatness. I'm not in 3rd grade anymore. As I said, however, all-in-all I like the Idaho Warden so even though I didn't particularly like this I am willing, because of his overall competence, to let this bit of earnestness slide. Anyway, I am supposed to have my review tomorrow, but you will read about it in the next paragraph.

3 June 2000

Sorry, my review has been postponed. Really, though, this review is a moot gesture. I am at the top of the wage scale(or so close that it doesn't matter), already do a good job and this review will not change my work habits. Hopefully it will be short and sweet. No need to waste each other's time or the corporation's money. I'll let you know.

6 May 2000

Yesterday was my 14 year anniversary with Cheetah Express.

A service engineer has been at our station for a few days and on Wednesday he spoke to us about why he was here and what he wanted to accomplish. This is the same guy who was at our station two years ago, changed the routes around with little or no input from us(nothing new here) and then, after he left, we changed things so they would work. It may sound harsh or cynical(What did you expect from The Inmate?), but it is the truth(Again, what did you expect from The Inmate?). So upon seeing him again I was extremely skeptical and pessimistic about any good that might come from his presence. The talk he gave did nothing to alleviate these fears. He started off by explaining that he had been a courier just like us so he knows what we go through, then he said that he had "a passion for couriers" because we are the ones on "the front lines." When I hear these corporate clichés my shit meter hits the top of the scale and instead of tuning out, which I realize, might be the best thing to do, I listen more closely and more intently. He then went on to say that our new station manager is a really "dynamite guy" and that he has has lots of dock barbecues and gives out courier awards--those things that "motivate us to come to work everyday." Say what? I couldn't believe that he would make such statement. At the end of his talk he spoke about courier input and how important it is. My impression was that input to him was much different than what input for me would be. After that I decided that I would talk to this individual who I will refer to as Ed.

I began our conversation by asking Ed how long he had been a courier. All told, it was something like six years, no small amount of time. I then asked him what motivated him to do his job when he was a courier. He gave me an answer that I could hardly believe and looking back on it I almost think he actually thought I had come seeking advice. He said it was trying to reach the statistical goals set for him, looking for shortcuts, learning his route area, etc. I should have asked him if he really meant that, but I didn't. I asked him if he remembered what he said in his speech, the previous day, motivated couriers to come to work and do their jobs. He did not. So I told him. He said that basically he was only referring to morale, not the things that really motivate people to do their jobs. I can't remember exactly what he said at that point, but I remember telling him I disagreed. I said ultimately, we come to work to make money. And we do a good job based upon our own standards of morality. He agreed with this as if that was a given that did not need to be stated, but I said that I believed that if management had a more realistic view of why people came to work then they would treat them differently. I talked some about the fact that managers are often guilty of over-managing people that really don't need to be managed. Ed is a statistics oriented individual. He and his colleagues are breaking our deliveries down to the point that they will allow for the time it takes to ring a doorbell. This is not a joke, this is literally what he said. I told him that I thought statistics were useful, but they are too often given too much weight. He then went on to assure me that couriers would have a lot of say in what goes on with the upcoming changes and, to his credit, he admitted that the last time he was here was not good. He wouldn't exactly accept the blame, he more or less put that on the program and our managers, but a least he realized it had major problems. He spent some time attempting to convince me that there would be a lot of input and I emphasized to him that input does not mean just giving someone information and letting them decide what to do, but being given actual control. I told him if this really happens then that's great; I was glad to hear it. I ended our conversation by saying at this point, after 14 years, I have a wait-and-see attitude about it.

There was definitely some tension in the room and I certainly initiated it. It was clear that I was angry--I don't yell, but there is definitely passion in my voice and he mentioned my anger and that he was a little taken aback by it. I basically said, look, I've been here 14 years and though I like a lot of things about Cheetah Express there are lots of things I don't like and I very often choose to express my opinions about them. What I did not tell him is that I realize that I sometimes lack tact. I had a long conversation with my wife about it because my conversation with Ed left me numb and to some degree asking myself, why the hell do I take the time to talk with Ed and others? It seems that most of the time it does little good. His speech angered me. I don't agree with this ridiculous emphasis on statistics and I know that most of my co-workers feel the same. I honestly think that what he has come down to do will not accomplish much of anything significant or practical. I asked my wife how I could approach someone with that information and yet not offend them? For instance, I didn't even go into the fact with him that most, if not all of the couriers, were either put off by his talk or completely bored by it. Is there any tactful way to say this? Is there any reason to? She admitted it would be difficult, but gently told me that my lack of tact could be counterproductive along with my, at times, confrontational manner and I have to admit that I agree with her to a large degree. So, I have been asking myself why is it that I tend to be confrontational with people like Ed? Is it some kind of macho thing? Do I just not like being told what to do? I really don't think it is these things. I think mainly it's this feeling that my opinions and input at Cheetah Express are ultimately not considered. Now, I suppose my lack of tact may be responsible in some instances. In others this is just the way this corporation works.

In many cases I think the only reason I write and talk to various people on the upper rungs of this particular corporate ladder is just so they know what I and many of my colleagues think about many of the things that are going on. In my early years here I actually thought my letters might change things, I now realize that is unlikely. One of my best friends tells me that the people who read my letters have to at least think about what I've written and that's something. And it is, but it's too bad that some truly significant and innovative changes do not occur.

Anyway, I'm debating on whether or not to send a follow-up email to Ed, a tactful one, concerning our conversation.

The best thing about work this week---is that I don't go back until Friday. I happened to be looking at the summer vacation schedule and realized to my horror that it was completely full. So I knew I would need a little respite before heading into the long, hot summer months. My son just turned three and we're taking him to Disneyland this week. I can hardly wait to see his reaction. Have a good week.

The Inmate

8 April, 2000

I have been fairly content at work lately. It isn't that things there have changed a great deal, in fact, I have had several people comment to me over the the last couple of months how things have changed for the worst and to a large degree I agree with that evaluation. This has to do with two things: poor local management and the ineptness of a large bureaucratic machine. Just as an example of the latter, our station has needed a forklift for a couple of years now but it was only about three or four months ago that we finally received one, however, instead of using it, it mainly just sat there for two reasons. It's electric and needed a special electrical outlet put in it to accommodate the charging mechanism and we needed to be trained. We have a supervisor who knows how to drive a forklift, but it was unclear whether he was technically(not actually) qualified to train us. He is now and so our training has begun.

As I said in an earlier journal entry, the reason for my contentment has to do with the tapes I have been listening to while I do my route. I no longer listen to A.M. radio. Listening to recorded books on tapes has literally revolutionized how I view my job. I actually look forward to work to a large degree and the better the book, the more I look forward to it. As one of my passions is writing, not only do I get to listen to great writers, but I also think that listening to them is improving my writing, particularly my fiction. Hence, work(in an indirect, not direct, way) gives me the sort of satisfaction and accomplishment that is important to me. And because my job takes little thought, particularly since I have been doing for so long and have been doing the same route for so long, I end up thinking about the books I'm listening to or some of the writing I have been working on. A couple of months ago my tape player broke and so I was banished to the radio. My initial thought was, "I listened to the radio for years I ought to be able to handle for a couple of days." I couldn't. I bought a new tape player as soon as I could and I'm back at it.

If you happen to drive for living or even if you simply have a long commute(you'll view traffic differently, I guarantee it) I highly recommend a tape player and recorded books. I get all my recorded books at the library and its great fun going there to choose the next few books I want to listen to. If it's a good library they'll have a large selection of both classic and contemporary works of fiction and nonfiction, unabridged(my choice) and abridged books. I've also listened to a lecture series on great literature and philosophy. This would be perfect for cross country truck drivers or sales people who travel a lot. Anyway, I think that great literature has the power to enhance, invigorate and enrich anyone's life and this is a great to way to pursue it.

Ironically, listening to these tapes at work has caused me to think less about work and hence has given me less to write about work for The Corporate Asylum. Maybe I should start writing about the books I'm listening to? I have tried fairly hard to keep topics on The Corporate Asylum directly and explicitly about work, but maybe The Corporate Asylum should branch off a little into areas that pertain to living life in general as it is certainly true living a more contented life will make work more tolerable. Must think about this. Suggestions anyone?

2 March 2000

Yesterday our manager called a meeting to get input on our morning sort from the infamous morning sort crew(I and my colleagues retrieve material from airplanes and then unload all of it at our station and sort it to various routes). In their purest forms these meetings are a good idea. It is common sense to ask those who actually perform particular jobs how to improve them. Unfortunately, this is rarely done. Management too often simply wants to institute their own ideas without input from those who do the job everyday. I guess this is so they can take the credit for any improvement. The irony is that if they really wanted to improve things they could most easily do it by allowing those who do the job, no matter how simple or mundane or trivial it might appear to be, to make the decisions to do it.

The meeting started with our manager explaining to us that our statistics were down. Two of my colleagues, The Half-Century Plus Inmate and The Former Warden Inmate, immediately began their assault mentioning the inadequacy of purely relying on statistics to evaluate what we do, the variables that are often not taken into consideration and the fact that many of the standards we are supposed to meet are erroneous to begin with. Our manager, The New A.M. Warden, was defensive and, at times, missed the point of what my colleagues were trying to say. Eventually I chimed in too, particularly about statistics. It was about this time that The New A.M. Warden mentioned that a visiting manager, The Urgent Warden, said we lacked a "sense of urgency."

This angered me. I thoroughly enjoy the people I work with and in particular the sort crew not only because they have good senses of humor and a good mixture of cynicism and sarcasm, but also because they work hard. The Urgent Warden happened to be at our station and when I saw him I said, "So Henry, how would you define 'a sense of urgency?'"

Sometimes I don't know why I pursue these things and sometimes I do not like the fact that I let these things bother me. In this case I took that comment as insult because I consider myself a good worker so when someone says I don't have "sense a urgency" I take it to mean that I don't work hard or that I'm lazy. I also took exception to that being the evaluation of our entire crew.

The Urgent Warden, of course, had an answer, but it was not nearly as polished as I was expecting. He said something like this: "You just want to see people moving quickly, not wasting time, ahh, it's a subjective thing, certainly."

At this point I jumped in and I was, admittedly, a little rude. I let go with a string of thoughts, sometimes looking at him, but most of the time sorting my material with my side to him, about the topic and did not allow him to say anything until the very end. In fact when he tried to say something I just kept right on talking--I reminded myself of those annoying salespeople I usually hang up on. It is a frightening thing to see this from the inside out. I have noticed over the years that my tolerance for accusations(i.e. constructive criticism, evaluations) of this sort is very low. I once overheard a conversation between a couple of managers and jumped in to voice my disagreement--and I was hot. Unfortunately, I had not overheard correctly and actually agreed with what was being said, but not before inserting more than just my feet into my mouth. I ended up apologizing to the manager who I had lectured. In regard to the present situation I almost saw it as a kind corporate justice: if you're going to make a ridiculous comment like that then don't expect me to listen to you. I'm not saying that attitude is right, it's just the attitude I had at the time. I was angry. Basically I said this: "A sense of urgency does not mean that people have to look frantic, have to run around as if they are in a great hurry. Michael Jordan did not look like he was trying hard. This is a good crew. We have for many years suggested things that have not been heeded and after a while you get tired of suggesting things. I've been here almost 14 years and I am insulted that you would say such a thing. You're right, it is a subjective comment. You can't just think that telling people to work faster is going to solve anything."

At this point our truck arrived and instead of talking to him I decided to work. I wrote an article years ago in The Inmate, the little paper that is ultimately responsible for this web site, about a crew of engineers that came to our station to evaluate our sort. I addressed this whole idea of truly listening to people who do the job(Here's the article).

Toward the end of the meeting, after we had all calmed down, some truly good suggestions were offered and our manager dutifully wrote them down. I went to her afterwards to thank her for taking suggestions. I think she was somewhat shocked at this since every other encounter I have had with her has usually been some kind of confrontation. But I wanted her to know that it's a good thing to do and that I want to see these things happen. It's easy to write them down on a piece of paper, it is more difficult to follow through with them. I hope she does.

A little while later I talked to a colleague of mine, The Stock Market Inmate, who thought the "sense of urgency" comment had some validity. It shocked me a little bit and we talked about it. We did come to some agreement on the fact that this appearance had more to do with the deficiencies of the process than with those who are doing the work.

I sometimes wonder if doing this web site is worth my while, or worth anybody's while for that matter. On a personal level, this is not, ultimately, the kind of writing I am most interested in doing. Part of the reason I have not been writing many Corporate Asylum essays lately is because I have been working on a short story, an idea that grabbed me and that I wanted to spend most of my writing time on. The web site is a--what exactly is it? It is certainly a place to voice my opinions about things and also a place to work out my frustrations. I also think I've learned some things about work that I would like to pass on to people who think similarly. Part of it is the enjoyment of doing it: I love to write, I love to read, I love to comment on things. I'm not making any money at it, though if I could make a living doing this web site I would most likely jump at that chance. I guess in my more idealistic, less realistic moments, I would like to think that it might have some impact in the corporate world. At the very least I'd just like people to be able to jump on this site and laugh or say, "That's just what I think" or "That's exactly the way it is."

I have of late settled into my job in ways that I have not been able to in previous years. Because I have worked part-time for almost 15 years when I was single and even after I got married I had a lot of time to write and read, two of my passions. When my son came along, I suddenly gave up a lot of that time to be with him, something I wanted to do, but nonetheless I also felt frustrated about not being able to read and write to the extent that I was accustomed to doing. I was depressed at times, angry that I earn a living doing something that did not contribute to those areas of my life that I love the most and frustrated that I seem unable to earn a living doing the latter. My wife, who I am indebted to for this, suggested I get a tape player I could plug into my van's cigarette lighter and listen to tapes. She suggested this, I think, a year before I finally did something about it and it has revolutionized my attitude about work. I used to listen to talk shows, mostly, some news, some music, but a.m. radio is not a mecca for music. Now I listen to Hemingway or Steinbeck or Kafka. And I look forward to work, not because of the work itself, but because I am able to use some of the time that seems, in some ways, like a loss, to pursue my deepest interests.

26 February 2000

I had a brief conversation with a woman from Human Resources regarding an email I sent concerning my employer's inability or, most probably, unwillingness to allow me to substitute vacation time for days I was out sick since I am out of sick time. The impression I received from my supervisor was that this woman from HR had told her that this could not be done so I wrote her.

I am the individual my supervisor contacted you about regarding my substituting vacation days for sick days. Probably she made the following known to you but I want to make sure that you have all the facts concerning this request.

First, I am not asking that the days I was sick not be considered sick days as far as discipline is concerned. I am quite happy to accept my written warning even if these days are paid as vacation days.

Secondly, I am out of sick time--that is why I want to take the vacation days--I need the money. My wife and I have had a lot of medical bills this year(some of my sick time this year was because of my wife's illness) and I would prefer to get paid than save my vacation days--only because this is a necessity--under any other circumstances, believe me, I would be quite happy to spend another three days away from work.

Allowing me to take vacation days accomplishes three good things:

1)Cheetah Express still gets to discipline a wayward soul like myself(too bad those viruses aren't aware of corporate policy) with a written warning and all the paperwork and signatures that go along with it.

2)Cheetah Express benefits financially because I will not be taking those three vacation days later in the year thus saving the beloved company about 300 dollars.

3)As a Cheetah Express employee I will also benefit financially at a time when money is needed--thus lifting my morale and my view of Cheetah Express as a corporation.

The conclusion, it seems to me, is obvious. This affects everyone's bottom line in a positive way.

If all this was considered, or if I have missed something that I am unaware of, I would appreciate it if you would explain it to me.

Thanks for your time and I am extremely interested in hearing from you,

I did not hear from this HR individual so about month later I sent her the following email.

I talked to Joyce Williams about the situation I wrote you about over a month ago. I assumed your answer was "no" upon seeing my much smaller paycheck. Joyce said that it was really no big deal and that Cheetah Express will often allow people in my position to do what I requested of my supervisor and finally of you. According to Joyce, my supervisor(then acting as Service Center Manager) could have made that decision.

I continue to be amazed, having worked here for almost 14 years, at the things that Cheetah Express management is unwilling to do particularly when no moral or ethical standards are being broken and when such things benefit both company and employee--as it stands now, my cynicism remains intact.

I would still like to hear your reasons for not allowing this.

The day after this when I arrived at work I was told that this HR generalist or specialist(nice titles) wanted to speak to me. Sometimes those biting letters get the quickest responses, though sometimes, admittedly, they don't get any. Anyway, a time was set up, I called her, but she could not break away from a conference call. My scheduled call, at an appointed time that she agreed to, was not really that important, I guess. When we finally got together to make a short story even shorter, she basically told me that she never told my supervisor any such thing. My supervisor presented it to me as if this HR person had made the decision, when, according to the HR person, this was her decision all along. I also explained to her that this presented a rather "sticky" situation because, presumably, I received false information. It does however beg the question why this HR person did not contact me immediately after my first email, a question I did not think to ask her until later. The thing I hate about situations like this is that everyone, I know, will have a "plausible" answer. My supervisor will probably tell the HR person that she told me no such thing and that I am simply a disgruntled troublemaker who enjoys confrontation(I am not and I do not). But everyone, particularly the HR person, will feel good because we all talked about the problem and talking about problems is so much better than actually solving them--solving them is a lot harder. As I told the HR person, it's a moot point for me, I don't need to replace my sick time now, so I'll just take three days of vacation. Had they made the decision when it mattered, I would have been grateful, as it is now, I remain amused. So anyway, the HR person said she will call my supervisor who is then supposed to talk to me. Oh boy.

11 February 2000

I had the following conversation today with another delivery guy on an elevator:

"Busy?" I asked.
"Oh yeah," he said with a sigh. "14 hours a day."
"Geeez! Is that normal?"
"It is for this company," he said. He delivers furniture.

I gave him The Corporate Asylum business card that I carry and walked back to my van.

Literally, it made me want to cry. What kind of life is that? That leaves 10 hours to do what? You can drive to and from work, sleep, eat, look at your kids in bed, masturbate while your wife is sleeping, watch some shitty sitcom reruns because that's all the mental and physical energy you have left and then you can get up and do it all again. It's no life--or it's a life--it's just not a good one.

He is responsible to a large degree for allowing himself to be taken advantage of, but it angers me that employers or managers are willing to allow or force those kind of hours upon workers. Time-and-half is not enough compensation for what is lost working that long. A good employer, a good manager, would not allow it.

A few weeks ago we received a rather amusing memo that I forgot to mention to you, my illustrious readers(Oh no! Even I, critic of corporate culture, have been adversely affected by my participation in The Asylum. You are not "my readers." I don't own you. Besides, though this is my web site, The Escaped Inmate often appears here, cartoonist Poodlestew has made a brief appearance and The Ex-Salt Miner frequently appears in Rants and Raves. You are readers of The Corporate Asylum--please forgive me.) It began thus:

To: All Employees
From: The CEO
Date January 1, 2000
Re: Cheetah Express's Unlawful Harrassment[sic] Policy

Yes, that's right. The CEO decided to explain to us our company's "Unlawful Harrassment Policy." The "unlawful policy" prohibits sexual harassment(I wonder what it does about a spelling error sent to the entire company from the desk of our leader--does anyone have a spell checker? It is risky to mention a typo on this update, I realize) And, our CEO has gratefully appointed people to enforce this "unlawful policy." And if we have any questions about the "Unlawful Harrassment Policy" we can contact our Human Resources Generalist as opposed to a Human Resources Specialist. It's a little disconcerting to realize that I work for a company that has an "Unlawful Harrassment Policy" and that they are so willing to blatantly admit it.

©2000 The Corporate Asylum . . . www.corporateasylum.com

the cartoon face of a jester like character peering out at you with a green eye(the other is closed)

More Journal | Home | Back to Top | Contact The Inmate