|
12 Sep 04 - 05:51 PM (#1270399) Subject: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Jim Dixon Authoritarianism in daily life, or in the workplace. How do you confront it and change it? I work in the mailroom of a university. Although we operate very much like a post office, we are university employees, not employees of the U. S. Postal Service. We handle a lot of packages addressed to students, as well as very important papers: visas, visa applications, passports, applications to graduate schools, checks, airline tickets, etc. Soon there will be absentee ballots. When a letter or package is too big to fit in a mailbox, or when it has been sent by a method that requires the receiver to sign a receipt (FedEx, UPS, Express Mail, Certified Mail, etc.), we put a slip in the student's mailbox telling them to come to the window to pick it up. The slips are marked with the student's name as well as a unique serial number that identifies the package. All the mailboxes have combination locks on them. So if a student comes to the window with a slip in their hands, we already know they must know the combination to the mailbox it came out of (barring some unlikely scenarios). As a further precaution, we ask the student to show a picture ID. No problem so far. But here's what sticks in my craw: My boss says the only acceptable identification is the official ID card issued by the University. A driver's license or even a passport isn't good enough. But students often don't have their University ID with them. They are far more likely to have a driver's license. My boss says that's the official policy of the University, and she didn't make the policy. However, there is no rule book in which I can look this up; I have to take her word for it. (Or I could go over her head, but that would be politically dangerous.) I believe she could change the policy if she wanted to, but she doesn't want to. She likes the policy, and so do my coworkers. Correctly identifying the student who owns the package is not the issue here. The main rationale for the rule (according to my boss) is that we are helping to make the campus more secure by encouraging students to carry their University ID with them at all times. It enables the campus security guards (she says) to stop suspicious-looking people and ask them to show their ID. This is an awfully weak argument, in my opinion. My boss has clearly given me the authority to make exceptions to the policy, but she insists that, in each instance, I must tell the student what the policy is, and that I am making an exception. The result is, I treat every case I handle as an exception. But I still hate having to lecture students about a rule that I think is stupid to begin with. It's clear to me, by observing my coworkers, that they simply enjoy playing out a little drama with the students. They love being able to tell a student they can't have a package and then hearing the student plead, "Oh, please! Please! I paid fifty bucks for that textbook on Ebay and I really need it to study for a test tomorrow!" And then, when you finally "relent" and agree to make an "exception" you get to hear them say, "Oh, thank you! Thank you! Thank you!" What an easy way to get your ego stroked! I asked one of my coworkers—who argued vehemently in favor of the current policy—"Would you ever absolutely refuse to hand over a package because the student didn't have the right ID?" She said, "I might if I didn't like him—if he was a troublemaker." (A troublemaker is anyone who has ever complained about the service they have gotten from the mailroom.) My coworkers and I have fought about this until we were practically yelling at each other. Now I don't want to bring it up again unless I have some very powerful arguments. Any suggestions? Reactions? Are you dealing with similar problems? |
|
12 Sep 04 - 06:03 PM (#1270412) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST There is nothing authoritarian about having a rule that requires the person in front of you is in fact a student at the university. I work in a high school where the children whine the same way you are Jim. It's a really immature attitude. I was at the U for 7 years, and I ALWAYS had my student ID. I carry it with my drivers license. It is what allowed me entry to computer labs, allowed me to photocopy at the libraries, and lots more. Many employers nowadays require employees to wear identification badges, which often double as security cards to gain entry into their work areas. So why exactly are you whining that students shouldn't have to have their IDs? It is just so bloody childish. I listen to the sorts of excuses (yes, excuses, offered by immature, childish COLLEGE AGED STUDENTS) every day as to why the children think they are too special and too precious to follow the rules. You sound just like them Jim, which surprises me. I thought you were much more mature than this. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 06:12 PM (#1270426) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Apologies, my first sentence should have read: "There is nothing authoritarian about having a rule that requires the person in front of you prove they are, in fact, a student at the university, AND the student who has rented the PO box in question. It is a simple security issue. Now, if your supervisor is making the remarks you are attributing to her (which I'm skeptical of to begin with, because even I, a former U student and Board of Regents employee know what the deal is with student mailboxes) as the reasons for the policy, the supervisor is wrong. There have been numerous problems with contaminated mail, suspicious mail, and vile hate mail sent through the university mail system, Jim. Even you should be aware of that. The policy is the right one, especially in an age of terrorists, both domestic and foreign (let us not forget the antics of our domestic terrorists sending letter bombs either). |
|
12 Sep 04 - 06:18 PM (#1270433) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: wysiwyg Authoritarianism in daily life. A fact of life. ~S~ |
|
12 Sep 04 - 06:20 PM (#1270437) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Excuse me, but a school rule about when and where you must show your school ID to get mail at a university of 50,000 students (which is the university Jim Dixon is referring to, I believe) isn't exactly the equivalent of the bombing of Guernica. Perspective, people. Perspective. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 06:24 PM (#1270446) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Maybe the security staff are fed up asking students for ID and they don't have it on them? Sounds a good way to train them into carrying it. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 06:47 PM (#1270476) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Exactly, 6:24. Even the high school kids I work with (who don't have an entitlement chip on their shoulder like so many of the "best and brightest" children who believe themselves above the law, the rules, and the rule of law) have already figured that out. It's like their drivers license. They just need to get in the habit of having it with them all the time. With all the truly big, important, meaningful things that college kids SHOULD be protesting and rebelling against, being expected to show their school ID isn't among them. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 07:59 PM (#1270522) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Jim Dixon I assume there is only one guest posting in this thread. Trying to make your opinion carry more weight by pretending to be several different people won't cut it. Please read my post carefully before responding. I clearly said, "Correctly identifying the student who owns the package is not the issue here." My coworkers freely admit that. In fact, they show it by their behavior. They make as many "exceptions" as I do. They just enjoy harassing the students (or, to give them the benefit of the doubt, they think it serves some higher purpose) while I hate it and believe it serves no worthwhile purpose. They argued in favor of keeping the policy (using spurious arguments, in my opinion) while I argued against it. Yes, sometimes students whine. But why put them in a position where they have to whine to get what rightfully belongs to them? That's just sadistic. The fact that you can get away with it doesn't make it right. I know perfectly well that this is not Guernica. That's why I included "in daily life" in the title of the thread. If you like to only contemplate more serious problems, feel free to take your attention elsewhere. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 08:24 PM (#1270539) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Steady on! You told us what your boss had said was the rationale for the argument to carry ID. It looks perfectly reasonable to us. I take it ID cards aren't common in the States? The students would get a reality check if they ever worked in Europe..(apart from UK, but that is on the cards here too, no pun intended.) |
|
12 Sep 04 - 09:12 PM (#1270583) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,SueB I see Jim's point. Bureaucracy can always rationalize red tape. Does the claim slip with the serial number on it state in large print plain English that the student will be required to present his/her University ID card to claim the package? Is there a sign up in the mailbox area that informs and reminds students of this policy? If it was a real policy, that ought to be the case. The boss' rationale is flawed. University campuses always have people who are not affiliated with the university roaming around freely - people who come to hear concerts, look at art, browse the library, use the copy center and the bookstore, watch sporting events, walk their dogs etc. Making the students carry university ID doesn't make a campus more secure, when the other half of the people running around don't have to have ID on them. It's only in places where access is restricted that the argument makes sense. And as far as security goes, to say that a university ID trumps a driver's license or passport is laughable. In other parts of the world, people are required to have their national ID card on them at all times, by law, but not in the US. I have heard people say that this is in the works for us here, too, in the next five or ten years. I don't know if it's true, but I imagine it will meet with a whole lotta resistance on the part of the average American. Maybe that's for another thread. The authoritarianism thing - I say, resist it! Easy for me to say, of course. I believe you are right, Jim, if that helps, but whether it makes sense for you to expend a lot of energy over it is another question. If you go on quietly making a rule out of making an exception, that might be the best you can do, and hope that as the months go by people will relax a little. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 09:14 PM (#1270585) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Dani Jim, I hate to say it because I do fight authoritarianism whenever I can, but it seems the problem here is not the RULE (which the students should probably figure out how to follow) but the abuse of it by those in authority. If you're afraid of the backlash, get some students to help expose the abuse: they're good at that, and it won't hurt them like it will you! Dani |
|
12 Sep 04 - 09:18 PM (#1270586) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST But shouldn't access be restricted near a mailroom of all places? |
|
12 Sep 04 - 09:26 PM (#1270595) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: mack/misophist I retired from the Post Office. Bureaucracies are like that. The best thing you can do is to be as nice as you can about it. Try to direct the conversation so that you start out be asking for the University ID and then accept something equivalent without making a big deal about it. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 10:00 PM (#1270620) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,SueB If they wanted to restrict access to the post office, they'd have to screen for ID at the entrances. You don't make the mailroom more secure by telling a student who has received mail addressed to her at the university and has been notified of this fact by a claim slip inserted in her own university mailbox, and who can provide both the valid claim slip and legal proof of her identity, that she can't have her package. That she had a mailbox for them to put the claim slip in is in itself proof that she's a student at the university. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 10:14 PM (#1270631) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Midchuck ...I do fight authoritarianism whenever I can, but it seems the problem here is not the RULE (which the students should probably figure out how to follow) but the abuse of it by those in authority... That's ALWAYS the problem in these situations. Until everyone is perfect, there have to be rules. And the rules have to be enforced by people who are honestly interested in making the system work smoothly for everyone (and are therefore prepared to bend the rule when it fails to work correctly in a specific situation), NOT by people who simply enjoy having power over other people and making them beg. The trouble with any system of government with elected officials is that the people who seek to be elected are, for the most part, the people who want to have power and "be important." And they're just the people who can be trusted with power the least. P. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 11:16 PM (#1270687) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,06:03; 06:12; 06:20; 06:47 Out of all the replies, only Dani and Guest 08:24 seems to "get it". Dani is the most right: the problem isn't with the rule. The problem, according to Jim's side of the story (when you work in education, one of the very first lessons you learn is never to make up your mind hearing only one person's version of the story--sorry Jim, but we are only hearing your interpretation of this and you seem angry at your co-workers), it is the arbitrary and capricious way the staff is implementing the policy. The purpose of the policy isn't the security issue related to the restricting movement of people around campus. There are many areas where movement is restricted, and they require different id cards to get into them. No ID, no entry. Rather, the policy Jim is talking about is the security issue related to the packages themselves, who has authority to claim them, and what sort of identification they are required to show to pick up a package. It is no different than the policy requirement that a student show their student ID when they pick up their financial aid checks, or pay their bills at student accounting, for instance. Of course there are always exceptions. But too often, especially when the staff themselves have "authority" or "anti-bureaucracy" issues, which it sounds like Jim does in this case, staff make the exceptions the rule. Not so good. Then you always have arbitrary, inconsistent application of the rules, and all kinds of students perceive that to be unfair (and they are right, it is unfair). All students should be treated the same. In most cases, I don't think they should be given the package without proper identification. They will learn to adjust. It won't kill them. They will whine. They will hate the staff person "who is so mean" and say that the rule sucks. Repeatedly. And tell you it is ridiculous. But we all have to grow up sometime. It is no more unfair to require proper student identification at a huge university, than it is to say you can't drive without your drivers license. It really is that simple. Staff is not doing students any favors by letting them off the hook, they are merely passing a problem student down the line to the next staff person who DOES go by the policy. In a university of 50,000 students, having a slip of paper simply doesn't cut it as identification anymore. The issue of whether the ID required should be student ID or a picture ID, I would still side with student ID, because it is the official university identification card, used everywhere on all the campuses. You aren't allowed to do a lot of things without a student ID on campus, so the idea that a student shouldn't have to produce their ID upon request anywhere, is just lame, egocentric, lazy behavior. It shouldn't be rewarded, IMO. Not having an ID, and not wanting to go get it is, 9 times out of 10, about nothing more than sheer laziness over not wanting to have to go fetch it. I know that seems cruel and unusually bureaucratic. But I tell you what. If you don't consistently stick to the policy, you will end up accepting any old thing, and that does leave you open to liability in the event you give a package to someone who isn't who they claim to be. Remember, this is still US postal laws AND university policy that apply here. Students do have a right to privacy that can't just be thrown out the window because the staff doesn't want to hassle with enforcing the rules because it makes them unpopular with the students. But after you do the job for awhile, you get good at sussing out who is handing you a line because they are lazy, or just want to mess with your head, challenging authority (why can't they go harrass the Board of Regents for the damn double digit tuition increases for the past 5 years, and do something truly useful with their anti-authoritarian energy?), or really just needs a break this one time. Perhaps that is something you haven't gained the confidence in yet, Jim? That isn't a small issue, and students can get REALLY belligerent about these things when they are being secretive, or trying to pull something over on you. Sometimes security has to be called in to get them the hell out of the office (or in my current workplace, the classroom, office, cafeteria, library, bathrooms, you name it). Students do sometimes go off on staff, just blow their tops, and start yelling at the staff when confronted on something they get caught out at. I know, I've been on the receiving end of it. I even got yelled at via TTD by a deaf university student once, but that is another story. Now, apparently not too many posters here have been around the Merry Prankster college students of late. But they fuck around all the time with university mail, and some of the stuff they do is dangerous. The university in question for Jim is a huge place, with lots of toxic, controlled stuff. There are research hospitals, management facilities chemicals, agricultural pesticides, fertilizers, etc where students work--places with restricted access, and restricted use materials. There is a very good reason why the students are never trusted. The reason is, they just love to pull their merry college pranks by mailing shit like that to one another, to people they are trying to harrass, that sort of thing. There are some very scary, unstable people in a university the size of this one. There have also been some very serious cases of racial harrassment through the university mail system. Very bad, in the geography department while I was there. Then there is the security issue that all colleges and universities face with the unibomber type mail threats. Remember the university prof killed by the mail bomb? It might sound like "don't do that you'll poke your eye out" sort of bureaucratic fear mongering. But if the bad thing happened on your watch Jim Dixon, I think you might be grateful if you could explain that you did follow policy, the student did have a valid student ID, the slip for picking up the package, and that the box was in fact registered to that student, wouldn't you? Especially if you had to explain what you did to someone besides the keystone cops U police--like the FBI? |
|
12 Sep 04 - 11:54 PM (#1270720) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,Clint Keller Not just *elected* officials, Midchuck; were you ever in school, or in the military? Assholes inevitably worm their way into positions of authority. Part of Jim's problem is that he has no means to appeal for a redress. If there's no ombudsman, no Inspector General you've got a structure that institutionalizes bullying. And even then, who inspects the Inspector General? clint |
|
13 Sep 04 - 12:00 AM (#1270724) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,Clint Keller Guest 06:03 et al: A driver's license IS proper identification, and is accepted even in our terrorist-infested airports. I worked in a university with a lot of people like you, who thought it would be a great place if you could get rid of the students. clint |
|
13 Sep 04 - 12:23 AM (#1270736) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST I was a student at the university Jim is talking about, and worked there as a student employee, and as a temp. There are a lot of means of redress available to Jim, it just sounds to me like he isn't using them. First off, there should be a written policy. If there isn't, he can request that the policy be put in writing, and that include the necessary information on how employees are expected to enforce the rule. He can meet with his supervisor. If he doesn't like what she says, he can request to meet with her supervisor. There is a university ombuds office to help resolve conflicts, which you are correct in saying, works for the university, not the students and workers at the university. There is the union, which I presume he is a member of, which if the conflict escalates, he can meet with, and request that the rep be brought in to meet with the supervisors. He isn't going to win, though. I'm guessing the policy does exist in writing, if not in daily practice. Jim appears to be one of the few workers in the mailroom who is having a problem with the policy. Because he doesn't want to enforce it, isn't much of a leg to stand on in terms of a human resources conflict. He was hired to enforce the rules. If he feels this strongly about it, maybe he just needs to find another job where he doesn't have contact with students, and then doesn't have to play the role of the enforcer, which seems to be what he is having problems with, not the policy itself. It sounds to me like Jim is uncomfortable exercising his authority over the students by enforcing university policy, even though he is required to do so as part of his duties. I didn't say a drivers license wasn't proper identification. I said it isn't unreasonable to expect students to carry their ID cards. I'll tell you this--they never forget to bring their IDs with them when they picked up their financial aid checks. So, the fact that students (and quite a few of you petty rebels) feel the minority group of students who insist they should be given special treatment because they don't want to remember to carry their ID with them, be given special treatment, tells me you all likely expect to receive it yourselves. In other words, you feel you shouldn't be held to the same standards as everyone else, because you are such a special person, or what? That other students should be treated according to a double standard (which is grossly unfair) just so you don't have to held to the same standard and follow the rules everyone is expected to follow? Do you routinely run red lights too, Clint? There are a lot of those sorts of "above it all" rules breakers out there in the ashpalt jungles, killing and maiming people at intersections with their special sense of entitlement. Where do YOU draw the line? You park in handicapped spaces too? |
|
13 Sep 04 - 02:02 AM (#1270774) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,SueB Thank you, Guest, for exemplifying the very officiousness that Jim is up against. Very illustrative. In your own words, "the policy Jim is talking about is the security issue related to the packages themselves, who has authority to claim them, and what sort of identification they are required to show to pick up a package." Yes. The issue is, can they prove they are the person to whom the package is addressed. If they can, with a drivers license or a passport, then to withhold their mail for any reason is a bad idea - it may even be actionable, since it's a felony to tamper with the US mail. Also, in your own words, "It is no different than the policy requirement that a student show their student ID when they pick up their financial aid checks, or pay their bills at student accounting, for instance." One, you don't need an ID to pay a bill, at student accounting or anywhere else. You don't even need ID to make a deposit at a bank. They don't care who you are when you're giving them money, just when they're giving YOU money. Two, requiring a student ID when disbursing student financial aid at the beginning of term isn't the same as withholding your mail halfway through the semester. Finally, the nonsense about how Jim will be sorry if that package he allowed the student to claim - after seeing the student's valid drivers license or passport - turns out to contain something BAD is just plain crapola. Jim is in no way responsible for the contents of the package. To say that he could be is tacky in the extreme, and to say that it could be prevented by requiring a university ID of the recipient instead of a driver's license or passport doesn't make any sense. And to suggest that Clint runs redlights and parks in handicapped spots? Don't you think you're going a bit too far? |
|
13 Sep 04 - 03:04 AM (#1270799) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,Clint Keller I wrote a very witty and intelligent reply to the Ghost Guest but it disappeared and I don't have the heart to reconstruct it. Anyway SueB done good enough, better than me. Only thing is, Guest, I didn't recommend breaking rules, I was talking about changing rules. And I sign my name. I do take responsibility for the things I write, dumb or embarrassing as they sometimes are. It's a good rule to follow. clint, Petty Rebel (call me "Pet") |
|
13 Sep 04 - 04:35 AM (#1270874) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Most people who work for big organizations are expected to carry ID. This is in the form of an ID issued by their employer. It won't let them drive a car or travel abroad. What is the big deal about students carrying ID issued by their university. It is good practice should they find themselves employed by such an organization. But if they find it too much trouble to do so, then they probably will carry that attitude forward and someone less pedantic will get the job. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 04:47 AM (#1270885) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,SueB Just as long as they get their just rewards, then. That'll show 'em. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 07:28 AM (#1270970) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Wolfgang Jim, we also have situations in German universities where we like to make sure who a person is, like for instance in examinations. How we make sure is our business alone. The old Germany was know for being very formal and authoritarian. We still have that as a sketch in TV. One version goes like that. In a post office, the clerk and a customer talk to each other about the wether and their wives and that they'll see each other next day at supper. They are friends or at least good acquaintances. Then the customer say, 'since I'm here can you have a look whether there is a parcel for me?' Clerk (civil servant, in the old times): 'Yes, there is one.' 'Can you give it to me?' 'Yes, if you show me your identity card.' 'I don't have it with me, but you know me very well'. 'Privately I do know you, but officially I don't know you." We can laugh about it now, for these times are gone since long. If rules have to be followed without thinking that is a sure sign of an authoritarian regime. Wolfgang |
|
13 Sep 04 - 09:08 AM (#1271046) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST So SueB, you work at the university in question? You seem to know an awful lot about the place. Did you attend the institution as a student, or have you worked there as an employee? Again, you missed the point entirely. There are a couple of pieces that go into identifying you for package pick-up, whether you are a student at a university, or Joe or Jill citizen at the post office. Just to pick up mail you receive a notice for, you need a LEGAL photo ID (and student IDs, like employee IDs are not legal outside the university or workplace), and notification slip. If you are picking up mail from a PO box, which is the case in this instance, I believe, you also are identified in the computer as the renter of mailbox #1234, which may or may not get checked by the staff at the time you pick up the mail/package. We all understand that a drivers license and passport are legal forms of id. But apparently, some of you paranoid rebel types haven't gotten the memo yet that schools, universities, hospitals, and businesses all use ID cards nowadays. It would be authoritarian to do spot checks to see if people have them, or to control peoples' movement with them. But to verify the person is not only who they say they are, but can also prove they are a student vs. a roommate of the students, whom they are fighting with, and who happened to pick up their notice slip from the pile of mail left on the table.... |
|
13 Sep 04 - 09:32 AM (#1271074) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Guest above is a postal worker. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 10:26 AM (#1271142) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Jim Dixon SueB has a very good grasp of the situation I am describing, better than anyone else who has posted here. Thanks, Sue, for taking the time to help me explain why I consider this part of my job odious. Let me correct a misconception. This is NOT the University of Minnesota. I work at a much smaller institution. We only have about 2200 mailboxes in use. None of the problems the guest describes are evident here. I just looked at the official "University Policies" web page and I found nothing in it about official university ID cards. I did, however find the following: "Guests (non-[University] students) at campus-sponsored events are required to sign in and show picture identification upon entry to an event." That's ridiculous. I have attended many public events on this campus—plays, art exhibits, public lectures, concerts, and social events—and have never been asked to show an ID (except when I wanted discounted ticket prices). It just goes to show how little attention people generally pay to "official" policies. Guest, why are you so fond of addressing me and Clint by name when you don't allow us to address you by YOUR name? (That's a rhetorical question. I think I know the answer.) Dani, the problem IS the rule. Yes, the people in authority abuse it, but the point is, they LIKE having the rule (and even use illogical arguments to support it) because it gives them the opportunity to abuse their authority. If you abolish the rule, you would eliminate one kind of abuse, and part of their authority. My supervisor, by the way, is proud of her policy that gives us the authority to make exceptions to the rule. She thinks it makes her employees look more professional, more important. And she tells us that looking professional and important is the key to increasing the departmental budget and getting us all raises. For myself, I'd rather have a rule that we could enforce consistently, as long as the rule makes sense and serves a useful purpose that outweighs the inconvenience it causes. This one doesn't. In case I left any doubt, I have discussed this at length with my supervisor, both privately and with my coworkers participating in the discussion. And I have discussed it privately with my coworkers. I have used every argument I can think of and gotten nowhere. You want worst-case scenarios? I'll give you worst-case scenarios: Case 1: A father sends his daughter a dozen roses on her birthday, which happens to be a Friday. The student comes to pick them up late Friday afternoon. We know perfectly well who she is, but we refuse to give her the roses because she doesn't show the "right" ID. There isn't time for her to go home and get her ID before the window closes for the day. The roses stay locked in our hot office all weekend. When she comes back Monday, they are wilted. You want to make it even more dramatic? Let's say the father is a wealthy lawyer and an alumnus who has donated a lot of money to the University, and a friend of the President. (This is not unreasonable.) Case 2: We refuse to give a foreign student his visa papers, and as a result, he gets deported. Case 3: A American student is getting ready to leave for study abroad, and we have his visa, but we refuse to give it to him, and consequently he misses his flight, and loses the money he paid for his airline ticket. Of course, if I pose any of these scenarios to my coworkers, they say, "No problem. If it's that important, we'd make an exception." But my point is, who are we to judge whether a piece of mail is important or not? That should not be our job. Most of the time we don't know what's inside the envelopes and packages we handle, unless the student tells us. Why should they have to tell us? Don't they have a right to privacy? Shouldn't we treat all letters and packages as if they're important? Legally, I think the failure to turn over a package to its rightful owner, after the owner has presented reasonable proof of identity, would be considered negligence, and we would be held liable for any damages, and would have to pay for the wilted roses, unused airline ticket, etc. But it would not be a felony, because the rules about tampering with US Mail don't apply. The material ceases to be US Mail once the addressee receives it. The University is the addressee as far as the Postal Service is concerned. There is a special rule that says that (as I interpret it) in the Domestic Mail Manual, published by the USPS. Anyway, a lot of the stuff we handle comes by private delivery firms such as Federal Express, and so is never US Mail to begin with. And students here don't rent their mailboxes. They are automatically issued a mailbox when they register. We (the University employees) are careful to call them "mailboxes" and not "PO Boxes." Not everyone understands the distinction. PO Boxes belong to the USPS and are rented to the public. By law, only US Postal Service employees can put mail into PO Boxes. Our boxes belong to the University, and University employees, not USPS employees, put letters into them. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 12:57 PM (#1271240) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Of course Jim, if you don't work at the U of M, you must work at another smaller university (there just aren't that many in town, are there?)which guessing by the number of mailboxes, I'd say is probably Hamline. Am I right? The other problem here is, as I said earlier, we are only getting your side of the story. It is hard to understand what the actual conflict is, when we only here one person's side of it. Just from my experience working at area colleges and universities as a temp (we find our way quickly to the departmental policies and procedures books pretty quickly just to survive day to day on the job), I would guess that the rule/policy you are talking about wouldn't be found in the university wide policy manual, but in your departmental policies and procedures book, which most departments have explaining the procedures for how to perform routine tasks for your department or area, that they use to train employees. But also, I truly don't understand what you are seeking as the solution to the "problem" when you seem to be the only one having it. It sounds to me like you are asking that a departmental policy/procedure be changed, ie what the procedure is for students picking up packages at the window. We all know bureaucrats who are petty tyrants, but in my experience there really aren't THAT many (though urban legend tells us otherwise), and I have certainly run into my fair share of them over the years. I have my horror stories too. Now, the culture of the department can be such that if the supervisor is a petty tyrant, and their charges are encouraged to behave using the same model for students, it can be a real problem. But other than that, there are usually ways to work around these things, if people are willing to be flexible. Usually the #1 barrier to changing procedures is that people don't want to learn a new way of doing something. What did you specifically ask your supervisor to change? You said she told you it was a university policy (and may partly be that), while it sounds to me more like a a department policy/procedure, specific to your work area. Is your reason for requesting this change because you feel you have a better way (ie more efficient, less time consuming, etc) way of performing the task? I know how resistant to change bureaucrats are, and I know it can be tremendously frustrating to have to keep performing a routine task that is part of your job when you think you've found a better way of doing it, and everyone resists changing it "because we've always done it this way". But there also seems to be an element of you not feeling comfortable performing the task of enforcing, as I said in an earlier post. Some people don't like having to do that part of their job. I work with someone like that. She doesn't like having to enforce the rules and policies that students are required to follow (as we all are in life, regardless of our life's path). So if you could explain to us which of the above two scenarios applies in this case, we might be able to offer some savvy advice. You are right when you say there are fewer problems with identity/IDs at a small institution vs a large one, which is what I was assuming you worked at, obviously. You do get to know the students personally. Once you know a student personally by both face and name, I see no reason to request they show you an ID at all, regardless of the situation. That would be be petty power tripping. But seeing as you are writing about this at the beginning of the school year (are you a new employee?), I'm guessing the issue is important to you now, whereas it may become largely irrelevant once you know the kids, later in the semester. To ask for an ID for someone you know personally by face and name, know their student status, etc would be silly. But at the beginning of the term, there will be a good number of faces and names you don't know. You will always have the occassional "stranger" you've never seen before, but then you just ask them to present their student ID, and they are good to go. But the problem in a university/college/school setting is this. We need to verify that the person in front of us is actually a student at your institution, and not impersonating a student, or a currently non-enrolled student at your institution, the same way employers sometimes need to verify that when they don't know the person in front of them. A drivers license doesn't tell you that the person is a currently enrolled student or employee with a mailbox, although I expect if they give you the student/employee ID number, you can look that information up in their student/employee record if you have access to that system. This isn't nearly as much of a concern at Hamline as it is at the U, where it happens ALL THE TIME. Students who have holds on their records at the U aren't allowed to register for classes until they clear the holds. So you have a lot of kids trying to check out books, use the computer labs, gain access to mailboxes, all sorts of things, when they aren't currently enrolled. At the U, they use ID scanners virtually everywhere now. But they also do this at all the community and technical colleges, small colleges, etc. for book check outs in the library, to get into the computer lab and log on to use a computer, that sort of thing. Which is why I initially balked at the idea of kids not having their IDs. Some kids will balk at anything, I know, I've worked in education at the secondary and post-secondary level for 15 years. But aside from that group, if students use the labs, the libraries, etc. on a routine basis, they just plain learn to always have their ID with them, because there are NO EXCEPTIONS to these rules. Period. Just like writing a check with a legal id, or having your drivers license on you while driving. It's the process we all have to follow. People who insist upon fighting that have every right to push the boulder uphill, if that is what they feel the need to do to make their point. But most of us learn at a pretty young age (and high school and college is usually the age at which they start to get on board with the program), that life is much easier and sweeter when you don't push the boulder uphill when you don't have to do it. Now, some of you may think that is cruel and unusual punishment, but it is the standard operating procedure nowadays. The time to have been worried about the ID thing was 30 years ago. Some places are stricter than others. We didn't use to have to show a picture id to get on airplane. Now we do. But perhaps you can let us know what you think the rule should be Jim. Also, let us know if would you just prefer not to have to be in the role of enforcer of policy and rules. Some people just don't like to do that sort of work, and I have no problem with that, if they can easily be accomodated without putting a burden on other staff. So, it would help us help you, I think, if you can define the problem more specifically, and explain what you think the solution will be, as you have explained it to your supervisor, tell us whether you are a new employee (and are you new to higher education too?). Then, we might be able to offer some truly useful advice to you. Some stuff is just learning curve. Some stuff is about the culture of the institution (Hamline is pretty conservative in that WASP authoritarian sort of way), some is the culture of your department, leadership style of your supervisor. But it does sound to me like you are new to this position, and maybe to working in higher ed. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 01:01 PM (#1271244) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Georgiansilver You don't do anything about it you just get on with it!! Now stop posting to this thread and get on with something useful!! |
|
13 Sep 04 - 01:02 PM (#1271245) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Georgiansilver Sorry, just my little "authoritarian" lightener, Best wishes. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 01:15 PM (#1271252) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST We can also keep trying to communicate, until Jim gets some sense of resolution that suits him. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 01:26 PM (#1271261) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Jim Dixon I really think I have made this clear in my previous postings. I want the policy to change so that it states that a driver's license or a passport is just as good as a University ID for the purpose of identifying the addressee of a letter or package. I want this so that I can stop wasting time by explaining a nonsensical rule to students. I also want it so that my coworkers will stop trying to use the rule to harass students they don't like. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 01:39 PM (#1271270) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Maybe it would help if you saw it from another perspective? The new security guard asks for ID. The student says, " I haven't got it on me, never a problem with Jim." The security guard insists on the ID, because he is new/doesn't know the student/ wants to keep his job. What he gets is a mouthful of verbal from the disgruntled student. Some practices are designed to help more people than the mailroom staff. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 02:01 PM (#1271292) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST But Jim, that is why I'm asking if you are a new employee. You may not understand that in education, we spend A LOT of time explaining rules, procedures, ways things work at the school, to students. It is part of our job, especially a the beginning of a school year or semester, and especially newly enrolled, 1st time students. It comes with the territory. And how much longer can it take to say "I need to see your student ID" than it does to say "I need to see your drivers license or passport"? The answer as to WHY you need to see their ID is "because I have to verify your student status, and that you are the student named on this slip." Boom, you're done. Now, if the issue is that the students are arguing with you AFTER that point because they don't want to comply with the request (and students do this all the time, no matter what), that is a whole different thing. If that is the thing you are objecting to, then you might need to understand that changing the policy/procedure won't stop them from arguing, but that time passing will lessen it to a large extent. At the beginning of the year, new students especially haven't learned the ropes yet. So they are defensive, because they don't like to (they would say) "look stupid". But it isn't about looking stupid really, it is about them feeling competent. In that regard, they are no different than we are when we are learning a new system, or the ropes of a new job, that sort of thing. The learning curve will result in the majority of students who come up to the window not even needing to be asked for the ID. They will shove it at you! Because they will know the ropes then. Also, I'm guessing the beginning of the year is a very busy time for packages too. This too should drop off by mid-semester or so. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 02:12 PM (#1271305) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,Clint Keller Guests 01:39 PM & 2:01: You're not listenig to what Jim Dixon just said. clint |
|
13 Sep 04 - 02:30 PM (#1271322) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Honest I am listening. And can still see no problem with training the students to what will become part of their everyday working life. They won't be met with much sympathy if they refuse to show ID in the workplace. They wouldn't be supported by their union. If they continue to allow execeptions to the rule, there is no need for his colleaugues attitudes to change. They are allowed to exercise their 'harrasment' because they can. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 02:37 PM (#1271330) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST 1:39 is the guest above, I'm 2:01. I'm curious, which part of why Jim is saying is it that you don't think we are hearing? Like I said, it would be very helpful to know if Jim is a new employee, and new to working in education, because it sounds to me as if he is. Experience employees rarely give this a second thought, especially at the beginning of a new school year, when we repeat the same instructions a hundred times a day and then some. It gets better later in the semester, as I said, but the beginning of the year is an adjustment for everyone, even the old dogs. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 02:40 PM (#1271332) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST oh. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 06:11 PM (#1271465) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Jim, ol boy, ya shunta give that qote fum yer coleg's web site. I see ole Guest don went an googled with it an now he no's were ye work. Next thing ya no he'l be emailin yer boss an rattin ya out. Y'all don' use yer real name, do ya? Don' worry. Ef ya git fired, they's a temp out there waitin ta git yer job. |
|
14 Sep 04 - 01:39 AM (#1271746) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,Clint Keller Guesties: For one thing he's not objecting to showing ID; he's objecting to the "authorities" not recognizing a driver's license (plus a slip which can only be obtained from a student's mailbox) as valid ID. And he's objecting to using the need for showingID to further egotistical power trips. Bullying. Of course you need to show ID in your everyday working life, but you don't need to be jerked around by people who take advantage of that need. Or do you think that's one of the privileges of rank? Got to go. I have handicapped places to park in wrongfully and people to kill at intersections. clint |
|
14 Sep 04 - 02:38 AM (#1271776) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,SueB You get extra points for hitting old ladies with shopping bags, Clint. High score wins, loser has to argue with Guest some more. |
|
14 Sep 04 - 02:51 AM (#1271783) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,Clint Keller Glad to find out the rules, SueB. I'd do most anything to not have to argue with Guest any more. clint |
|
14 Sep 04 - 03:12 AM (#1271795) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,SueB Rules clarification: I meant hitting old ladies who are encumbered with shopping bags, with your car. You have to stay in your car. You can't get out of your car and chase them down on the sidewalk. Speaking of handicapped spots, I used to work for a guy who was blind - read stuff aloud for him and drove him around, mostly, - once he had me park in a handicapped spot and then hide on the floor in front of the passenger seat while he slid over to the driver's side. When he heard someone coming, he made a big show of getting out of the car and extending his folding cane and dropping the keys and trying to find them...I suppose it's been done before, but at the time I thought I was going to absolutely die laughing. |
|
14 Sep 04 - 03:22 AM (#1271800) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,Clint Keller Glad to get the clarification. I was looking for a shopping bag and a couple of bricks. I could have made a fool of myself. I wish I'd seen your blind employer do his act. There are too few bright spots like that. clint |
|
15 Sep 04 - 01:16 AM (#1272047) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Jim Dixon Well, folks I've got good news. Today the subject came up at our twice-weekly staff meeting. It turned into another heated argument between my 2 coworkers and me, until time ran out and we had to quit, with nothing actually settled. But this time, my boss, instead of siding with my coworkers as she had in the past, just sort of sat back and listened while we fought it out. Instead of taking the knee-jerk reaction "you're wrong" she seemed to be actually thinking about it for the first time. This was early in the morning. Then late in the afternoon, after my 2 coworkers had gone home, she came and talked to me privately. We talked for over an hour. I really feel like she finally listened and now sort of understands my point of view. She's still noncommittal – she won't say I'm right or wrong, won't say whether she will change the policy or not, but says she needs to "think about it" some more. She did give me permission to go talk to the head of campus security about the problem. (I had considered doing that on my own but was afraid my boss would be offended.) Regarding the alleged "policy" that students must show a University ID to pick up a package, or that students must carry a University ID on them at all times – my coworkers and my boss all at first said "It must be written down somewhere" – but nobody can find it! My boss said she thought it was in the "student handbook" but nobody can produce such a document! Well, I feel somewhat vindicated, and somewhat hopeful things will change. |
|
15 Sep 04 - 06:50 AM (#1272219) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Grab Eh?! As far as trying to have students carry their student ID all the time, please remember that a uni is a *private* place, filled with very expensive equipment. How on earth is it bad for a security guard to be able to check that someone hanging around outside the computer labs is actually a student having a smoke break, and not a criminal waiting to tailgate a student through the doors and steal 200 PCs? A driver's license won't cut it in that situation. Using this as the justification for having to have your student ID for picking up parcels is pretty weak, but the goal of having students carry their ID cards with them is generally the right thing. And there's no reason for them not to, anyway. It's just a card, for heaven's sake - if they've got their driver's license already, how is it inconveniencing them to have a second card in their wallet? Graham. |
|
15 Sep 04 - 08:55 AM (#1272293) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST There is no official UNIVERSITY policy that says students must have their IDs on them at all times, I'm sure. No one is talking about a policy that says that. What I said is, it is a perfectly reasonable expectation, considering the numbers of places that students are required to show their IDs to do university business, for them to have it with them. But Jim seems to have changed the parameters of the argument now. Before he was balking at having to enforce a rule that requires students to show their university ID at the university mailroom window to pick up their packages. Why Jim is fighting this is absolutely baffling, because it isn't a big fucking deal in the real world, and Jim looks like a power mad jerk, who is now going to be ostracized by his co-workers, and for good reason. Not that Jim is being a bit judgmental or anything. The charges Jim is making against his co-workers are VERY serious, BTW. Grounds for actionable discipline. So you go for it Jim. You sure are one control freak, if these are the lengths you feel you have to go just to get your way. |
|
15 Sep 04 - 09:04 AM (#1272298) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Jim Dixon Grab, you are missing the point. I am not arguing against students being required to carry ID cards. (Maybe that argument should be made, but it is irrelevant to the main point I am making here.) I am arguing against using unfair, unreasonable, and possibly illegal methods of forcing them to do it. One detail you seem to have missed (I mentioned it in my last message and I regret I didn't stress it earlier) is that whoever is issuing the cards, conducting orientation of new students, or publishing official rules is doing a terrible job. They are giving the students ZERO information about what the card is for, at least as far as the campus post office is concerned. As far as I have been able to determine, NOBODY is telling them during new-student orientation or anywhere else, that they are supposed to carry the ID card at all times. NOBODY (outside the post office) is telling them they will need the ID card to pick up a package. The first time they hear it is the first time they show up at the post office window trying to claim a package. It comes as a complete surprise to them. At that point, it IS unfair and unreasonable to deny them their own property as a means of forcing them to do something they previously had no idea they were supposed to do. Remember, we have a new crop of students every year, and a near-complete turnover every four years. The fact that somebody might have sent out an e-mail 3 years ago telling students to always carry their ID doesn't cut it. At least I had one small victory yesterday. I was to get one my coworkers to concede that IF in fact there is an official policy that students should always carry their ID, then this policy ought to be published somewhere, and we ought to be able to find it. So far, we haven't found it. The only evidence we have that such a policy exists is "oral tradition" passed down among employees of the campus post office! And, yes, this is a private institution (although our Guest above mistakenly assumed it was a public one, and argued from that premise), and the board of trustees, if they wanted to, could even turn it into a military academy and require all our students to stand at attention and salute us. They could put up barbed wire around the perimeters to keep the public out. But if they did that, it would not be the kind of institution I would want to work for, or want my son to attend. As an employee, I feel it is my right and my duty to argue against any policies—or alleged policies—that I feel are detrimental to the mission of the institution as a whole, and I am doing just that. |
|
15 Sep 04 - 09:13 AM (#1272304) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Jim Dixon My personal policy is to ignore people who call me a "power mad jerk." People who use such tactics as name-calling obviously would have no chance of ever persuading anyone to change a policy, and therefore have nothing of value to add to this discussion. |
|
15 Sep 04 - 11:04 AM (#1272441) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Grab OK Jim, if that's your beef then I agree - the school authorities need to get their act together. But this isn't "authoritarianism", it's just crap organisation. It feels like you're overstating the problem a bit. Now petty bureaucracy *is* annoying, but your co-workers are in the situation of "no-one ever got fired for doing what they were told". If you suggest improvements to the system and you're right, you look good; but criticising the system and getting it wrong might carry a black mark on your record. No uni is going to barricade the perimeters to stop the public getting in. But equally, no uni is going to say "oh yeah, all you guys just come in and use our PCs and wander round our million-dollar labs whenever you like". Somewhere between the two there needs to be a compromise. ID cards to tell who has a right to be there would be a reasonable compromise, because it doesn't cause anyone any inconvenience. I don't see though how you and your co-workers can get so upset over this that you're yelling at each other, unless you're presenting the issue badly. If you start by saying "the rule is stupid" then you've insulted your boss (and anyone else who thinks the rule is OK), and no-one will then listen to your justifications, it'll just turn into a fight. If you say "the rule is inconsistent, and we could improve it by doing XYZ" then you've got scope for rational discussion. Something I else thought of. When you check the slip, do you also check that their ID has the same name on it as is printed on the slip, and refuse to give it to anyone else? If not, I'd be worried! Graham. |
|
15 Sep 04 - 05:54 PM (#1272843) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Jim Dixon said: "I am not arguing against students being required to carry ID cards." Students are never REQUIRED to carry an ID card. They are just really stupid if they choose not to do it, especially if they then decide to argue with the staff who ask them for it when conducting university business. Then Jim Dixon says: "One detail you seem to have missed (I mentioned it in my last message and I regret I didn't stress it earlier) is that whoever is issuing the cards, conducting orientation of new students, or publishing official rules is doing a terrible job. They are giving the students ZERO information about what the card is for, at least as far as the campus post office is concerned." Excuse me, but why in god's name, does a college student need "orientation" about their freakin' ID card????? What, it is too tough to figure out what they are for? That gee, maybe they might need it for something? Like maybe something to do with the university? This is such a miniscule part of university business, is absolutely doesn't belong in the university policy (ask students how many of them have read THOSE for christ sake--3 maybe, in a good year). It also doesn't belong in orientation. Talk about wanting the bureaucracy to revolve around JIM DIXON PERSONALLY. Jesus. The place for this is right where it is. In YOUR department, decided by YOUR supervisors, and in THEIR employee training manuals. And then, Mr. Dixon informs us: "NOBODY (outside the post office) is telling them they will need the ID card to pick up a package. The first time they hear it is the first time they show up at the post office window trying to claim a package." Wah fucking wah. What, are these preschoolers? They can't handle a simple instruction from the staff at the window like "May I see your ID please?" They have meltdowns on the spot, that's THEIR problem. Why the hell Jim Dixon thinks this infintessimally insignificant "rule" should be coming out of the Office of the President, or which ever office issues university policy, or rises to the level of the student orientation, I'll never know. If this is that big of a deal, try writing a simple "mailbox" or university post office info sheet, and have the student orientation people include it with the packets that none of the students read. That will fix them. "At that point, it IS unfair and unreasonable to deny them their own property as a means of forcing them to do something they previously had no idea they were supposed to do." God save us from career men like you, Jim. Just why is it "unreasonable" again? Because they are too lazy to walk to their dorm rooms? God the cruelty of life. It just isn't fair, is it? And then, this piece de resistance: "I was to get one my coworkers to concede that IF in fact there is an official policy that students should always carry their ID, then this policy ought to be published somewhere, and we ought to be able to find it." Right. So what the hell is stopping you from typing it up, posting it on the wall outside the window, and PUTTING A COPY OF IT IN EACH STUDENT'S MAILBOX?????????? Maybe sky writing it would help, eh? And finally, we have this: "As an employee, I feel it is my right and my duty to argue against any policies—or alleged policies—that I feel are detrimental to the mission of the institution as a whole, and I am doing just that." Destrimental to the mission of the institution????? Forgetting your fucking ID card? Talk about your bureaucratic power trips Jim. Oh my god. Oh my god. Why are you so clueless? I'm sure you'll rise to your level of incompetence soon. And finally, thank you Graham. |
|
15 Sep 04 - 06:18 PM (#1272857) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,petr I was on the other end of that. Last christmas my wife went to visit her folks in another province. They had sent us a christmas pkg via purkolator (the instructions were to leave it on our porch, which the courier ok'd at the sending end) Of course they didnt leave it on the porch, I had to go and pick it up and there was only 1 working day left, and they were across town so I just got there 5mins before they closed. I could tell they were ticked off when I came in, as they were getting ready to leave. One of them told the other staff to lock the door after me. So when I asked for the package and gave them the delivery slip they left at the door - and showed my id with the same address. They said the package was not addressed to me (it was apparently addressed to my wife) and would not release it. when I asked if they could double check if my name is on the package one of them did a cursory peek around the corner and said no. (I dont even think she looked) As my wife was away for 2 weeks and only she could pick it up, the package would be sent back after 7 days as it was not picked up. So as I left i thanked them for nothing. to which they shouted something behind me. later I phoned purkolater and they said they could extend the pickup time. When my wife called to complain, as her folks had paid extra for deliver before the xmas weekend about the only thing they would do is ask the staff to call me and apologize. (which one of them did and left a msg although it wasnt particularly heartfelt -) imagine my irritation when my wife finally picked up the package 2 weeks later and it had her name and my name right next to it. and all for a bunch of (now stale) christmas cookies. |
|
15 Sep 04 - 06:32 PM (#1272866) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Oh crumbs! |
|
15 Sep 04 - 06:40 PM (#1272870) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: Jim Dixon Do we need any further evidence that there are authoritarians all around us? |
|
15 Sep 04 - 07:42 PM (#1272905) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST,petr I havent read all the above, but it would seem to me that if its ok to not being totally nitpicky about the ids and let the student have the stuff while letting them know it is the exception then why not do that. Im more irritated by the power trip over not releasing something to a student because the staf dont like him. weve all been fucked around by bureaucracy one way or another (when I moved from one province to bc as a teenager I still had a learners drivers licence - which in manitoba was listed as on probation. the bc motor veh. dude said I had to do a whole road test as well as a written test - because I did something obviously bad to be on probation - although all manitoba drivers are the 1st year.) he wouldnt budge or call manitoba to check. I just went to another branch and had it done, no problem, the guy was just a jerk of course he wasnt like that with the cute girl that was in the line ahead of me. |
|
15 Sep 04 - 08:14 PM (#1272926) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Can't wait to find out what Jim Dixon gets from his work colleagues he is accusing of bullying students, for Christmas. I think we should nominate him for sainthood, for forcing a stupid rule in the mailroom to the level of "university policy" and accusing his co-workers of behavior that is grounds for disciplinary action or firing. What a great guy. I so wish I could work with him. We really need more crusaders like him pushing mailroom rules making up to the board room. |
|
15 Sep 04 - 09:16 PM (#1272973) Subject: RE: BS: Authoritarianism in daily life. From: GUEST Yes. The Guest who is a regular nailing a member from the bushes. Talk about no balls. |