Theory: Audit, or Investigation, of Appointed People
(This article is # 36 in a series on Sick Organizations that was planned and started prior to the first article in the series being published on 14 Sept 2011. This article was written for the public of the world in general and not about any specific person or any specific illegal activity. Anyone who would claim it is about them would be wrong and also have to be nuts to admit he/ she was an appointed crook and claim the article was about him/ her. People identify themselves to others as appointed crooks by their actions with public business and money/ property; generalized writings as this should be no direct threat to the guilty anywhere, but informative to both appointed crooks and the public everywhere. See article: This Blog: Postings ) Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D.
People are appointed, either politically or on merit, or both, to positions of power in various organizations around the world. We usually associate political/ merit appointments to government, university, religion, and corporation positions. In such positions they have power over people and easy access to organization money, property, power, goals/ secrets, and decisions affecting people, property, and money.
Some appointed people do their jobs well, serve the public/ customers as they are supposed to do, and do not steal/ scam/ use power wrongly in their jobs. However, there is an unknown percentage of appointed people who take advantage of their usually secure political position to steal, run various scams, or use their power in wrong ways. Since a lot of instances are covered up, and never reported to/ recorded by law authorities, we have no real idea of the percentage of appointed people that are actually crooks. From my experiences and listening to others I expect that at least 50 % of the appointed people around the world have used their powers incorrectly/ illegally either for/ against another person or in some sort of scam to benefit themselves or relatives/ friends/ politicians.
Their appointed power is used against others to eliminate competition to their "greatness," those that are against their actions, those they do not like, those that know too much, etc. Appointed power is used for others in many ways: hiring, support, favor, endorsement, publicity, awarding grants and contracts, various deals, gifts, etc. The wrong use of public money can range from the outright direct theft of public money to elaborate sweetheart deals where the originator receives a kick-back (money, sex, property, etc.) for transfer of money, property, land, etc. to another. In some countries this culture is so firmly entrenched that it is a daily way of life. The schemes may go on for years and nothing is done about it by the authorities (they too may be involved).
Usually the crooked appointed people are left alone to do their damage because the parent agency/ higher authority does not want to find/ hear anything wrong on their watch or to admit they appointed the wrong person/ made a mistake, or they appointed a crook, or they like/ cooperate/ benefit in what he is doing. Scammers and thieves deny, honest people just tell the truth. Crooked politically-appointed people and crooked politicians protect each other in a mutual admiration society/ mutual scam society that feeds off the public (taxpayers, stockholders). The public literally has the foxes guarding the henhouses all around the world. The crooked politically-appointed and the crooked politicians are closely tied together and thus protect each other. So those with high political connections generally get off scott free, or are allowed to retire (or "fade away"), if they are caught in any wrongdoing (so they won't expose their political partners). In some countries they are executed if caught (so they cannot talk or embarass those in power, or to stop the investigation and cover up the rest of the network taking public funds). Some will retire and keep the money and stuff they have stolen. It appears that legal practices/ laws designed by politicians who try to get the best deals for themselves allow crooked appointed officials to rip the public off around the world at their pleasure and nothing much is done about it. (For one example in world, see Sun Herald article, http://www.sunherald.com/2012/10/28/4270516/officials-to-call-for-new-laws.html#disqus_thread )
Sometimes an appointed person is replaced/ retired if he becomes too obvious in his illegal actions or too arrogant with others. Many complaints may finally lead to some action by authorities. Authorities may also cut the caught offending appointed person loose before they also are painted as crooks. However, authorities may appoint another of their buddies (who has not yet been exposed as a crook) to take over from the previous crook, and their scams may (or may not) continue on as before. And the exposed crook may then be rewarded for doing things well for years and quietly agreeing to his "retirement" by getting "consulting" or "part time" jobs in the future from the organization he just left, or other organizations. And the scams continue on and on ..............
They will generally laugh at the efforts of those who would try to "get rid of them," because unless there is jail time involved, they know they have the power and money behind them and not many can touch them. Some, when investigated (some are "investigated" by their fellow crooks at other agencies), are so confident in their political protection they act like nothing is wrong, and go about their appointed job as usual. They sometimes know what is going to happen (political decision by those higher up) shortly after they have been found out. They also know they can play their scams whether or not they are present on the grounds of the agency in question.
This type of people do not think they have done anything wrong (they have little or no conscience). They say they work hard, "deserve," and are entitled to any extra benefits they can get. They also see themselves as "doing good" by providing for their friends and family. When finally "caught" in their actions and making the public mad, they usually retire fairly gracefully, laughing all the way. Even after being "retired" they can still get more money, at the same or a different organization, by being a "consultant" or a "part time" contractor. In the United States, for example, they usually do not fear any of us, or our complaints; they may fear a little jail time at one of the country-club jails for white-collar crooks.
These appointed people doing illegal actions are generally very arrogant people who do not like to be questioned in any way by those they consider inferior. And I guess they have a right to be arrogant -- they know they are protected all the way to the top. (The longer higher officials refrain from saying anything about the problem, the more one should suspect they are trying to cover-up the problem and the more one might suspect they too are involved.) They are rarely replaced unless they mess up really badly, like lose control of themselves and show big bosses they cannot control even themselves (show anger/ violence or have a hissy fit, or get too greedy, too arrogant, too power hungry, or too obvious in their scams, etc.) or cannot follow orders or embarass/ expose their bosses. They usually rule the workers by intimidation and threat rather than by guidance and inspiration. The main goals of business and government are to keep the peons under control and working as cheaply as possible, and "their" people in positions of power with easy access to public money.
Sometimes appointed people are women who appear to have bigger balls than an elephant. They hide behind being a woman to take their evil to others and to lessen attacks on themselves. How can any male that loves and respects his mother attack or fight back against a woman? Some sick organizations around the world realize that and put pushy arrogant aggressive nasty females in power positions where they "eat up"/ destroy people like cream puffs, and do about anything they want. Females are even less likely to be investigated or charged with doing anything wrong, so some that know that just do about anything they want. A good example of this is divorce court in the United States where motherhood is usually equated to sainthood and women get away with doing or saying just about anything to gain advantage in custody or settlement, or in trying to destroy the reputation of an ex through false charges of abuse (a common practice) .
Some agency investigations of appointed people can be nothing more than a joke. One got the wrong target (name confusion?), and then called everyone in the building as a witness except the complainer, thereby exposing the complainer (on purpose ?) to all the staff and to further persecution. The investigators accused the complainer of having a vendetta against the correct accused person, when it was the opposite. The powers that be twisted things around to make out like the whistleblower was the bad guy. This is a common action of sick organizations. The message was sent that they were not going to investigate the corrupt one, and the complainer better shut up. Sometimes investigating agencies will not investigate unless the illegal use of public funds exceeds a certain minimum (unknown minimum, $50,000 (?), $100,000 (?), or more (?)). Do not assume that if they find something illegal that something will be done to the guilty as a punishment. Some law enforcement agencies in the world only enforce the law against poor, or not politically-connected, people. Many times the guilty are rewarded by their political partners in their activities. Politics trumps law and science and truth, sex trumps politics, money trumps everything.
In investigations competition may lead to more truth, and more justice. For example, a reluctant local or higher agency may be stimulated into action (they can't show us up as incompetent, or crooked....) by an investigation by a higher agency. Or a local or higher agency may be stimulated into action by a good investigative newspaper, media group, blogger, or public outcry. Conversely, if a higher agency declines to investigate and passes on the investigation to a lower agency, the lower agency may then be more likely to cover up the corruption going on. When/ if the public outcry and anger swells enough to "break the dam" of dirty politics, fear, and intimidation that keep the peons quiet, justice/ truth may finally be sought.
There is a down side to not investigating quickly for the scammers involved. The longer the investigation goes on the more people get involved that get mad and the more digging is done to expose more and more branches of corruption that are tied into the original organization, and the greater the chances that something will be done to punish the crooks. Doing nothing may cause the crooks to eventually "lose an arm or a leg, rather than just the little finger." So it is best for the people being investigated, and their political friends, that the investigation goes quickly, or not at all.
Also, once an appointed person has wrongly used power to his benefit, and the public becomes aware of this, then that person, as a representative of the organization (and the parent organization) is no longer believed, or respected as one of their leaders, and becomes the subject of bad jokes and anger. The person becomes useless, and a burden, to the organizations in question. If the person is not punished for his wrongs, and made to make things right again, he should be replaced ASAP to potentially regain organization credibility. Again, it is best for the sick organizations involved to act quickly to correct the wrongs to minimize damage to credibility, or quickly "retire" the person caught, and keep the public uproar at a minimum.
If one has warned authorities of a problem and they do nothing and cover it up, then one has more information to use in the fight, and to protect himself in the future.
If you reported a prior illegal activity and the authorities did nothing then, but now they appear to be doing something about it, you cannot say "See, I told you so." Then you would show up the incompetence or past politics of the investigating agencies and you'd be a target of their wrath for making them look bad. No, you must be quiet and must quietly bask in your knowing, along with maybe a few others, that you were right.
To those around the world who would complain about/ report an illegal action--- THEY WILL INVESTIGATE YOU FIRST. If nothing else, they want to find out how credible you are, how much you know, what proof you have, your criminal record, what others think of you, who your friends are that may think the same way, etc. They may or may not even investigate the corrupt one; they may demand and destroy your proof, especially if it is property of the sick organization. YOU are the one upsetting the political/ money flow in this case. YOU are the danger to those supposed to serve the public but are actually parasites on the public. YOU are a threat to their sweet scam. THEY have the power and public money at their disposal. THEY may even make all the evidence and records disappear and then just walk away with what they took. In some cases everyone but the public gets use of public money. YOU will be investigated, questioned, followed, spied upon, harassed, slandered, threatened, set up/ framed, possibly fired, and maybe much more. YOU may be driven to drink, depression, being a hermit, and trusting very few. Few, if any, will stand with you, and some will betray and desert you. The good guy wanting things to be done right is now persecuted for questioning or slowing down their scams or exposing some corruption. Forget threats from other countries, worry about what your own people/ politicians are doing to you, your money, your food, and your home daily in your country (in the United States think: Great Recession losses, home losses, contaminated food/ drugs, and many other examples).
Those who would complain must be very careful. For example, in this area (Mississippi Code 97-35-47) it is unlawful "to report a crime or any element of a crime to any law enforcement or any officer of any court, by any means, knowing that such report is false." A violation includes up to a year in jail, one thousand dollars, or both, PLUS costs of investigation of the falsely reported crime, PLUS costs of prosecution of someone convicted under this section. Some places love to prosecute the whistleblower rather than the crook.
The morals of the United States, for example, have gotten so bad, in my opinion, that the once great USA of my youth appears to be becoming a third rate nation of scammers and thieves and parasites and drug users. It is no wonder some other countries thumb their noses at us, and outpace us in many fields and stats now. Has anyone causing the Great Recession been forced to give back what they took, or sentenced to a day in jail?
There is very little investigative/ complete reporting by the media anymore, especially in the cities where the crimes are taking place, probably due to the potential of loss of advertising revenue, and political pressure. Our human society today in all countries of the world will throw the book at someone who steals a loaf of bread to eat, but usually does little to the crooks who steal millions from the public.
The smart guilty appointed people around the world will blow off the general thoughts in this article as not bothersome to them because they are protected. Their being "bothered" by this article could be taken as an indication by the public that they are guilty, which they do not want to admit. They do not want any actions to call attention to other things they are doing. Most guilty will just disregard these thoughts, not call attention to themselves, and just go about their business as if their political protection will last forever. And, for some, it does.
We need to stop rewarding the crooks and praise the workers doing their jobs under very great stress. We need to regain our moral compass as humans and do things the right way. We need world organizations run on merit advances rather than politics. We need better laws to prevent / punish corruption. We need more honest politicians, leaders, investigators, law makers, law enforcers, judges, taxpayers, etc. throughout the world to get each country back on track, and moving towards the top. We need to compete on being the best, not the worse.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
Thanks to Steve L. Shepard for making suggestions to improve this article.
Some of Lawler's Laws:
The more people brought into an investigation, the greater the chance something will be done. Some will be mad and protect themselves. Some guilty may also cut a deal to lessen their punishment.
The longer an investigation goes on, the greater the chance of more discoveries, which may put the crooks away.
The longer higher powers put off doing right due to an investigation, the greater the chances more corruption will be exposed, and the greater the chances the higher powers will also be labelled as corrupt.
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Theory: Slander As A Main Weapon
Theory: Slander As A Main Weapon
Slander about another is used in sick organizations to try to negate the work of another, destroy their credibility, destroy their legacy, destroy their reputation, destroy their career, etc. The slander can be about almost any subject: He is crazy, lazy, unreliable, never on time, promiscuous, a poor worker, a wife beater, an animal abuser, a liar, a drunk, a drug user, etc., etc. The slander is usually done by a sick/bully boss who is jealous of the worker (worker shows up the boss by having better facilities, getting more recognition, being more observant, having more friends, etc.), a co-worker wanting the other worker's job, office, etc,, friends of the person starting the slander who are supporting their buddy in his attack, the leaders of a sick organization who are setting the worker up for a firing and trying to justify their firing actions by their slanders, other rivals at the organization, etc. The slanderer can be anyone at the organization; the reason for the slander can be anything, or nothing more than dislike. The original slander can also come from outside the organization (from an ex, enemy, neighbor, previous employer, etc.) and someone from the sick organization may pick up the slander to use as HIS OWN, probably thinking he can use the slander to destroy someone else for whatever reason he has for doing so.
Slander is usually committed by a dishonest person who may not be very smart; if he were honest and smart he would research to find the truth BEFORE he started/spread any slander (which could make him look like a fool if the slander is proven to be a LIE, or maybe lead to a lawsuit). There are those who will repeat the lie as often as they can to anyone who will listen, even to using their lies as a teaching "example" of a bad person to their students, interns, assistants, co-workers, etc. Others will repeat the lie as much as they can so eventually the lie is spread far and wide, and few know the origin of the lie, but hear the lie so often they begin to accept it as the truth. This also happens in political races.
There are some bosses/supervisors who will use their lies to try to ruin the careers of rivals, to get their facilities and workers taken away from the victim, to get their salaries reduced, to make life at the sick organization so difficult the person finds it hard to do the work necessary to silence the slanders of the bad boss, and any number of other things to try to destroy the rival, and get him kicked out of the "sandbox."
There are some slanderers whose brain gets "stuck" or "frozen" so much they are constantly thinking about getting their victim even up to 15 + years after the victim has retired and left the sick organization, and are constantly repeating the slanders to anyone who will listen.
What can the poor victim do? Usually very little. Those that know him know the truth. Others will believe about anything they want to believe; some just want to believe the worse about others because it makes good gossip. It is difficult to get a witness to testify in a slander case. Why? Those that slander usually have some sort of power over others and any potential witness is afraid to testify against such a person. If a lowly worker slanders another he can be easily fired and gotten rid of; if someone with power slanders another he is rarely challenged by those lower in power than him, and those above him support him, even in his lies, because he is a member of their power group. And this truly makes for a VERY SICK ORGANIZATION extending through a long period of time, in some cases for over 40 years.
And if the leaders of the sick organization believe the lies, they might persecute the victim by firing, ruining his career, giving him a pay cut, taking his facilities away, taking his workers away, etc., etc. So slander should be fought just as hard as if someone were trying to kill you, because they are trying to kill your career and future.
If the victim ever finds out, even years later, that one of his friends heard a slander from the slanderer or one of his cohorts, then the victim should jump on it to find out all the particulars and then counter the slander and slanderer by submitting EVIDENCE that the slander is a lie to the next highest authority (after the slanderer) in the organization, and say something like this, "I am giving you FIRST shot at correcting the slanders being put forth by so-and-so, on this date, at a gathering of various people, several who heard the slanders. The evidence countering the slanders and proving them to be lies is enclosed." If the next highest boss is also one of those persecuting you, then deal with the highest authority of the organization you can without upsetting their chain-of-command rules. Then include a detailed list of the possible options that may be available (that you are thinking about) against the offending organization and its slandering member(s); but make no threats.
If you make a public deal out of this situation a lot of people will just call you a disgruntled employee. You want to get the organization to handle it, so they do not come back on you; you are exercising your power over them by getting them to correct a situation they do not want to handle (how can they chastise their buddy?). They will want to keep things quiet, too; they do not want to be forced to admit that such actions against another happened at their organization, or on their watch, and thus have it become public knowledge.
You will never get total satisfaction out of the outcome; you will not get repair of your reputation for the years of slander, or money lost in your career due to their persecution. Even after providing proof that the slander is a lie there will be some who will still believe anything they want. The main office may do nothing more than to tell the offender to quit his slanders, and not punish him in any way (because he is so-o-o-o important to their program). They may not care that the slanderer treats many people badly and is a constant negative example for the organization. But you will get satisfaction of at least knowing you have proven to some that the slanders were lies.
If you are slandered, get your proof of the lie as fast as you can to the next highest authority in the organization above the slanderer, and calmly ask him to handle it. Slander can ruin careers, families, and the future, and is NOT to be taken lightly, but fought and proven to be lies (if for nothing else, just one's own peace of mind).
Every one of us will be slandered during his life by someone who does not like him for various reasons, or for no reason other than his presence/existence.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
Slander about another is used in sick organizations to try to negate the work of another, destroy their credibility, destroy their legacy, destroy their reputation, destroy their career, etc. The slander can be about almost any subject: He is crazy, lazy, unreliable, never on time, promiscuous, a poor worker, a wife beater, an animal abuser, a liar, a drunk, a drug user, etc., etc. The slander is usually done by a sick/bully boss who is jealous of the worker (worker shows up the boss by having better facilities, getting more recognition, being more observant, having more friends, etc.), a co-worker wanting the other worker's job, office, etc,, friends of the person starting the slander who are supporting their buddy in his attack, the leaders of a sick organization who are setting the worker up for a firing and trying to justify their firing actions by their slanders, other rivals at the organization, etc. The slanderer can be anyone at the organization; the reason for the slander can be anything, or nothing more than dislike. The original slander can also come from outside the organization (from an ex, enemy, neighbor, previous employer, etc.) and someone from the sick organization may pick up the slander to use as HIS OWN, probably thinking he can use the slander to destroy someone else for whatever reason he has for doing so.
Slander is usually committed by a dishonest person who may not be very smart; if he were honest and smart he would research to find the truth BEFORE he started/spread any slander (which could make him look like a fool if the slander is proven to be a LIE, or maybe lead to a lawsuit). There are those who will repeat the lie as often as they can to anyone who will listen, even to using their lies as a teaching "example" of a bad person to their students, interns, assistants, co-workers, etc. Others will repeat the lie as much as they can so eventually the lie is spread far and wide, and few know the origin of the lie, but hear the lie so often they begin to accept it as the truth. This also happens in political races.
There are some bosses/supervisors who will use their lies to try to ruin the careers of rivals, to get their facilities and workers taken away from the victim, to get their salaries reduced, to make life at the sick organization so difficult the person finds it hard to do the work necessary to silence the slanders of the bad boss, and any number of other things to try to destroy the rival, and get him kicked out of the "sandbox."
There are some slanderers whose brain gets "stuck" or "frozen" so much they are constantly thinking about getting their victim even up to 15 + years after the victim has retired and left the sick organization, and are constantly repeating the slanders to anyone who will listen.
What can the poor victim do? Usually very little. Those that know him know the truth. Others will believe about anything they want to believe; some just want to believe the worse about others because it makes good gossip. It is difficult to get a witness to testify in a slander case. Why? Those that slander usually have some sort of power over others and any potential witness is afraid to testify against such a person. If a lowly worker slanders another he can be easily fired and gotten rid of; if someone with power slanders another he is rarely challenged by those lower in power than him, and those above him support him, even in his lies, because he is a member of their power group. And this truly makes for a VERY SICK ORGANIZATION extending through a long period of time, in some cases for over 40 years.
And if the leaders of the sick organization believe the lies, they might persecute the victim by firing, ruining his career, giving him a pay cut, taking his facilities away, taking his workers away, etc., etc. So slander should be fought just as hard as if someone were trying to kill you, because they are trying to kill your career and future.
If the victim ever finds out, even years later, that one of his friends heard a slander from the slanderer or one of his cohorts, then the victim should jump on it to find out all the particulars and then counter the slander and slanderer by submitting EVIDENCE that the slander is a lie to the next highest authority (after the slanderer) in the organization, and say something like this, "I am giving you FIRST shot at correcting the slanders being put forth by so-and-so, on this date, at a gathering of various people, several who heard the slanders. The evidence countering the slanders and proving them to be lies is enclosed." If the next highest boss is also one of those persecuting you, then deal with the highest authority of the organization you can without upsetting their chain-of-command rules. Then include a detailed list of the possible options that may be available (that you are thinking about) against the offending organization and its slandering member(s); but make no threats.
If you make a public deal out of this situation a lot of people will just call you a disgruntled employee. You want to get the organization to handle it, so they do not come back on you; you are exercising your power over them by getting them to correct a situation they do not want to handle (how can they chastise their buddy?). They will want to keep things quiet, too; they do not want to be forced to admit that such actions against another happened at their organization, or on their watch, and thus have it become public knowledge.
You will never get total satisfaction out of the outcome; you will not get repair of your reputation for the years of slander, or money lost in your career due to their persecution. Even after providing proof that the slander is a lie there will be some who will still believe anything they want. The main office may do nothing more than to tell the offender to quit his slanders, and not punish him in any way (because he is so-o-o-o important to their program). They may not care that the slanderer treats many people badly and is a constant negative example for the organization. But you will get satisfaction of at least knowing you have proven to some that the slanders were lies.
If you are slandered, get your proof of the lie as fast as you can to the next highest authority in the organization above the slanderer, and calmly ask him to handle it. Slander can ruin careers, families, and the future, and is NOT to be taken lightly, but fought and proven to be lies (if for nothing else, just one's own peace of mind).
Every one of us will be slandered during his life by someone who does not like him for various reasons, or for no reason other than his presence/existence.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Theory: Kangaroo Court is One Weapon They Use
Theory: Kangaroo Court is One Weapon They Use
Sick organizations are fairly well known for their use of kangaroo courts to silence those that would question their actions, etc. They may initially call such courts "appeal hearings" or something similar, but in a sick organization the appeal hearing becomes a kangaroo court because you have now challenged the organization's "right" to do as they wish to you. They are going to defend their "right" to do as they wish to you, as their worker, and teach you a lesson. Kangaroo courts are generally held in response to an appeal you made to a decision they made (that you question) about you or your job.
Kangaroo Court is defined as:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_court
A kangaroo court is "a mock court in which the principles of law and justice are disregarded or perverted".
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Kangaroo+Court
An unfair, biased, or hasty judicial proceeding that ends in a harsh punishment; an unauthorized trial conducted by individuals who have taken the law into their own hands, such as those put on by vigilantes or prison inmates; a proceeding and its leaders who are considered sham, corrupt, and without regard for the law.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/kangaroo+court
any crudely or irregularly operated court, especially one so controlled as to render a fair trial impossible.
Kangaroo courts, by definition, are designed by the establishment so they win and you lose, and they teach you their lesson. They are mainly done to intimidate you and rest of staff, showing they can do anything to anybody at anytime, and that they are in control. A kangaroo court session is held to put someone down, to let them know who is boss, to stop criticism/talk before it gets started much, etc.
The Director/CEO of the sick organization usually chooses who will sit (usually 5 people) in judgement on the kangaroo court. They may give you one token choice of someone to sit at the hearing (they may ask for a list of several), and they choose one of those from your list who will judge you which will not mean anything in the final vote, because the vote is already rigged against you (4 votes to your one choice). This enables them to find out who ELSE thinks your way and needs to be controlled, so they can single them out for persecution, attitude adjustment, or firing, too. The kangaroo bunch gets together to question and beat up on you (their rules) and you have to sit there and take it while they go out for breaks, coffee, and to get more ammo (questions, charges) from other bullies not at "court" hearing.
They take great delight in watching you squirm and try to defend yourself against all sorts of charges against the sick organization, mostly various acts of supposed insubordination against your bully boss, false charges about your job performance, and your sayings to others. You cannot bring anyone in with you to help in your defense (like an attorney, or witness). They make up stuff, twist the truth, exaggerate, etc. everything so there is little truth anywhere in their charges against you. If they have instilled a little fear in you about what they can do, they have done what they wanted.
They have access to your personnel file where people have put anything they wanted for the time of your employment there. This is also "evidence" against you; you usually don't know what is in there and usually have no way to correct any false information. If you can, examine your personnel file to see what they are saying. Your yearly job performance evaluation is also usually in this file.
Do not expect to use the staff handbook (if there is one) in your defense. They will say things like: it is being revised and is not in effect at this time, or we (or those at the main office) are in the process of updating it, or something similar.
Since I think and observe fairly well, I have heard about various kangaroo courts in my life, from those in elementary school days on up to various jobs to divorce court (where, for some examples, motherhood is equated to sainthood, and a man is no good and must be punished by taking what he earned away from him, even though his wife committed adultery). In my opinion, divorce courts are more like kangaroo courts, and are full of lies and unfair "justice."
In my opinion, one of the most outrageous kangaroo courts a person was forced to go through happened after he just happened to ask "Do you realize you're eating better than the ........?" after he saw all the steaks, luncheon meats, drinks, and other goodies bought on ........ money for an outing. They held two days of hearings on what he asked (one question) to stress him out and bother him, to let him know they were boss, to let him know he must not question any of their actions, to let him know they were doing anything they wanted, to let him know he had no control over anything (including his own job and future), etc. For good measure they later made him pick up all the cigarette butts around the building, to exercise their control over him and show the rest of the staff they were in control and they'd better stay in line or they'd get similar treatment.
A kangaroo court is not a nice thing to go through; a sick organization is a bad place to work for the average worker, a horrible place for a worker who voices his opinion, believes in freedom of speech, and seeks the truth, and a good place to work for those in power and having fun at others' expense.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Sick organizations are fairly well known for their use of kangaroo courts to silence those that would question their actions, etc. They may initially call such courts "appeal hearings" or something similar, but in a sick organization the appeal hearing becomes a kangaroo court because you have now challenged the organization's "right" to do as they wish to you. They are going to defend their "right" to do as they wish to you, as their worker, and teach you a lesson. Kangaroo courts are generally held in response to an appeal you made to a decision they made (that you question) about you or your job.
Kangaroo Court is defined as:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_court
A kangaroo court is "a mock court in which the principles of law and justice are disregarded or perverted".
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Kangaroo+Court
An unfair, biased, or hasty judicial proceeding that ends in a harsh punishment; an unauthorized trial conducted by individuals who have taken the law into their own hands, such as those put on by vigilantes or prison inmates; a proceeding and its leaders who are considered sham, corrupt, and without regard for the law.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/kangaroo+court
any crudely or irregularly operated court, especially one so controlled as to render a fair trial impossible.
Kangaroo courts, by definition, are designed by the establishment so they win and you lose, and they teach you their lesson. They are mainly done to intimidate you and rest of staff, showing they can do anything to anybody at anytime, and that they are in control. A kangaroo court session is held to put someone down, to let them know who is boss, to stop criticism/talk before it gets started much, etc.
The Director/CEO of the sick organization usually chooses who will sit (usually 5 people) in judgement on the kangaroo court. They may give you one token choice of someone to sit at the hearing (they may ask for a list of several), and they choose one of those from your list who will judge you which will not mean anything in the final vote, because the vote is already rigged against you (4 votes to your one choice). This enables them to find out who ELSE thinks your way and needs to be controlled, so they can single them out for persecution, attitude adjustment, or firing, too. The kangaroo bunch gets together to question and beat up on you (their rules) and you have to sit there and take it while they go out for breaks, coffee, and to get more ammo (questions, charges) from other bullies not at "court" hearing.
They take great delight in watching you squirm and try to defend yourself against all sorts of charges against the sick organization, mostly various acts of supposed insubordination against your bully boss, false charges about your job performance, and your sayings to others. You cannot bring anyone in with you to help in your defense (like an attorney, or witness). They make up stuff, twist the truth, exaggerate, etc. everything so there is little truth anywhere in their charges against you. If they have instilled a little fear in you about what they can do, they have done what they wanted.
They have access to your personnel file where people have put anything they wanted for the time of your employment there. This is also "evidence" against you; you usually don't know what is in there and usually have no way to correct any false information. If you can, examine your personnel file to see what they are saying. Your yearly job performance evaluation is also usually in this file.
Do not expect to use the staff handbook (if there is one) in your defense. They will say things like: it is being revised and is not in effect at this time, or we (or those at the main office) are in the process of updating it, or something similar.
Since I think and observe fairly well, I have heard about various kangaroo courts in my life, from those in elementary school days on up to various jobs to divorce court (where, for some examples, motherhood is equated to sainthood, and a man is no good and must be punished by taking what he earned away from him, even though his wife committed adultery). In my opinion, divorce courts are more like kangaroo courts, and are full of lies and unfair "justice."
In my opinion, one of the most outrageous kangaroo courts a person was forced to go through happened after he just happened to ask "Do you realize you're eating better than the ........?" after he saw all the steaks, luncheon meats, drinks, and other goodies bought on ........ money for an outing. They held two days of hearings on what he asked (one question) to stress him out and bother him, to let him know they were boss, to let him know he must not question any of their actions, to let him know they were doing anything they wanted, to let him know he had no control over anything (including his own job and future), etc. For good measure they later made him pick up all the cigarette butts around the building, to exercise their control over him and show the rest of the staff they were in control and they'd better stay in line or they'd get similar treatment.
A kangaroo court is not a nice thing to go through; a sick organization is a bad place to work for the average worker, a horrible place for a worker who voices his opinion, believes in freedom of speech, and seeks the truth, and a good place to work for those in power and having fun at others' expense.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Friday, September 28, 2012
Theory: New outside Director Gets Educated/Trained
Theory: New outside Director Gets Educated/Trained
When a new Director comes into a sick organization from outside the organization the lower employees experience a surge of hope that maybe they will get treated better. Usually no such luck!
If those supervisors in power have not already given their new "boss" an earful on how things "work around here" he will soon get his education. He is given a set list of guidelines (sometimes a staff handbook, which is usually followed to the letter for workers, and neglected for the supervisors) plus a lecture on "how things really work around here" by the bullies and others in power there (politicians controlling the money, the organization, various staff members, etc.). If he gives in to their way of thinking, he is "their" leader; if not he is fought every step of the way and made very unhappy, does not get their support, and does not usually stay director very long. Usually he submits to the "old" way and the organization keeps on staying SICK, treating people badly and unfairly, and nothing is changed. (If the new Director is chosen from those already at the sick organization there is usually no change in policy or operation; the Director already knows how things work at the organization.)
In one case the bullies flew to see the new Director chosen by others to indoctrinate him on the rules of the game before he got to the organization site, who the "troublemakers" (people who could think and question) were, the politics of the organization, the power players, etc., so the new Director could get a "running" start on being the new "buddy" Director, so there would be a "smooth transition" (nothing is changed), and it would be politics as usual. And the politicians and leaders stay happy, but the workers stay screwed.
In order to be "buddies" with his new senior staff he must "bend" to their ways. They have been there longer and "know" how things work.
After the new Director "gives in " once to the ways of the old establishment his fate is sealed. He must follow the wishes of the established set of bullies if he wants continued cooperation and peace with his supervisors. Forget about the workers, their education and training is minimal and they can be easily replaced with others "off the street." So the organization stays sick, doing very little, not upsetting the political agenda, etc. This is another way an institution stays sick for a long time, through many directors.
The only way to really turn the organization around is to "clean house" of all those bullies in power (including the politicians) over their individual kingdoms and start all over with a new director that is strong and fair, and cannot be influenced/intimidated by those left at the institution. The new Director then sets up his own power structure with those he controls (similar to what happens in a new political takeover). Then he can change some of the rules of operation as he sees fit; he may make it worse or better, or stay the same.
Unless one hears about drastic changes at an institution shortly after a new director starts, one can assume it is business as usual (the same politics, the same treatment of staff, etc.).
There are a lot of sick organizations out there due to all the sick, bully bosses/supervisors out there.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
When a new Director comes into a sick organization from outside the organization the lower employees experience a surge of hope that maybe they will get treated better. Usually no such luck!
If those supervisors in power have not already given their new "boss" an earful on how things "work around here" he will soon get his education. He is given a set list of guidelines (sometimes a staff handbook, which is usually followed to the letter for workers, and neglected for the supervisors) plus a lecture on "how things really work around here" by the bullies and others in power there (politicians controlling the money, the organization, various staff members, etc.). If he gives in to their way of thinking, he is "their" leader; if not he is fought every step of the way and made very unhappy, does not get their support, and does not usually stay director very long. Usually he submits to the "old" way and the organization keeps on staying SICK, treating people badly and unfairly, and nothing is changed. (If the new Director is chosen from those already at the sick organization there is usually no change in policy or operation; the Director already knows how things work at the organization.)
In one case the bullies flew to see the new Director chosen by others to indoctrinate him on the rules of the game before he got to the organization site, who the "troublemakers" (people who could think and question) were, the politics of the organization, the power players, etc., so the new Director could get a "running" start on being the new "buddy" Director, so there would be a "smooth transition" (nothing is changed), and it would be politics as usual. And the politicians and leaders stay happy, but the workers stay screwed.
In order to be "buddies" with his new senior staff he must "bend" to their ways. They have been there longer and "know" how things work.
After the new Director "gives in " once to the ways of the old establishment his fate is sealed. He must follow the wishes of the established set of bullies if he wants continued cooperation and peace with his supervisors. Forget about the workers, their education and training is minimal and they can be easily replaced with others "off the street." So the organization stays sick, doing very little, not upsetting the political agenda, etc. This is another way an institution stays sick for a long time, through many directors.
The only way to really turn the organization around is to "clean house" of all those bullies in power (including the politicians) over their individual kingdoms and start all over with a new director that is strong and fair, and cannot be influenced/intimidated by those left at the institution. The new Director then sets up his own power structure with those he controls (similar to what happens in a new political takeover). Then he can change some of the rules of operation as he sees fit; he may make it worse or better, or stay the same.
Unless one hears about drastic changes at an institution shortly after a new director starts, one can assume it is business as usual (the same politics, the same treatment of staff, etc.).
There are a lot of sick organizations out there due to all the sick, bully bosses/supervisors out there.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Monday, September 24, 2012
Theory: Victory over a Sick Organization
Theory: Victory over a Sick Organization
The leaders of a sick organization usually win in almost any fight with an employee because:
---the power is theirs
---they change/make up the rules as they go along
---they control your job, paycheck, vacation time. sick leave, overtime, benefits, etc., and will threaten/promise to stop or reduce any, or all, to win
---they are not going to let you win (bad for their power/public image)
---they will protect their members, no matter how bad (you think) some of their bullies are
---they will stick together in their positions, no matter how wrong they are
---politics will rule, not logic, or fact, or truth, or science
---they will use whatever tricks or set-ups necessary to win
---they will make witnesses, records, and evidence disappear/appear to their advantage
(even to using your partner/friend to get the evidence out of your own house, or having testimony disappear from court records)
(if the evidence can be considered as organization property do NOT take it off organization property so you can get caught/prosecuted for theft of organization property -- hide the evidence ON organization property and make copies of it to secure somewhere other than your home)
However, there are sometimes ways an employee might claim a "victory." Such a "victory" over a sick organization can be in several forms:
---outlasting them to get a retirement, or reach another goal
---escape to a another/better organization
---exposure of them for what they are
---getting bully people removed, or exposed for what they are
---preventing bully people from advancing in position or power
---legal/court victory (rare)
---organizational kangaroo court victory (very rare)
---getting staff handbook followed and enforced (rare)
---getting them replaced through political power change
Unless one is very smart, or has some good backing (good attorney or politician or a lot of the public supporting them ), or is very determined, or has "dirt" on them about illegal activities there is generally no real victory over a sick organization. One can achieve one of the goals above, yet still "lose" due to bad health caused by all the stress, or lose your partner or family who do not understand your plight.
And even if there were a victory as listed above, one should never mention/gloat over such a victory because the people of a sick organization can try to come back to put the bite on you years later in unexpected ways. So always keep your evidence even after you leave, in a secure place other than your home, in case you need it to fend off the sick organization later (sometimes there is no statute of limitations for a crime, like embezzlement).
The leaders of a sick organization have no feeling for others, never forget, and must win at all costs. They will neglect to enforce the staff handbook on their own people, but will gladly "throw the book" at an employee. Do not assume that if an investigation/audit finds something illegal in their activities that something will be done about it. They will try about any trick possible to cover up/deny that one of their own did anything wrong. Also, they will slander you for years after you are gone, especially if they think you have escaped their wrath.
After their persecution they will not normally let one escape with any sort of victory over them; it is not good practice to let a worker win against any organization (sick or not). To let them think they have won, while you celebrate getting your goal, is the only and usually silent victory some might get. And usually the only reason one gets such a "victory" is that they were not totally aware of the goal the victim sought, or they backed down a little to avoid exposure for their illegal activities.
Adrian R. Lawler. Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
The leaders of a sick organization usually win in almost any fight with an employee because:
---the power is theirs
---they change/make up the rules as they go along
---they control your job, paycheck, vacation time. sick leave, overtime, benefits, etc., and will threaten/promise to stop or reduce any, or all, to win
---they are not going to let you win (bad for their power/public image)
---they will protect their members, no matter how bad (you think) some of their bullies are
---they will stick together in their positions, no matter how wrong they are
---politics will rule, not logic, or fact, or truth, or science
---they will use whatever tricks or set-ups necessary to win
---they will make witnesses, records, and evidence disappear/appear to their advantage
(even to using your partner/friend to get the evidence out of your own house, or having testimony disappear from court records)
(if the evidence can be considered as organization property do NOT take it off organization property so you can get caught/prosecuted for theft of organization property -- hide the evidence ON organization property and make copies of it to secure somewhere other than your home)
However, there are sometimes ways an employee might claim a "victory." Such a "victory" over a sick organization can be in several forms:
---outlasting them to get a retirement, or reach another goal
---escape to a another/better organization
---exposure of them for what they are
---getting bully people removed, or exposed for what they are
---preventing bully people from advancing in position or power
---legal/court victory (rare)
---organizational kangaroo court victory (very rare)
---getting staff handbook followed and enforced (rare)
---getting them replaced through political power change
Unless one is very smart, or has some good backing (good attorney or politician or a lot of the public supporting them ), or is very determined, or has "dirt" on them about illegal activities there is generally no real victory over a sick organization. One can achieve one of the goals above, yet still "lose" due to bad health caused by all the stress, or lose your partner or family who do not understand your plight.
And even if there were a victory as listed above, one should never mention/gloat over such a victory because the people of a sick organization can try to come back to put the bite on you years later in unexpected ways. So always keep your evidence even after you leave, in a secure place other than your home, in case you need it to fend off the sick organization later (sometimes there is no statute of limitations for a crime, like embezzlement).
The leaders of a sick organization have no feeling for others, never forget, and must win at all costs. They will neglect to enforce the staff handbook on their own people, but will gladly "throw the book" at an employee. Do not assume that if an investigation/audit finds something illegal in their activities that something will be done about it. They will try about any trick possible to cover up/deny that one of their own did anything wrong. Also, they will slander you for years after you are gone, especially if they think you have escaped their wrath.
After their persecution they will not normally let one escape with any sort of victory over them; it is not good practice to let a worker win against any organization (sick or not). To let them think they have won, while you celebrate getting your goal, is the only and usually silent victory some might get. And usually the only reason one gets such a "victory" is that they were not totally aware of the goal the victim sought, or they backed down a little to avoid exposure for their illegal activities.
Adrian R. Lawler. Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Sunday, August 12, 2012
This Blog: Postings
This Blog: Postings
I am posting these sections on "Some Signs of a Sick Organization" to hopefully help victims understand what is going on and how they might best deal with whatever their situation may be in a sick organization. Sick organizations are found in every occupation, and every type of people organization in the world. Basically an organization is sick because of the sick (unfair, dishonest people, who are bullies, liars, cheaters, slanderers, thugs, and/or thieves, etc.) people running that organization. Thus, many organizations are sick one or more times during their history due to the type of leaders they have and what they cause/allow to happen. The leaders of a sick organization rarely examine themselves for seeking improvement, but concentrate on tormenting those that do not bow down to them, or follow their lead through, at worse, unfair, immoral, or illegal actions.
My comments, thoughts, and "theories" are based on many years of observations by various people on sick organizations. My own experiences started when I was born into a family with an abrasive father who was "always right" and rarely allowed another opinion/thought (a sick family organization), and continued through 28 years of schooling in several states and Europe, many different types of jobs through the years, and various unfair or bully people. In my opinion, many of the people I observed did NOT exercise their power over others fairly and honestly, and politics and dislike played great roles in their dealings with people.
This blog will be slowly expanded as I write down observations, thoughts, and theories based on past experiences and experiences from various others down through the years. I will continue to write short sections on each of the characteristics of a sick organization. Hopefully my writings will help others in the future to better understand, handle, and survive a sick organization and their bully people. Any organization of people involved in family, religious, education, corporation, government, charity, research, health, sporting, entertainment, news, service, food, etc. endeavors can be sick. You can read about such organizations every day in media releases, and hear about them daily in bars. etc. around the world.
These posts will NOT be anywhere near the last words on sick organizations, or bully leaders, but, hopefully, will explain some things and put new thoughts on other things about sick organizations. Those writing about sick organizations after me can add their updates, new findings, new observations, new theories, etc. Sick organizations represent a very complex problem of society because we are dealing with the egos and evils of those who exercise unfair power over others in many various organizations around the world on a daily basis.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
I am posting these sections on "Some Signs of a Sick Organization" to hopefully help victims understand what is going on and how they might best deal with whatever their situation may be in a sick organization. Sick organizations are found in every occupation, and every type of people organization in the world. Basically an organization is sick because of the sick (unfair, dishonest people, who are bullies, liars, cheaters, slanderers, thugs, and/or thieves, etc.) people running that organization. Thus, many organizations are sick one or more times during their history due to the type of leaders they have and what they cause/allow to happen. The leaders of a sick organization rarely examine themselves for seeking improvement, but concentrate on tormenting those that do not bow down to them, or follow their lead through, at worse, unfair, immoral, or illegal actions.
My comments, thoughts, and "theories" are based on many years of observations by various people on sick organizations. My own experiences started when I was born into a family with an abrasive father who was "always right" and rarely allowed another opinion/thought (a sick family organization), and continued through 28 years of schooling in several states and Europe, many different types of jobs through the years, and various unfair or bully people. In my opinion, many of the people I observed did NOT exercise their power over others fairly and honestly, and politics and dislike played great roles in their dealings with people.
This blog will be slowly expanded as I write down observations, thoughts, and theories based on past experiences and experiences from various others down through the years. I will continue to write short sections on each of the characteristics of a sick organization. Hopefully my writings will help others in the future to better understand, handle, and survive a sick organization and their bully people. Any organization of people involved in family, religious, education, corporation, government, charity, research, health, sporting, entertainment, news, service, food, etc. endeavors can be sick. You can read about such organizations every day in media releases, and hear about them daily in bars. etc. around the world.
These posts will NOT be anywhere near the last words on sick organizations, or bully leaders, but, hopefully, will explain some things and put new thoughts on other things about sick organizations. Those writing about sick organizations after me can add their updates, new findings, new observations, new theories, etc. Sick organizations represent a very complex problem of society because we are dealing with the egos and evils of those who exercise unfair power over others in many various organizations around the world on a daily basis.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Theory: Sabotage in a Sick Organization
Theory: Sabotage in a Sick Organization
The leaders of a sick organization may not get rid of a troublemaker for various reasons, some being:
---protection by political/legal connections of the troublemaker
---troublemaker holds evidence against them, and could expose their wrongdoings if pushed to his/her limit
---they need troublemaker's expertise/labor/contacts
---other reasons known only to the leaders
But keeping a troublemaker on staff does not mean they leave him/her alone. They might try to sabotage him/her or his/her project at any time. or take his/her project, workers, or facilities away, or physically hurt him/her and put him/her out of action (like a mysterious poisoning), or attack his/her work or credibility or character, or make his/her work difficult and require long hours of work, or make his/her daily life at the sick organization a daily struggle so he/she has to be constantly on his/her guard.
The leaders may use themselves, or co-workers to the troublemaker, or someone outside the organization, or the troublemaker's partner, etc. to sabotage the troublemaker. Verbal promises are usually made to the saboteurs in order to get their help against the troublemaker. The sick organization rarely wants to put anything in writing that may come back to haunt them later.
Some of the many sabotage tricks they use (in no special order, presented as if "you" were the troublemaker):
---verbally offer you various career options, but each is a lie
---try to seduce your partner and/or turn partner against you, or spy/report on you (by verbal offer of a job, or plan to speed up any divorce proceedings, etc.)
---send some sexy people to see you, tempt you, and then testify against you
---verbally offer all sorts of benefits to others if they mess with you, or spy on you
---read your mail, or make your mail (incoming & outgoing) disappear
---read your email (if on company computer) and use things found out against you
---offer/promise their favorite graduate student or tennis buddy your job
---take your project, workers, facilities. or equipment away (for any reason they want), then tell you if you don't like it you can leave
---spread lies that you cannot do your job
---turn off/mess with something that you need to keep running at work
---start, or spread, slanders about you
---move things around, etc., in your work area, then take pictures to "prove" you are not doing your job
---make things disappear from your work area, and then blame you
---make reports done for management disappear
---poison/drug your food or drink, etc.
---erase/copy your files from your computer
---use spies against you
---twist things you say to their advantage. or for justification of their actions
-- spray pesticide or something you are allergic to in your work area that kills your research organisms or affects your health
---change things in your research work area without letting you know
---tell bosses, co-workers, and students lies about you
---steal/destroy notes or files or pictures or samples/specimens
---make your laptop disappear, or make your data disappear
---do not give you phone/other messages collected in your absence
---tell bosses they don't know where you are to imply you are not on the job
---plant porn or alcohol or drugs in your desk, or work area.
---plant porn on your company computer
---plant organization property in your vehicle, or house.
---give you more work than is physically possible to complete.
---twist your words or actions around to make you look bad, or lazy, or inept.
---blame you for broken/stolen, or missing, equipment
---blame you for bad publicity
---take credit for your work, ideas, procedures. etc.
---make you walk a line no one else must do
---make you report to a BS artist that knows nothing about your job
---do anything they want to you at any time
---use you as an example of a "bad" employee
---harass you on anything they can make up, or on anything you do or say
---single you out for more unfair treatment if you complain about unfair treatment
---try to destroy you with slanders after you are gone from the sick organization
---subject you to kangaroo court hearings on things you say or do that are considered funny or insignificant when done by others
---let someone else interview and hire your workers
Any action against you that stresses your mind or job performance can be considered a way to sabotage you or your job. In the ideal situation, one must be able to do his/her job to the best of his ability without harassment, sabotage, or unfair stress from another.
If you know they are after you, and it should be obvious by their actions, be extremely careful of who you trust, and associate with. Secure all correspondence, reports, etc. where no one else can get to them, or destroy them. Beware of any people that NOW show an interest in you, or your job. Keep your thoughts, discoveries, inventions, politics, religion, sexual preference, enemies, etc. to yourself ONLY (do not use their email or their phone for your thoughts). Be on your toes, and look over your shoulder all the time. Keep a "memo of record" of daily happenings and things done to you, and evidence against them noting their wrongdoings, illegal actions, etc. Good luck.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
The leaders of a sick organization may not get rid of a troublemaker for various reasons, some being:
---protection by political/legal connections of the troublemaker
---troublemaker holds evidence against them, and could expose their wrongdoings if pushed to his/her limit
---they need troublemaker's expertise/labor/contacts
---other reasons known only to the leaders
But keeping a troublemaker on staff does not mean they leave him/her alone. They might try to sabotage him/her or his/her project at any time. or take his/her project, workers, or facilities away, or physically hurt him/her and put him/her out of action (like a mysterious poisoning), or attack his/her work or credibility or character, or make his/her work difficult and require long hours of work, or make his/her daily life at the sick organization a daily struggle so he/she has to be constantly on his/her guard.
The leaders may use themselves, or co-workers to the troublemaker, or someone outside the organization, or the troublemaker's partner, etc. to sabotage the troublemaker. Verbal promises are usually made to the saboteurs in order to get their help against the troublemaker. The sick organization rarely wants to put anything in writing that may come back to haunt them later.
Some of the many sabotage tricks they use (in no special order, presented as if "you" were the troublemaker):
---verbally offer you various career options, but each is a lie
---try to seduce your partner and/or turn partner against you, or spy/report on you (by verbal offer of a job, or plan to speed up any divorce proceedings, etc.)
---send some sexy people to see you, tempt you, and then testify against you
---verbally offer all sorts of benefits to others if they mess with you, or spy on you
---read your mail, or make your mail (incoming & outgoing) disappear
---read your email (if on company computer) and use things found out against you
---offer/promise their favorite graduate student or tennis buddy your job
---take your project, workers, facilities. or equipment away (for any reason they want), then tell you if you don't like it you can leave
---spread lies that you cannot do your job
---turn off/mess with something that you need to keep running at work
---start, or spread, slanders about you
---move things around, etc., in your work area, then take pictures to "prove" you are not doing your job
---make things disappear from your work area, and then blame you
---make reports done for management disappear
---poison/drug your food or drink, etc.
---erase/copy your files from your computer
---use spies against you
---twist things you say to their advantage. or for justification of their actions
-- spray pesticide or something you are allergic to in your work area that kills your research organisms or affects your health
---change things in your research work area without letting you know
---tell bosses, co-workers, and students lies about you
---steal/destroy notes or files or pictures or samples/specimens
---make your laptop disappear, or make your data disappear
---do not give you phone/other messages collected in your absence
---tell bosses they don't know where you are to imply you are not on the job
---plant porn or alcohol or drugs in your desk, or work area.
---plant porn on your company computer
---plant organization property in your vehicle, or house.
---give you more work than is physically possible to complete.
---twist your words or actions around to make you look bad, or lazy, or inept.
---blame you for broken/stolen, or missing, equipment
---blame you for bad publicity
---take credit for your work, ideas, procedures. etc.
---make you walk a line no one else must do
---make you report to a BS artist that knows nothing about your job
---do anything they want to you at any time
---use you as an example of a "bad" employee
---harass you on anything they can make up, or on anything you do or say
---single you out for more unfair treatment if you complain about unfair treatment
---try to destroy you with slanders after you are gone from the sick organization
---subject you to kangaroo court hearings on things you say or do that are considered funny or insignificant when done by others
---let someone else interview and hire your workers
Any action against you that stresses your mind or job performance can be considered a way to sabotage you or your job. In the ideal situation, one must be able to do his/her job to the best of his ability without harassment, sabotage, or unfair stress from another.
If you know they are after you, and it should be obvious by their actions, be extremely careful of who you trust, and associate with. Secure all correspondence, reports, etc. where no one else can get to them, or destroy them. Beware of any people that NOW show an interest in you, or your job. Keep your thoughts, discoveries, inventions, politics, religion, sexual preference, enemies, etc. to yourself ONLY (do not use their email or their phone for your thoughts). Be on your toes, and look over your shoulder all the time. Keep a "memo of record" of daily happenings and things done to you, and evidence against them noting their wrongdoings, illegal actions, etc. Good luck.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Another Voice
Another Voice
It is always of interest to me to see letters/opinions of others about politically-run (or sick) organizations. I attach a letter to a local paper discussing what the writer thinks as some problems with various agencies.
I do not agree with all his thoughts and will not go into a discussion on them here, having discussed much of this in previous posts, but government "research" agencies without political control that tell the truth (rather than a political position) and actually serve the public all the time (rather than politicians, corporations, etc. most of the time) are dreams that will probably never come true.
Government, university, and corporate "scientists" must embrace and support the political wishes of their bosses if they want to remain employed. If the political position is the same as the truth, then we get the truth. If not, we get the political untrue answer.
The accents in the letter below are mine.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
Dispersants could have caused dolphin deaths (Letter)
Published: Saturday, July 21, 2012, The Mississippi Press, p. 5A, 6:33 AM
By Mississippi Press Editorial Board
I read with some interest, and some disbelief, the July 19 article headlined "Report ties cold Gulf water to dolphin deaths," on the front page of The Mississippi Press. I see that researchers are attributing the stillborn and early deaths of bottlenose dolphins to -- what else? -- global warming, without actually saying it.
This is really starting to be more than troubling. The main trouble is that there is no long-term, unmanipulated data that can justify the global warming consensus of bought-and paid-off researchers.
The overwhelming number of non-research granted scientists completely disagree with the manmade warming theory. That's all it is, by the way -- a theory, unsubstantiated in factual data. It would take thousands of years of data to make the theory fact.
As a retired research-and-development analyst for a major chemical company on the coast, I know full well the patent-protected polymer businesses that made the dispersants used by BP are fully capable of wreaking this kind of havoc with marine mammals. The cancer rates in workers after the Exxon Valdez spill is evidence enough. The wildlife damage there was unequaled in modern times. Why should we expect anything different here?
If it weren't for the belief that most of the researchers are not deliberately trying to avoid placing blame, this scientist would believe that a large cover-up exists.
Every research facility worth mentioning got large research grants via BP after the 2010 oil spill and the general information stream changed in tone, filtered through management, after receiving those grants.
I believe that the heavy metals and long-chain organic molecules used in the dispersants are placing and, for an extended time, will continue to place our Gulf in a very precarious position. Money buys silence, and in this case it was a huge amount of money.
We need the oil wells. That's a fact of modern life. But what we need even more is a government whose bureaucracies are honest, unaffected and thorough. Not the kind of federal agencies we currently have, run by radicals and labor unions, with politicians making the decisions based on the political wind.
Preferably, these agencies should be staffed and controlled by professionals, held to the highest standards of integrity and honesty, devoid of useless regulations designed to protect the politicians. And fines and punishments that would make deliberate cheating, dangerous shortcuts and lying so expensive that they wouldn't ever happen.
DOUG DENEHIE
Ocean Springs
published: Saturday, July 21, 2012, 6:33 AM
http://blog.gulflive.com/mississippi-press-opinion/2012/07/dispersants_could_have_caused_dolphin_deaths_letter.html
It is always of interest to me to see letters/opinions of others about politically-run (or sick) organizations. I attach a letter to a local paper discussing what the writer thinks as some problems with various agencies.
I do not agree with all his thoughts and will not go into a discussion on them here, having discussed much of this in previous posts, but government "research" agencies without political control that tell the truth (rather than a political position) and actually serve the public all the time (rather than politicians, corporations, etc. most of the time) are dreams that will probably never come true.
Government, university, and corporate "scientists" must embrace and support the political wishes of their bosses if they want to remain employed. If the political position is the same as the truth, then we get the truth. If not, we get the political untrue answer.
The accents in the letter below are mine.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
Dispersants could have caused dolphin deaths (Letter)
Published: Saturday, July 21, 2012, The Mississippi Press, p. 5A, 6:33 AM
By Mississippi Press Editorial Board
I read with some interest, and some disbelief, the July 19 article headlined "Report ties cold Gulf water to dolphin deaths," on the front page of The Mississippi Press. I see that researchers are attributing the stillborn and early deaths of bottlenose dolphins to -- what else? -- global warming, without actually saying it.
This is really starting to be more than troubling. The main trouble is that there is no long-term, unmanipulated data that can justify the global warming consensus of bought-and paid-off researchers.
The overwhelming number of non-research granted scientists completely disagree with the manmade warming theory. That's all it is, by the way -- a theory, unsubstantiated in factual data. It would take thousands of years of data to make the theory fact.
As a retired research-and-development analyst for a major chemical company on the coast, I know full well the patent-protected polymer businesses that made the dispersants used by BP are fully capable of wreaking this kind of havoc with marine mammals. The cancer rates in workers after the Exxon Valdez spill is evidence enough. The wildlife damage there was unequaled in modern times. Why should we expect anything different here?
If it weren't for the belief that most of the researchers are not deliberately trying to avoid placing blame, this scientist would believe that a large cover-up exists.
Every research facility worth mentioning got large research grants via BP after the 2010 oil spill and the general information stream changed in tone, filtered through management, after receiving those grants.
I believe that the heavy metals and long-chain organic molecules used in the dispersants are placing and, for an extended time, will continue to place our Gulf in a very precarious position. Money buys silence, and in this case it was a huge amount of money.
We need the oil wells. That's a fact of modern life. But what we need even more is a government whose bureaucracies are honest, unaffected and thorough. Not the kind of federal agencies we currently have, run by radicals and labor unions, with politicians making the decisions based on the political wind.
Preferably, these agencies should be staffed and controlled by professionals, held to the highest standards of integrity and honesty, devoid of useless regulations designed to protect the politicians. And fines and punishments that would make deliberate cheating, dangerous shortcuts and lying so expensive that they wouldn't ever happen.
DOUG DENEHIE
Ocean Springs
published: Saturday, July 21, 2012, 6:33 AM
http://blog.gulflive.com/mississippi-press-opinion/2012/07/dispersants_could_have_caused_dolphin_deaths_letter.html
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Theory: Profitable, and Perfect, "Troublemaker"
Theory: Profitable, and Perfect, "Troublemaker"
In some cases a "troublemaker" can be used by the sick organization at great benefit to the organization. Why? Because the "troublemaker," if he/she decides to stay or the sick organization retains him/her, will take a great amount of using and abusing from the leaders of the sick organization so he/she can keep his job to support his/her family, or stay in his/her house, or is trapped and cannot leave because he/she cannot get a good letter of recommendation for another job elsewhere, etc. The sick organization can then make the "troublemaker" work long hours (or even some overtime for free), work holidays, relinquish credit/ideas to others, devise new procedures, devise to do things better and cheaper, solve various problems, etc., etc. The "troublemaker" can become almost like a slave to his/her boss or organization, being so just to keep a job he/she likes/needs, or to live in a place he/she likes, etc. The bullies that run the sick organization, if they are smart enough, realize that "troublemakers" under their control can be of great benefit to them, and make them look good, etc.
The perfect "troublemaker" works harder than the average worker (he/she is under constant scrutiny), makes the leaders look better, does not complain too much, tries to keep quiet, stands back as the leaders take credit for his/her ideas and work, etc. He/she wants to keep his/her job so they can do about anything that they want to him/her, and he/she will tolerate a lot of BS/persecution in order to survive in the job position he/she is placed by the sick organization. He/she is tired of persecution and spends his/her time trying to do a good job so he/she will be left alone, and thus is causing no further trouble. However, the troublemaker can restart reacting/complaining a lot if badly treated again. He/she is not out to increase the hostilities; he/she is trying to survive and support his/her family, but he/she will sometimes strike back if tormented again.
Since a troublemaker knows he/she is under constant threat of being set-up and fired he/she is more willing to cooperate with the sick organization in order to keep his/her job if he/she wants to stay. Unfortunately the bully bosses do not always get together in their treatment of the troublemaker, and one or more may torment the troublemaker so much he/she reacts in order to make them stop, or to save himself/herself, or to counter their moves, or to expose the tormentor, etc. A reaction by the troublemaker to their evil can lead to more problems for the sick organization.
When the trouble caused by a troublemaker (it does not matter that the troublemaker did NOT cause the torment to occur, a reaction by the troublemaker to torment/evil/slander may cause further trouble to the sick organization) outweighs the benefits the sick organization obtains from the troublemaker by keeping him/her on then the sick organization will probably cut him/her loose. Generally speaking, the evil bully tormentors are kept on and not called to task unless they show they cannot control themselves (having a hissy fit, loud outburst, cursing, etc.) in front of a higher boss. And it is generally the troublemaker that squawks when stepped on that is gotten rid of (How dare that underling question the actions of a superior!).
A few thoughts by Lawler:
A sick organization cares nothing for its workers except what they can do for the sick organization and/or its bully bosses. The leaders believe that workers can be easily replaced, and say so when threatening staff.
A troublemaker must remember that the threat of exposure and the various benefits he/she gives to the sick organization help determine if the sick organization retains the troublemaker.
A fired troublemaker can sometimes be used by the sick organization as free labor by requesting help/advice on a speciality of the troublemaker. The troublemaker then may think he/she is finally being accepted, when, in reality, he/she is just being used.
A good troublemaker can make others rich and famous, as they ride his/her ideas, hard work, inventions, procedures, discoveries, etc. to PR, fame, advancements, etc.
See other "Troublemaker" posts.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
In some cases a "troublemaker" can be used by the sick organization at great benefit to the organization. Why? Because the "troublemaker," if he/she decides to stay or the sick organization retains him/her, will take a great amount of using and abusing from the leaders of the sick organization so he/she can keep his job to support his/her family, or stay in his/her house, or is trapped and cannot leave because he/she cannot get a good letter of recommendation for another job elsewhere, etc. The sick organization can then make the "troublemaker" work long hours (or even some overtime for free), work holidays, relinquish credit/ideas to others, devise new procedures, devise to do things better and cheaper, solve various problems, etc., etc. The "troublemaker" can become almost like a slave to his/her boss or organization, being so just to keep a job he/she likes/needs, or to live in a place he/she likes, etc. The bullies that run the sick organization, if they are smart enough, realize that "troublemakers" under their control can be of great benefit to them, and make them look good, etc.
The perfect "troublemaker" works harder than the average worker (he/she is under constant scrutiny), makes the leaders look better, does not complain too much, tries to keep quiet, stands back as the leaders take credit for his/her ideas and work, etc. He/she wants to keep his/her job so they can do about anything that they want to him/her, and he/she will tolerate a lot of BS/persecution in order to survive in the job position he/she is placed by the sick organization. He/she is tired of persecution and spends his/her time trying to do a good job so he/she will be left alone, and thus is causing no further trouble. However, the troublemaker can restart reacting/complaining a lot if badly treated again. He/she is not out to increase the hostilities; he/she is trying to survive and support his/her family, but he/she will sometimes strike back if tormented again.
Since a troublemaker knows he/she is under constant threat of being set-up and fired he/she is more willing to cooperate with the sick organization in order to keep his/her job if he/she wants to stay. Unfortunately the bully bosses do not always get together in their treatment of the troublemaker, and one or more may torment the troublemaker so much he/she reacts in order to make them stop, or to save himself/herself, or to counter their moves, or to expose the tormentor, etc. A reaction by the troublemaker to their evil can lead to more problems for the sick organization.
When the trouble caused by a troublemaker (it does not matter that the troublemaker did NOT cause the torment to occur, a reaction by the troublemaker to torment/evil/slander may cause further trouble to the sick organization) outweighs the benefits the sick organization obtains from the troublemaker by keeping him/her on then the sick organization will probably cut him/her loose. Generally speaking, the evil bully tormentors are kept on and not called to task unless they show they cannot control themselves (having a hissy fit, loud outburst, cursing, etc.) in front of a higher boss. And it is generally the troublemaker that squawks when stepped on that is gotten rid of (How dare that underling question the actions of a superior!).
A few thoughts by Lawler:
A sick organization cares nothing for its workers except what they can do for the sick organization and/or its bully bosses. The leaders believe that workers can be easily replaced, and say so when threatening staff.
A troublemaker must remember that the threat of exposure and the various benefits he/she gives to the sick organization help determine if the sick organization retains the troublemaker.
A fired troublemaker can sometimes be used by the sick organization as free labor by requesting help/advice on a speciality of the troublemaker. The troublemaker then may think he/she is finally being accepted, when, in reality, he/she is just being used.
A good troublemaker can make others rich and famous, as they ride his/her ideas, hard work, inventions, procedures, discoveries, etc. to PR, fame, advancements, etc.
See other "Troublemaker" posts.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Theory: They Use Spies Against You
Theory: They Use Spies Against You
In a sick organization there are many types of people: the bullies that love to give others trouble, those that keep their mouths shut, those that play both sides against the middle, the political appointees that do not have to do much, the spies, the "slaves," the "token" people, the "pretty" people that are loved by many, the older ones who help others, the "jokesters" kept on, one or more "troublemakers," etc.
The power people of the sick organization maintain their spies which can come in many forms: A person appointed to assist you, a volunteer, a student/intern, those of the opposite sex, older workers nearing retirement, your life partner, those you thought were friends, etc. They all do the same -- spy on you for those in power in exchange for something in return. Their price can be a lax working environment, help on their studies/degree, possible promise of a full-time job, extra recognition, a quicker divorce settlement, extra benefits, trips, help to make sure they get their retirement, protection from lay-off, etc. Also retired military who want extra income without much work can be spies; they are used to taking orders from above and not thinking much about the orders.
How do you recognize them? The lowly worker who has the ear of the big boss, the worker who comes and goes as he wishes, the worker who spends his day visiting rather than working, the too eager volunteer that follows you everywhere, the pretty female who flirts with you, the nosy one who wants to know how everything works, the buddies that play tennis with the boss--- all could be spies. Another way to recognize them is that they do not appear to have ANY job worries like the rest of the staff.
Once you determine the identity of the spies, then you can start feeding them information you want to get back to the higher powers, or you can just put your information into the rumor mill where it will get to many. You never want to tell all the secrets of how you do your job so they can easily replace you. You can tell them minor problems that need fixing, some of your plans if you feel threatened, that you are willing to leave if the deal is good, and various other minor things, etc. Any major information/deals should be done direct with the powers of the sick organization.
Other spying can be done by getting copies of your emails, etc., and recordings of your phone calls. Various organizations may do one or both without telling you. Never put critical information (any personal or job information you want to keep private) in an email done through your organization's computers, or a call made from their phones, or through a wireless network that might be intercepted. Also remember that phones can now take pictures of you and record your words. When in doubt, do not let it (your secret/opinion) out. You should always act like someone is looking/listening over your shoulder; they are.
Never believe a spy at your job or his boss. If you are making a deal get it in writing, otherwise there is no real deal. Many find out too late that trusting the word of someone in a sick organization just does not work. Unless it is written down (or recorded) it is not said, and cannot be proved.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
In a sick organization there are many types of people: the bullies that love to give others trouble, those that keep their mouths shut, those that play both sides against the middle, the political appointees that do not have to do much, the spies, the "slaves," the "token" people, the "pretty" people that are loved by many, the older ones who help others, the "jokesters" kept on, one or more "troublemakers," etc.
The power people of the sick organization maintain their spies which can come in many forms: A person appointed to assist you, a volunteer, a student/intern, those of the opposite sex, older workers nearing retirement, your life partner, those you thought were friends, etc. They all do the same -- spy on you for those in power in exchange for something in return. Their price can be a lax working environment, help on their studies/degree, possible promise of a full-time job, extra recognition, a quicker divorce settlement, extra benefits, trips, help to make sure they get their retirement, protection from lay-off, etc. Also retired military who want extra income without much work can be spies; they are used to taking orders from above and not thinking much about the orders.
How do you recognize them? The lowly worker who has the ear of the big boss, the worker who comes and goes as he wishes, the worker who spends his day visiting rather than working, the too eager volunteer that follows you everywhere, the pretty female who flirts with you, the nosy one who wants to know how everything works, the buddies that play tennis with the boss--- all could be spies. Another way to recognize them is that they do not appear to have ANY job worries like the rest of the staff.
Once you determine the identity of the spies, then you can start feeding them information you want to get back to the higher powers, or you can just put your information into the rumor mill where it will get to many. You never want to tell all the secrets of how you do your job so they can easily replace you. You can tell them minor problems that need fixing, some of your plans if you feel threatened, that you are willing to leave if the deal is good, and various other minor things, etc. Any major information/deals should be done direct with the powers of the sick organization.
Other spying can be done by getting copies of your emails, etc., and recordings of your phone calls. Various organizations may do one or both without telling you. Never put critical information (any personal or job information you want to keep private) in an email done through your organization's computers, or a call made from their phones, or through a wireless network that might be intercepted. Also remember that phones can now take pictures of you and record your words. When in doubt, do not let it (your secret/opinion) out. You should always act like someone is looking/listening over your shoulder; they are.
Never believe a spy at your job or his boss. If you are making a deal get it in writing, otherwise there is no real deal. Many find out too late that trusting the word of someone in a sick organization just does not work. Unless it is written down (or recorded) it is not said, and cannot be proved.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D. , (C) 2012 --
Saturday, May 12, 2012
Theory: Show No Reaction or Anger to Their Evil
Theory: Show No Reaction or Anger to Their Evil
Victims of a sick organization must not show any reaction or anger at their attacks, hissy fits, slanders, and dirty tricks, but must remain calm, even if some bully nut spits in one's face during a hissy fit. The apparent no effect of their evil on the victim will drive the bullies/leaders of the sick organization crazy. A prime example of this type of passive resistance is Mahatma Gandi, who drove the British Empire crazy, and is now one of his nation's heroes.
Bully bosses feed off the reactions to their evil actions -- no reaction can cause them to increase their evil in hope of getting a reaction, but repeated (long term) no reactions by the victim will probably lead to less vicious attacks since they are no longer expecting /anticipating a reaction (as with Gandi).
The bullies in a sick organization will torment their victims in about any way they can. Some of the many things they might do: try to humiliate you or correct you in front of others, make you clean up after another's mess, give you the dirtiest jobs they can, make you work long hours, isolate you from others, steal your ideas and findings, leave you nasty notes, threaten your job and career frequently, try to make you a slave to their wants, have a hissy fit in your face, put their wagging finger in your face, get abusive if they do not get their way, take credit for your ideas or work, give someone else the credit for your ideas or work, slander you to students/interns and fellow workers, reduce your salary, reduce your benefits, take away your workers, take away your work locations, deny use of a computer, deny use of equipment, deny use of a secretary for typing, put a spy in your work crew, refuse your use of comp time, refuse sick time off, subject you to kangaroo court hearings and judgements, make you do things no one else has to do, call you crazy, make fun of you, accuse you of things you did not do, try to make you quit daily, and many, many more things that can torment you, deprive you of sleep at night, make you have bad dreams, make you sick, and cause a weak partner to leave you. You still must show no reaction or anger.
After they have done you some evil, keep records of their evil to use as potential ammo back at them on violating organization handbook, or laws. A record of the actions, sayings, witnesses, etc. of a bully can indicate the truth about a tormenter/bully and may help save your skin later. The daily "memo of record" should be kept on your body during working hours (keep it secure) and in a place away from your home after hours (a bad partner can use it against you during a split, or steal/destroy it if joining forces with sick organization against you). Remember that one of the worse things a sick organization tries to avoid is public exposure and negative publicity, and that is your main potential threat weapon against them.
You must have the threat of exposure available to use against them, but should avoid using exposure unless absolutely necessary. Once you expose them there will be a big fight, and since they have much more power than you in politics, media, and the organization in question, the "fix" is usually in to just get rid of you for any number of reasons they can make up or point to. Also, once you expose them you will have used at least part of your evidence against them and may not have enough big dirt (evidence) left to follow through in a lawsuit, hearing, investigation, etc.
Always give the higher bosses the first shot to try to correct a wrong ....... If they do something to correct the problem then you are ahead, if they do nothing to address a violation of the organization handbook, or some local, state, or federal law then you have MORE ammo you can use against them later. And you must have a good record so they cannot use that against you.
If you have reached your limit of bullying, lying, dirty tricks, and BS, then you have to decide (1) if you are willing to continue to take it (be their slave) and stay at the organization, (2) if you have enough evidence against them for wrongdoing to hold them at bay until you can retire or think of another way out, (3) if you can stand the stress of legal stuff if you try to expose their wrongdoings, or, (4) if it would be best to fold up and leave the sick organization.
If you show a reaction or anger they might try to use that against you in an insubordination charge against you. One must eat a lot of crow and take a lot of BS to survive for long in jobs today in all the many sick organizations around us.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Victims of a sick organization must not show any reaction or anger at their attacks, hissy fits, slanders, and dirty tricks, but must remain calm, even if some bully nut spits in one's face during a hissy fit. The apparent no effect of their evil on the victim will drive the bullies/leaders of the sick organization crazy. A prime example of this type of passive resistance is Mahatma Gandi, who drove the British Empire crazy, and is now one of his nation's heroes.
Bully bosses feed off the reactions to their evil actions -- no reaction can cause them to increase their evil in hope of getting a reaction, but repeated (long term) no reactions by the victim will probably lead to less vicious attacks since they are no longer expecting /anticipating a reaction (as with Gandi).
The bullies in a sick organization will torment their victims in about any way they can. Some of the many things they might do: try to humiliate you or correct you in front of others, make you clean up after another's mess, give you the dirtiest jobs they can, make you work long hours, isolate you from others, steal your ideas and findings, leave you nasty notes, threaten your job and career frequently, try to make you a slave to their wants, have a hissy fit in your face, put their wagging finger in your face, get abusive if they do not get their way, take credit for your ideas or work, give someone else the credit for your ideas or work, slander you to students/interns and fellow workers, reduce your salary, reduce your benefits, take away your workers, take away your work locations, deny use of a computer, deny use of equipment, deny use of a secretary for typing, put a spy in your work crew, refuse your use of comp time, refuse sick time off, subject you to kangaroo court hearings and judgements, make you do things no one else has to do, call you crazy, make fun of you, accuse you of things you did not do, try to make you quit daily, and many, many more things that can torment you, deprive you of sleep at night, make you have bad dreams, make you sick, and cause a weak partner to leave you. You still must show no reaction or anger.
After they have done you some evil, keep records of their evil to use as potential ammo back at them on violating organization handbook, or laws. A record of the actions, sayings, witnesses, etc. of a bully can indicate the truth about a tormenter/bully and may help save your skin later. The daily "memo of record" should be kept on your body during working hours (keep it secure) and in a place away from your home after hours (a bad partner can use it against you during a split, or steal/destroy it if joining forces with sick organization against you). Remember that one of the worse things a sick organization tries to avoid is public exposure and negative publicity, and that is your main potential threat weapon against them.
You must have the threat of exposure available to use against them, but should avoid using exposure unless absolutely necessary. Once you expose them there will be a big fight, and since they have much more power than you in politics, media, and the organization in question, the "fix" is usually in to just get rid of you for any number of reasons they can make up or point to. Also, once you expose them you will have used at least part of your evidence against them and may not have enough big dirt (evidence) left to follow through in a lawsuit, hearing, investigation, etc.
Always give the higher bosses the first shot to try to correct a wrong ....... If they do something to correct the problem then you are ahead, if they do nothing to address a violation of the organization handbook, or some local, state, or federal law then you have MORE ammo you can use against them later. And you must have a good record so they cannot use that against you.
If you have reached your limit of bullying, lying, dirty tricks, and BS, then you have to decide (1) if you are willing to continue to take it (be their slave) and stay at the organization, (2) if you have enough evidence against them for wrongdoing to hold them at bay until you can retire or think of another way out, (3) if you can stand the stress of legal stuff if you try to expose their wrongdoings, or, (4) if it would be best to fold up and leave the sick organization.
If you show a reaction or anger they might try to use that against you in an insubordination charge against you. One must eat a lot of crow and take a lot of BS to survive for long in jobs today in all the many sick organizations around us.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Theory: How Great We Are
Theory: How Great We Are
Since a sick organization does not usually accomplish much, they have to churn out publicity so it looks like they are doing great work for the taxpayer/stockholder dollar. They place major significance to minor findings/discoveries, and rush to get media PR out.
As per any political organization, only their "truth" is submitted to the media. They allow no opposing thought to come from their organization, which might "confuse" the issue, and might even make some of the public think about the issue. They want the public to accept their word as the pure gospel.
Sometimes a "great" leader quits, and, in order to further the BS, and the PR on greatness, writes articles about his buddies and how great they are for the organization. This helps solidify their positions in the organization, is pay-back for their support when he was the leader, and keeps him in the pool of "greatness."
Sometimes they try to make out they are the foundation of the organization, when in fact, they are a brick or less each, and on a side wall. They call themselves "pioneers," when the true pioneers came many years ago and established the organization. They do not acknowledge those that came before, or others there now that are doing things of equal or better significance.
They go around telling all who will listen that they are "world-class" in their work and position. In my opinion, "world-class" is not a status determined by the workers themselves, but by the observations and opinions of those from outside the organization as they judge the work done. In my opinion, those that go around tooting "we are world-class" are NOT world-class.
They refuse to acknowledge others that they do not like that have contributed as much or more than them. They hate to share credit, limelight, spotlight, stage, etc. with those they do not like, so they will conspire to get PR for themselves and diverted away from those not liked.
Their arrogance is obvious and they consider themselves so great they must have the best office, best view, best work area, best PR, best consideration and support, and the best of everything possible because they "deserve it."
If you are classed as a troublemaker. or one of his/her supporters, you will never get proper credit for your efforts or correct publicity for your work. How can YOU be any good?? You're the troublemaker.
Sometimes the BS is so great, and the embellishment so much that it affects those people who must compose and release such PR to the media. For example: One PR person got so disgusted about the false information and highly politicized-embellished publicity the person had to put out to the media about how great the bully tyrants were that the person had to go on tranquilizers, and finally quit.
Some thoughts by Lawler
They give each other "awards" to try to convince others & public on how important they are.
Those that toot their horns the loudest are usually the biggest blowhards ......
Now some are putting out PR hype calling themselves "pioneers" -- BS -- the real pioneers started the joint many years ago.
They will re-write history of the organization to exclude those they do not like and put themselves at the top of the organization's heroes.
"Great" leader of sick organization quits, & thus buries last bit of poo about him/her before exposure, saving some face.
Many are so firmly stuck in believing lies they will not even consider believing the truth.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012
Since a sick organization does not usually accomplish much, they have to churn out publicity so it looks like they are doing great work for the taxpayer/stockholder dollar. They place major significance to minor findings/discoveries, and rush to get media PR out.
As per any political organization, only their "truth" is submitted to the media. They allow no opposing thought to come from their organization, which might "confuse" the issue, and might even make some of the public think about the issue. They want the public to accept their word as the pure gospel.
Sometimes a "great" leader quits, and, in order to further the BS, and the PR on greatness, writes articles about his buddies and how great they are for the organization. This helps solidify their positions in the organization, is pay-back for their support when he was the leader, and keeps him in the pool of "greatness."
Sometimes they try to make out they are the foundation of the organization, when in fact, they are a brick or less each, and on a side wall. They call themselves "pioneers," when the true pioneers came many years ago and established the organization. They do not acknowledge those that came before, or others there now that are doing things of equal or better significance.
They go around telling all who will listen that they are "world-class" in their work and position. In my opinion, "world-class" is not a status determined by the workers themselves, but by the observations and opinions of those from outside the organization as they judge the work done. In my opinion, those that go around tooting "we are world-class" are NOT world-class.
They refuse to acknowledge others that they do not like that have contributed as much or more than them. They hate to share credit, limelight, spotlight, stage, etc. with those they do not like, so they will conspire to get PR for themselves and diverted away from those not liked.
Their arrogance is obvious and they consider themselves so great they must have the best office, best view, best work area, best PR, best consideration and support, and the best of everything possible because they "deserve it."
If you are classed as a troublemaker. or one of his/her supporters, you will never get proper credit for your efforts or correct publicity for your work. How can YOU be any good?? You're the troublemaker.
Sometimes the BS is so great, and the embellishment so much that it affects those people who must compose and release such PR to the media. For example: One PR person got so disgusted about the false information and highly politicized-embellished publicity the person had to put out to the media about how great the bully tyrants were that the person had to go on tranquilizers, and finally quit.
Some thoughts by Lawler
They give each other "awards" to try to convince others & public on how important they are.
Those that toot their horns the loudest are usually the biggest blowhards ......
Now some are putting out PR hype calling themselves "pioneers" -- BS -- the real pioneers started the joint many years ago.
They will re-write history of the organization to exclude those they do not like and put themselves at the top of the organization's heroes.
"Great" leader of sick organization quits, & thus buries last bit of poo about him/her before exposure, saving some face.
Many are so firmly stuck in believing lies they will not even consider believing the truth.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Theory: Sick Organization Leader Quits
Theory: Sick Organization Leader Quits
Leaders of various sick organizations around the world quit all the time for various reasons. Sometimes the quitting comes without warning, or obvious/explained reason, and sometimes the quitting is expected/wanted by many for a good while. In one case, a worker going to the retirement party of the leader of a sick organization said the reason he was going to the party was "to make sure he was leaving."
Some of the reasons for quitting can be tired of the constant BS and turmoil, of always trying to control and handle and get work out of crazy/lazy people, of constantly seeking money/profit to keep organization going, of having to act out a part to the public and politicians, and trying to escape being exposed, to avoid a lawsuit, to beat getting fired, to leave a positive legacy, to avoid a breakdown, etc. In other cases the leader could be forced out by higher bosses because he lost his composure/temper and embarassed the organization and showed he could not control even himself, because he did not follow the leadership directions wanted by higher bosses, because he could not do the job, because products/profits were not enough, etc.
The quitting reasons released/given are varied, and usually do not reflect the true reasons, which are usually hidden to avoid any negative publicity getting out to the public.
Some reasons (true or not) given by a sick organization for a leader of a sick organization quitting can be as follows: accomplished goals, taking on another challenge elsewhere, for personal reasons, for health reasons, going to pursue different things, time for a new direction, returning to teaching, going to retire, going to write, etc. It is rarely noted that a leader was forced out or fired.
The real reasons for quitting/forcing out are generally two: 1. The higher bosses are tired of the leader's mistakes, etc. 2. The leader is tired of what he is doing.
The leader usually wants to quit while still on top, before any scandal/lawsuit involving him/her gets out, and before any decrease in positive publicity/legacy occurs.
Sometimes a temporary leader is put in place until the new leader can be selected. Higher powers do not want much change going on during the time of the temporary leader, so sometimes they get a past leader out of retirement to fill in that does not do much except smile a lot and act happy. Such a past leader is usually known for going down the middle of the road, telling each side to cool it and wait for future changes (which never come), hoping problem will die down, but never really solving the problem. Such a leader is perfect for what they want, no changes.
The sick organization finds a new leader that, surprise - surprise, has many of the same leadership characteristics of the previous leaders. So he/she fits right in with the continuing controlling political operation of the organization. And the sick organization keeps on staying sick ........and operating as before..........
Some of Lawler's thoughts on sick leaders quitting: Even the leader of a sick organization can tire of constantly burying the poo, and quit.
"Great" leader of sick organization quits, & thus buries last bit of poo about him/her before public exposure, saving some face.
When a person either quits or dies, others lie about them on the positive side the most, saying how "Great" they were.
"Great" leader of sick organization quit before the mountain of poo buried him/her & their "great" legacy.
Even "great" leaders of a sick organization can tire of the constant BS they must keep control of & dole out to others.
When you are dealing with humans, crazy humans, and crazier humans the BS never stops.
Once a leader of a sick organization throws a hissy fit, and thus proves he cannot even control himself, the higher bosses know they have a problem and need a new leader.
Even the leader of a sick organization can tire of having more ruthless bosses than him controlling his life.
One leader quitting said "I'm just tired." Apparently response from one who is tired of the constant BS of dealing with crazy/lazy people.
An organization is only as good at that moment as the worse one of their organization getting negative publicity.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Leaders of various sick organizations around the world quit all the time for various reasons. Sometimes the quitting comes without warning, or obvious/explained reason, and sometimes the quitting is expected/wanted by many for a good while. In one case, a worker going to the retirement party of the leader of a sick organization said the reason he was going to the party was "to make sure he was leaving."
Some of the reasons for quitting can be tired of the constant BS and turmoil, of always trying to control and handle and get work out of crazy/lazy people, of constantly seeking money/profit to keep organization going, of having to act out a part to the public and politicians, and trying to escape being exposed, to avoid a lawsuit, to beat getting fired, to leave a positive legacy, to avoid a breakdown, etc. In other cases the leader could be forced out by higher bosses because he lost his composure/temper and embarassed the organization and showed he could not control even himself, because he did not follow the leadership directions wanted by higher bosses, because he could not do the job, because products/profits were not enough, etc.
The quitting reasons released/given are varied, and usually do not reflect the true reasons, which are usually hidden to avoid any negative publicity getting out to the public.
Some reasons (true or not) given by a sick organization for a leader of a sick organization quitting can be as follows: accomplished goals, taking on another challenge elsewhere, for personal reasons, for health reasons, going to pursue different things, time for a new direction, returning to teaching, going to retire, going to write, etc. It is rarely noted that a leader was forced out or fired.
The real reasons for quitting/forcing out are generally two: 1. The higher bosses are tired of the leader's mistakes, etc. 2. The leader is tired of what he is doing.
The leader usually wants to quit while still on top, before any scandal/lawsuit involving him/her gets out, and before any decrease in positive publicity/legacy occurs.
Sometimes a temporary leader is put in place until the new leader can be selected. Higher powers do not want much change going on during the time of the temporary leader, so sometimes they get a past leader out of retirement to fill in that does not do much except smile a lot and act happy. Such a past leader is usually known for going down the middle of the road, telling each side to cool it and wait for future changes (which never come), hoping problem will die down, but never really solving the problem. Such a leader is perfect for what they want, no changes.
The sick organization finds a new leader that, surprise - surprise, has many of the same leadership characteristics of the previous leaders. So he/she fits right in with the continuing controlling political operation of the organization. And the sick organization keeps on staying sick ........and operating as before..........
Some of Lawler's thoughts on sick leaders quitting: Even the leader of a sick organization can tire of constantly burying the poo, and quit.
"Great" leader of sick organization quits, & thus buries last bit of poo about him/her before public exposure, saving some face.
When a person either quits or dies, others lie about them on the positive side the most, saying how "Great" they were.
"Great" leader of sick organization quit before the mountain of poo buried him/her & their "great" legacy.
Even "great" leaders of a sick organization can tire of the constant BS they must keep control of & dole out to others.
When you are dealing with humans, crazy humans, and crazier humans the BS never stops.
Once a leader of a sick organization throws a hissy fit, and thus proves he cannot even control himself, the higher bosses know they have a problem and need a new leader.
Even the leader of a sick organization can tire of having more ruthless bosses than him controlling his life.
One leader quitting said "I'm just tired." Apparently response from one who is tired of the constant BS of dealing with crazy/lazy people.
An organization is only as good at that moment as the worse one of their organization getting negative publicity.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Theory: Right Thing is Rarely Done in a Sick Organization
Theory: Right Thing is Rarely Done in a Sick Organization
Very few organizations do the right thing in dealing with their workers, and thus most can be classed as sick. Workers get abused and taken advantage of in their labor, time, ideas, discoveries, salary, promotion, publicity, etc. The bosses of a sick organization do the things that protect them politically, and keep the organization viable and funded going into the future. Many bully bosses and organizations change employees often, using all sorts of tactics to get rid of those they cannot control or cause them problems, believing that they can always get another body off the street they can train to do what they want done. The bosses keep those who they think they can trust due to their "suck-up" actions, or spying on others, and play favorites with them, letting them get away with stuff others are fired for doing/or not doing. A sick organization is a crazy place.
Do not ever expect any organization to do the right thing unless it is already in, or fits, their agenda. Do not pay close attention to, or believe, the "mission statement" of a sick organization, which is generally an idealized smoke screen to hide the real daily operation in actual practice of the organization.
Most organizations will do the things to protect the organization (and their jobs) and keep the money coming (and thus follow the political master plan to keep the funding). Truth is rarely at the forefront of an organization's agenda. Truth is seldom sought, and rarely found. The main agenda is "Whatever is best for keeping the organization going, no matter what the truth, or cost, or what must be buried."
The name of the game is winning one political position after another, not finding, or telling, the truth, and keeping (and increasing) the money flow.
Many a person has been labelled "a loose cannon" or "troublemaker" for seeking or telling the truth, to their personal horror, and to the horror of the bosses of the sick organization who must many times "spin" a tale to counter the truth told.
One must remember that politics trumps science (truth), sex trumps politics, and money trumps everything. Do not expect the truth unless that is the actual real goal of the organization.
And to the doubters out there, I say, "Dig enough and you will find dirt."
Parting thought on right thing: We live in a wierd world, where people chastize others for not giving a baseball to a crying kid, but think nothing of taking that kid's home, or food, or father, or future away.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012
Very few organizations do the right thing in dealing with their workers, and thus most can be classed as sick. Workers get abused and taken advantage of in their labor, time, ideas, discoveries, salary, promotion, publicity, etc. The bosses of a sick organization do the things that protect them politically, and keep the organization viable and funded going into the future. Many bully bosses and organizations change employees often, using all sorts of tactics to get rid of those they cannot control or cause them problems, believing that they can always get another body off the street they can train to do what they want done. The bosses keep those who they think they can trust due to their "suck-up" actions, or spying on others, and play favorites with them, letting them get away with stuff others are fired for doing/or not doing. A sick organization is a crazy place.
Do not ever expect any organization to do the right thing unless it is already in, or fits, their agenda. Do not pay close attention to, or believe, the "mission statement" of a sick organization, which is generally an idealized smoke screen to hide the real daily operation in actual practice of the organization.
Most organizations will do the things to protect the organization (and their jobs) and keep the money coming (and thus follow the political master plan to keep the funding). Truth is rarely at the forefront of an organization's agenda. Truth is seldom sought, and rarely found. The main agenda is "Whatever is best for keeping the organization going, no matter what the truth, or cost, or what must be buried."
The name of the game is winning one political position after another, not finding, or telling, the truth, and keeping (and increasing) the money flow.
Many a person has been labelled "a loose cannon" or "troublemaker" for seeking or telling the truth, to their personal horror, and to the horror of the bosses of the sick organization who must many times "spin" a tale to counter the truth told.
One must remember that politics trumps science (truth), sex trumps politics, and money trumps everything. Do not expect the truth unless that is the actual real goal of the organization.
And to the doubters out there, I say, "Dig enough and you will find dirt."
Parting thought on right thing: We live in a wierd world, where people chastize others for not giving a baseball to a crying kid, but think nothing of taking that kid's home, or food, or father, or future away.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012
Friday, April 27, 2012
Theory: Silence Leads to Silence
Theory: Silence Leads to Silence
There can be three main ways to try to get a wrong corrected by a sick organization. One, go to the top boss or the governing body of the organization in a quiet way so as not to embarass anyone. Two, go public and see if any public outcry leads to a change. Three, pursue the matter via legal action. None are guaranteed to work. Sometimes, for some people, the best option is to just leave the sick organization, and start over.
A person wronged by a sick organization may request a hearing as per organization handbook, a top boss consideration and ruling, or other direct means, etc., to correct the perceived wrongs. The person may think it best to do his actions quietly, or is told/requested to do so, to not embarass the sick organization (or himself) in the eyes of the public/media. The victim may be trying to do things the right way. The sick organization does not care if one is trying to do the right thing, the major thing that matters to them is the public perception of the place. If one is quiet about his complaints, the sick organization will generally be quiet/not reply about said complaints, and will do as little as possible in your behalf that will still keep you quiet.
So what is an honest person to do against a sick organization and its actions? See previous post on "Theory: Troublemaker Must Decide."
If at all possible you need a memo, paper, picture, video, or audio evidence of wrongdoing against you that can be "discovered" by another, or posted by another (not working at the sick organization), so he /she can raise the cry for justice in your behalf. If you tried to call attention to wrong treatment of you, then you'd most likely get labelled a whiner, trouble-maker, sore loser, disgruntled employee, alarmist, etc., and receive little attention.
You must remember that a sick organization wants to stay the same and operate the same as before. If you request an action that takes more time/work than the sick organization thinks it should give you or if you pursue possible actions not involving the legal system, you will most likely be met with silence and inaction. But, IF they think you might be a loose cannon that could do about anything to advance your cause (you are mad as hell) they then might start to do something, but drag out their actions in response to you to take longer time and/or cause you to give up. One should not accept verbal promises from the sick organization (you will have no proof of what they said)(they will make all sorts of verbal promises intended to placate and quieten you that they have no intention of keeping), but only written agreements or actions that can be verified, seen, and documented/witnessed by others.
The sick organization is not going to:
---admit to any wrongdoing.
---help you in any way that could help you prove their wrongs.
---tell the truth, or take any real action, unless forced to do so by legal actions, or by possible public exposure, or by negative publicity.
---expend any energy/time on your requests/demands unless they are forced to do so by legal actions against them.
---do anything quickly to solve the wrongdoing, but will drag things out as long as possible to wear you down to make you give up.
---give you any praise or acknowledgement of a good job.
---let you receive from them any positive publicity in any media (you have to generate your own positive PR, if you want it, via other channels, means, contacts, etc. And this will make them mad.) They will put out publicity/pictures of others around your work.
One example of an organization caught: A university seems to be more likely to correct a problem IF one or more of its people is caught in the public eye in a wrong act -- otherwise the university does/says little or nothing. Thus, if its students or staff screw up enough in the public eye so that negative publicity starts to appear in the media, then the top boss will quickly do something to punish the wrongdoers so there is the public perception of a "great" university, that acts quickly to correct wrongs. Nothing could be further from the truth. They only act quickly IF CAUGHT. If not caught in their wrongdoing, nothing is said and all is buried as quietly and quickly as possible, as per a bunch of busy cats burying their poo.
Generally, if you operate in silence you will receive silence and inaction back from the sick organization. You must decide if you want to undergo the stress of public exposure or a legal action that may possibly lead (no guarantee) to some action in correcting the wrong.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
There can be three main ways to try to get a wrong corrected by a sick organization. One, go to the top boss or the governing body of the organization in a quiet way so as not to embarass anyone. Two, go public and see if any public outcry leads to a change. Three, pursue the matter via legal action. None are guaranteed to work. Sometimes, for some people, the best option is to just leave the sick organization, and start over.
A person wronged by a sick organization may request a hearing as per organization handbook, a top boss consideration and ruling, or other direct means, etc., to correct the perceived wrongs. The person may think it best to do his actions quietly, or is told/requested to do so, to not embarass the sick organization (or himself) in the eyes of the public/media. The victim may be trying to do things the right way. The sick organization does not care if one is trying to do the right thing, the major thing that matters to them is the public perception of the place. If one is quiet about his complaints, the sick organization will generally be quiet/not reply about said complaints, and will do as little as possible in your behalf that will still keep you quiet.
So what is an honest person to do against a sick organization and its actions? See previous post on "Theory: Troublemaker Must Decide."
If at all possible you need a memo, paper, picture, video, or audio evidence of wrongdoing against you that can be "discovered" by another, or posted by another (not working at the sick organization), so he /she can raise the cry for justice in your behalf. If you tried to call attention to wrong treatment of you, then you'd most likely get labelled a whiner, trouble-maker, sore loser, disgruntled employee, alarmist, etc., and receive little attention.
You must remember that a sick organization wants to stay the same and operate the same as before. If you request an action that takes more time/work than the sick organization thinks it should give you or if you pursue possible actions not involving the legal system, you will most likely be met with silence and inaction. But, IF they think you might be a loose cannon that could do about anything to advance your cause (you are mad as hell) they then might start to do something, but drag out their actions in response to you to take longer time and/or cause you to give up. One should not accept verbal promises from the sick organization (you will have no proof of what they said)(they will make all sorts of verbal promises intended to placate and quieten you that they have no intention of keeping), but only written agreements or actions that can be verified, seen, and documented/witnessed by others.
The sick organization is not going to:
---admit to any wrongdoing.
---help you in any way that could help you prove their wrongs.
---tell the truth, or take any real action, unless forced to do so by legal actions, or by possible public exposure, or by negative publicity.
---expend any energy/time on your requests/demands unless they are forced to do so by legal actions against them.
---do anything quickly to solve the wrongdoing, but will drag things out as long as possible to wear you down to make you give up.
---give you any praise or acknowledgement of a good job.
---let you receive from them any positive publicity in any media (you have to generate your own positive PR, if you want it, via other channels, means, contacts, etc. And this will make them mad.) They will put out publicity/pictures of others around your work.
One example of an organization caught: A university seems to be more likely to correct a problem IF one or more of its people is caught in the public eye in a wrong act -- otherwise the university does/says little or nothing. Thus, if its students or staff screw up enough in the public eye so that negative publicity starts to appear in the media, then the top boss will quickly do something to punish the wrongdoers so there is the public perception of a "great" university, that acts quickly to correct wrongs. Nothing could be further from the truth. They only act quickly IF CAUGHT. If not caught in their wrongdoing, nothing is said and all is buried as quietly and quickly as possible, as per a bunch of busy cats burying their poo.
Generally, if you operate in silence you will receive silence and inaction back from the sick organization. You must decide if you want to undergo the stress of public exposure or a legal action that may possibly lead (no guarantee) to some action in correcting the wrong.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Monday, April 16, 2012
Theory: Denial in a Sick Organization
Theory: Denial in a Sick Organization
The offending sick organization will never admit any wrongdoing so there is no record of verbal or written acknowledgement of violation of any law or company/agency handbook that the victim could possibly use in a lawsuit against the offending organization.
The victim can expect no real sympathy, no act of caring, no help or advice, etc., from the sick organization. There is generally no acknowledgement, or reply, to emails, letters, etc., unless there is a legal/court document requiring a response.
The sick organization will never apologize, or say they are sorry, because that could be taken as an admission of guilt in the matter. And that could result in a lawsuit. And they will never admit you did a good job, because (their position) they would never treat anyone badly if they did a good job.
If you are the victim, expect to be mostly all alone. No one will want to help you and also become a victim unless he/she is one of high moral character and is willing to fight with you.
It does not matter if you are right in the matter and are representing the truth. The sick organization is in the fight to win, at all costs. Truth does not matter to a sick organization and could actually harm the political position of the sick organization. And truth does not always prevail in our court system.
The victim will be labelled a disgruntled employee, a malcontent, a troublemaker, a bad scientist, or worse. Slanders will be circulated to discredit the victim. Former partners of the victim will be recruited to help bring him down.
Since the sick organization can never admit any wrongdoing, it can never realize or acknowledge it is itself a sick organization, so it continues being a sick organization on and on ........
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph. D., (C) 2012
The offending sick organization will never admit any wrongdoing so there is no record of verbal or written acknowledgement of violation of any law or company/agency handbook that the victim could possibly use in a lawsuit against the offending organization.
The victim can expect no real sympathy, no act of caring, no help or advice, etc., from the sick organization. There is generally no acknowledgement, or reply, to emails, letters, etc., unless there is a legal/court document requiring a response.
The sick organization will never apologize, or say they are sorry, because that could be taken as an admission of guilt in the matter. And that could result in a lawsuit. And they will never admit you did a good job, because (their position) they would never treat anyone badly if they did a good job.
If you are the victim, expect to be mostly all alone. No one will want to help you and also become a victim unless he/she is one of high moral character and is willing to fight with you.
It does not matter if you are right in the matter and are representing the truth. The sick organization is in the fight to win, at all costs. Truth does not matter to a sick organization and could actually harm the political position of the sick organization. And truth does not always prevail in our court system.
The victim will be labelled a disgruntled employee, a malcontent, a troublemaker, a bad scientist, or worse. Slanders will be circulated to discredit the victim. Former partners of the victim will be recruited to help bring him down.
Since the sick organization can never admit any wrongdoing, it can never realize or acknowledge it is itself a sick organization, so it continues being a sick organization on and on ........
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph. D., (C) 2012
Sunday, April 15, 2012
Theory: Signs of a Bad, or Corrupt, "Scientist" (by Adrian R. Lawler)
Theory: Signs of a Bad, or Corrupt, "Scientist" (by Adrian R. Lawler)
The definitions below are mine, and are based on my observations of many years. Both bad, or corrupt, "scientists" can cause great harm (Ex: pollution of an area, cause death of native organisms, cause illness/injury to humans, give wrong information to the public, etc.), because they can lead to false answers rather than the truth. Such "scientists" commit a fraud on society and the corrupt ones should be prosecuted for their fraud, in my opinion. The bad "scientists" may have committed fraud by accident, but the corrupt "scientists" committed fraud on purpose.
A real scientist is constantly questioning, observing, and seeking the truth, without regard to politics, power, money, sex, or any other outside influence. In my opinion, Dr. Gordon Gunter, who hired me in l971 as a new Ph.D., and was a major teacher to me in life and science, represented what it means to be a real scientist.
A bad scientist is one who does things out of ignorance, stupidity, or carelessness which may affect research in progress or the conclusions of research.
A very few examples:
--A person used roach spray in an office area next to culture area for organisms used in experiments, knowing that the air flow in the building went from office through culture area to exhaust. The airborne pesticide spray settled in many tanks, killing a large number of brood stock, thereby causing a long delay in experiments.
--A person hooked up air supply lines to live organisms used in experiments without an oil filter after the air compressor (and before the live organisms). Oil from the compressor was injected into water holding the organisms, adding an unwanted toxin, and affecting the experiment.
--A supervisor moved heaters in a fish culture lab closer to the tanks without checking with person in charge of fish, and without checking on heating done on the tanks a little time later. Many brood stock were cooked, and important experiments were delayed. Supervisor then blamed the fish worker (and not himself), saying the fish room was not properly insulated, and made workers insulate the floor while others went off to a party.
--A person demanded pesticide treatment of aquatic plants to rid them of dragonfly and damselfly larvae so they would not eat a few small fish, but thought nothing of using fish, exposed to the pesticide in the plants, in a toxicity test.
--A person demanded fish in a tank be fed a lot of food, over protests of the fish feeder, and the next morning valuable fish were dead from overeating.
Sometimes a bad "scientist" makes a bad call because he/she tries to make decisions in fields where they have little knowledge, or experience, and they misuse their power.
A corrupt scientist is one who changes on purpose (for malice/revenge, for political reasons, for money, for power, etc.) the outcome of a "scientific" investigation by making changes in: the thing to be analysed (Ex: dilution of original toxic sample), or sampling design (Ex: change location of a station), or experimental techniques, or analysis, etc., which will give him the answer he, or someone else wants, which will avoid the true reality, but, unless found out, will present the picture of "good science" and be accepted as such by other scientists and the public.
Do not assume that one who touts "good science" is actually practicing "good science." The person could be trying to convince you that "good science" is happening rather than politics.
A very few examples:
--A person moved a sampling station away from bayou (runoff) area on beach where there were high coliform readings to a safe station upcurrent and far enough removed from orginial station so that a bad coliform count was not gotten. (Outcome they wanted of no/low coliform counts resulted in tourism for the beach area and apparently outweighed any of their concerns for public heath.)
--A person apparently diluted toxic effluent enough so that it passed a toxicity test.
--A person disregarded a large number of tags that had either been rejected/expelled by tagged fish, or the tags came from fish that died after rough tagging, and washed up on shore, and acted like that his techniques were sound.
--A person doctored the data/analysis/conclusion, or "cooked the books" to get the answer desired.
--A person designed his sampling times and locations so that he got the answer wanted. Ex: No longer sampling after rains when coliform counts can go higher.
A bad or corrupt "scientist" may also be a bully scientist. Such people want/need the ideas and works of others to advance their image/position/power/publication list/etc. See a prior post on bully scientists.
Politicians sometimes pick corrupt "scientists" as described above to be their government or university agency/department leaders, etc., because they know this type of people will give them the answer they want. Politicians and administrators do not usually want an honest person or real scientist because they consider such people to be "loose cannons" that cannot be controlled (such people may tell the truth). They do not want people telling the truth in oppostion to the political answer they are presenting, especially if the people have a good reputations as scientists and high credibility.
It is a hell-of-a-world we live in ... where some people can go to jail for not telling the truth to a government official or in a court proceeding, and others can lose their jobs/careers/families for telling the truth when their bosses/politicians do not want them to do so.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
The definitions below are mine, and are based on my observations of many years. Both bad, or corrupt, "scientists" can cause great harm (Ex: pollution of an area, cause death of native organisms, cause illness/injury to humans, give wrong information to the public, etc.), because they can lead to false answers rather than the truth. Such "scientists" commit a fraud on society and the corrupt ones should be prosecuted for their fraud, in my opinion. The bad "scientists" may have committed fraud by accident, but the corrupt "scientists" committed fraud on purpose.
A real scientist is constantly questioning, observing, and seeking the truth, without regard to politics, power, money, sex, or any other outside influence. In my opinion, Dr. Gordon Gunter, who hired me in l971 as a new Ph.D., and was a major teacher to me in life and science, represented what it means to be a real scientist.
A bad scientist is one who does things out of ignorance, stupidity, or carelessness which may affect research in progress or the conclusions of research.
A very few examples:
--A person used roach spray in an office area next to culture area for organisms used in experiments, knowing that the air flow in the building went from office through culture area to exhaust. The airborne pesticide spray settled in many tanks, killing a large number of brood stock, thereby causing a long delay in experiments.
--A person hooked up air supply lines to live organisms used in experiments without an oil filter after the air compressor (and before the live organisms). Oil from the compressor was injected into water holding the organisms, adding an unwanted toxin, and affecting the experiment.
--A supervisor moved heaters in a fish culture lab closer to the tanks without checking with person in charge of fish, and without checking on heating done on the tanks a little time later. Many brood stock were cooked, and important experiments were delayed. Supervisor then blamed the fish worker (and not himself), saying the fish room was not properly insulated, and made workers insulate the floor while others went off to a party.
--A person demanded pesticide treatment of aquatic plants to rid them of dragonfly and damselfly larvae so they would not eat a few small fish, but thought nothing of using fish, exposed to the pesticide in the plants, in a toxicity test.
--A person demanded fish in a tank be fed a lot of food, over protests of the fish feeder, and the next morning valuable fish were dead from overeating.
Sometimes a bad "scientist" makes a bad call because he/she tries to make decisions in fields where they have little knowledge, or experience, and they misuse their power.
A corrupt scientist is one who changes on purpose (for malice/revenge, for political reasons, for money, for power, etc.) the outcome of a "scientific" investigation by making changes in: the thing to be analysed (Ex: dilution of original toxic sample), or sampling design (Ex: change location of a station), or experimental techniques, or analysis, etc., which will give him the answer he, or someone else wants, which will avoid the true reality, but, unless found out, will present the picture of "good science" and be accepted as such by other scientists and the public.
Do not assume that one who touts "good science" is actually practicing "good science." The person could be trying to convince you that "good science" is happening rather than politics.
A very few examples:
--A person moved a sampling station away from bayou (runoff) area on beach where there were high coliform readings to a safe station upcurrent and far enough removed from orginial station so that a bad coliform count was not gotten. (Outcome they wanted of no/low coliform counts resulted in tourism for the beach area and apparently outweighed any of their concerns for public heath.)
--A person apparently diluted toxic effluent enough so that it passed a toxicity test.
--A person disregarded a large number of tags that had either been rejected/expelled by tagged fish, or the tags came from fish that died after rough tagging, and washed up on shore, and acted like that his techniques were sound.
--A person doctored the data/analysis/conclusion, or "cooked the books" to get the answer desired.
--A person designed his sampling times and locations so that he got the answer wanted. Ex: No longer sampling after rains when coliform counts can go higher.
A bad or corrupt "scientist" may also be a bully scientist. Such people want/need the ideas and works of others to advance their image/position/power/publication list/etc. See a prior post on bully scientists.
Politicians sometimes pick corrupt "scientists" as described above to be their government or university agency/department leaders, etc., because they know this type of people will give them the answer they want. Politicians and administrators do not usually want an honest person or real scientist because they consider such people to be "loose cannons" that cannot be controlled (such people may tell the truth). They do not want people telling the truth in oppostion to the political answer they are presenting, especially if the people have a good reputations as scientists and high credibility.
It is a hell-of-a-world we live in ... where some people can go to jail for not telling the truth to a government official or in a court proceeding, and others can lose their jobs/careers/families for telling the truth when their bosses/politicians do not want them to do so.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Monday, April 2, 2012
Theory: Why Bully Bosses Are Bad News (by Adrian R. Lawler)
Theory: Why Bully Bosses Are Bad News (by Adrian R. Lawler)
A sick organization usually has one or more bully bosses, who help/cause organization to be sick in its actions to others. Such toxic people usually have political connections or some other way to operate without getting themselves replaced, like nepotism, money, bringing money into the organization, or the organization may use them to help purge the organization of people they do not want. Many can be recognized by their "hissy fits," shouting, cursing, wagging their finger in your face, spitting in your face when they rant, etc. when they do not get their way initially. They operate by doing anything they want to anybody at anytime, and think nothing of it. They have an advantage over many other people because they know people of character will try to do the right thing, so they know the moves most will make beforehand, but they will do anything they want.
If you get on their "hit" list, for whatever, or no, reason, you can possibly kiss your job (and maybe career) goodbye. The reason can be you know too much, are too smart (and show somebody up), are too dumb, will not play their way, make them jealous, make them afraid of you (loose cannon), embarass them, do not bow down to their "greatness," etc. In a bully's eyes, everyone is for their use and advancement.
The only way to survive (but usually under constant harassment) is to have more ammo (proof of illegal actions) on the sick organization/bully boss than the bully boss has on you. And this is a dangerous game to play; you cannot openingly threaten them with exposure, but have to let it be known through the grapevine, or your actions, you are writing down or have evidence secured at a place away from your home or job. When they make a move on you, you have to make a move that is smarter, and further reaching, and difficult to trace directly back to you (but they "know" it is you), than their move so they decide it is best to keep you partially under their thumb rather than cut you loose to possibly tell all.
Unfortunately, as with about every profession out there, there can be crooked, bad, unqualified, and/or bully bosses. If they are politically appointed, they can have any, or all, the previous traits. The present posting is about bully bosses. If the bully bosses are "researchers/scientists," then they can be a very bad blot on the professions of those supposed to be seeking the truth. The bullies prey on interns, students, and underlings to further advance their report/publication list, their reputation, their awards/grants, or their pay, etc. They also sabotage or remove their underlings who get more space than they have, or become more famous than them, or are recognized as being smarter than them, etc.
They literally hold the future of their underlings in their bully hands, controlling their careers and pay scale while stealing ideas, inventions, data, pictures, new discoveries, etc. from their underlings. They demand and get authorship on their students' and underlings' reports and publications to further their own "production" list of reports/publications, which they use in applying for awards/grants, seeking promotions and raises, and impressing others on how great, or how smart, they are. (If a boss contributes a good amount of meaningful information to a publication they can rightly seek more than just an acknowledgement on the publication. Bullies demand authorship, sometimes with little or no contribution to publication.)
Bully bosses can break a young worker by killing the desire to question or seek the truth, by denying a higher professional degree, by withholding or writing a bad letter of recommendation, and various other ways, etc. Although they can sometimes be considered a "great researcher/scientist" by those who have no idea of what is going on, or do not care what such people do to others, those that know them or have experienced their actions think they are horrid people, and usually do not associate with them unless forced to in order to keep their own job or maintain their position (stay in favor) in the organization.
It is not unusual for dishonest bully bosses to steal ideas/findings and inventions from their students or workers because they hold the power of controlling the future (higher degrees or jobs) of the students or workers. (The victim gets things stolen from him, and usually does nothing in order to get his degree or keep his job.) Some "researchers/scientists" have become famous by taking ideas, findings, inventions, pictures, etc. from their students and workers and either claiming as their own or putting their name on their underlings' reports/publications and then later getting honored for "achievement" or being "prolific." This action might go back to the olden times school of thought where anything done by an apprentice belonged to the master. And since those with many reports/publications usually get more grants, more salary, and more "awards," the present researcher/scientific reward system continually (but maybe unintentionally) tempts some bosses to steal from their underlings (so they will have many reports/publications, etc.), leading to a more and more (as seen by me and others) dishonest "researcher/scientific" community (Those that would steal from others probably would not be against "cooking the books," and reporting false results to obtain the experimental answer they want, the organization wants, or some politician wants, etc.).
When the leaders of an organization condone the actions of a bully, cater to the wants/demands of a bully, refuse to punish a bully for lies and slanders, and essentially let a bully do anything, etc., then that organization becomes a "joke" in the eyes of the bully's victims, and others who know about the bully. The organization is known as sick.
Keep a daily "Memo of Record" (if you suspect a bully boss or co-worker, etc., is trying to get you, or your ideas/findings) of anything you think important so, if needed, you can use it in a legal battle. Record description of incident, subject, words said, location, time, date, and witnesses in the log. Keep daily entries to the log on your body while at work, and have the total log properly secured elsewhere offsite, and not at home. Tell no one, including spouse, about the log or where it is hidden. Leave directions to log location in safety deposit box.
A person who hurts no one, tries to do his job, and trusts too much is an easy victim for a bully who wants to steal time, ideas, discoveries, credit, etc. for his own use, especially if the bully controls the job status, or higher degree status, of the victim. It is really horrible to have a bully in control of one's time, job, career, higher degree, salary, future, etc., etc. A worker, intern, or student should think long and hard before he accepts a position with a bully boss.
Some theory examples of bully bosses:
--- one who got underling taken away from a big project he co-founded that was getting more attention than the boss was.
--- one who connived with an enemy to get worker demoted and salary cut.
--- one who delighted in violating job preformance evaluation directions and giving bad job reviews to workers to keep them on "their toes."
--- one who put major report of underling in closet and "forgot about it" until almost past the deadline.
--- one who violated many laws, rules, and policies and then delighted in telling complaining victims to "hire a good attorney."
--- one who delighted in slandering those not liked and using them as "teaching/intimidation" tools to keep others in line.
--- one who delighted in holding "fixed" "kangaroo court" hearings to justify illegal/immoral actions against those not liked.
--- one who delighted in leaving nasty notes for the workers.
--- one who worked people very hard without allowing leave time, etc. for a year and then fired them so there would be a constant turnover of fresh eager bodies and so there would be no raises given.
A bully boss will intimidate (under threat to job or professional degree) and bully people into:
---working overtime and holidays for free.
---working through break or lunch time.
---putting his (boss) name on ideas, projects, reports, inventions.
---giving up rights (to him) to any new discoveries.
---not claiming sick, vacation, or comp time.
---training his buddy who is destined to either be your new boss or your replacement and you can do nothing about it.
---spying on others for him.
---taking blame for, or covering up, his mistakes.
---letting him take credit for your work, ideas, inventions, discoveries, etc.
---covering up for him if he leaves work early.
---using private resources in support of job/work for bully boss.
Some really delight in being a bully boss, exercising their absolute control over the professional futures of their underlings. Horrible in many ways!!
Some thoughts: Bully scientists are essentially nothings. One cannot be a seeker of the truth and be a BULLY at the same time. He's just a bully.
One cannot say he's a scientist seeking the truth IF he lives/acts like a BULLY never seeking the truth before bullying/slandering.
Google "bully bosses" to get a wide range of information about such people.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
A sick organization usually has one or more bully bosses, who help/cause organization to be sick in its actions to others. Such toxic people usually have political connections or some other way to operate without getting themselves replaced, like nepotism, money, bringing money into the organization, or the organization may use them to help purge the organization of people they do not want. Many can be recognized by their "hissy fits," shouting, cursing, wagging their finger in your face, spitting in your face when they rant, etc. when they do not get their way initially. They operate by doing anything they want to anybody at anytime, and think nothing of it. They have an advantage over many other people because they know people of character will try to do the right thing, so they know the moves most will make beforehand, but they will do anything they want.
If you get on their "hit" list, for whatever, or no, reason, you can possibly kiss your job (and maybe career) goodbye. The reason can be you know too much, are too smart (and show somebody up), are too dumb, will not play their way, make them jealous, make them afraid of you (loose cannon), embarass them, do not bow down to their "greatness," etc. In a bully's eyes, everyone is for their use and advancement.
The only way to survive (but usually under constant harassment) is to have more ammo (proof of illegal actions) on the sick organization/bully boss than the bully boss has on you. And this is a dangerous game to play; you cannot openingly threaten them with exposure, but have to let it be known through the grapevine, or your actions, you are writing down or have evidence secured at a place away from your home or job. When they make a move on you, you have to make a move that is smarter, and further reaching, and difficult to trace directly back to you (but they "know" it is you), than their move so they decide it is best to keep you partially under their thumb rather than cut you loose to possibly tell all.
Unfortunately, as with about every profession out there, there can be crooked, bad, unqualified, and/or bully bosses. If they are politically appointed, they can have any, or all, the previous traits. The present posting is about bully bosses. If the bully bosses are "researchers/scientists," then they can be a very bad blot on the professions of those supposed to be seeking the truth. The bullies prey on interns, students, and underlings to further advance their report/publication list, their reputation, their awards/grants, or their pay, etc. They also sabotage or remove their underlings who get more space than they have, or become more famous than them, or are recognized as being smarter than them, etc.
They literally hold the future of their underlings in their bully hands, controlling their careers and pay scale while stealing ideas, inventions, data, pictures, new discoveries, etc. from their underlings. They demand and get authorship on their students' and underlings' reports and publications to further their own "production" list of reports/publications, which they use in applying for awards/grants, seeking promotions and raises, and impressing others on how great, or how smart, they are. (If a boss contributes a good amount of meaningful information to a publication they can rightly seek more than just an acknowledgement on the publication. Bullies demand authorship, sometimes with little or no contribution to publication.)
Bully bosses can break a young worker by killing the desire to question or seek the truth, by denying a higher professional degree, by withholding or writing a bad letter of recommendation, and various other ways, etc. Although they can sometimes be considered a "great researcher/scientist" by those who have no idea of what is going on, or do not care what such people do to others, those that know them or have experienced their actions think they are horrid people, and usually do not associate with them unless forced to in order to keep their own job or maintain their position (stay in favor) in the organization.
It is not unusual for dishonest bully bosses to steal ideas/findings and inventions from their students or workers because they hold the power of controlling the future (higher degrees or jobs) of the students or workers. (The victim gets things stolen from him, and usually does nothing in order to get his degree or keep his job.) Some "researchers/scientists" have become famous by taking ideas, findings, inventions, pictures, etc. from their students and workers and either claiming as their own or putting their name on their underlings' reports/publications and then later getting honored for "achievement" or being "prolific." This action might go back to the olden times school of thought where anything done by an apprentice belonged to the master. And since those with many reports/publications usually get more grants, more salary, and more "awards," the present researcher/scientific reward system continually (but maybe unintentionally) tempts some bosses to steal from their underlings (so they will have many reports/publications, etc.), leading to a more and more (as seen by me and others) dishonest "researcher/scientific" community (Those that would steal from others probably would not be against "cooking the books," and reporting false results to obtain the experimental answer they want, the organization wants, or some politician wants, etc.).
When the leaders of an organization condone the actions of a bully, cater to the wants/demands of a bully, refuse to punish a bully for lies and slanders, and essentially let a bully do anything, etc., then that organization becomes a "joke" in the eyes of the bully's victims, and others who know about the bully. The organization is known as sick.
Keep a daily "Memo of Record" (if you suspect a bully boss or co-worker, etc., is trying to get you, or your ideas/findings) of anything you think important so, if needed, you can use it in a legal battle. Record description of incident, subject, words said, location, time, date, and witnesses in the log. Keep daily entries to the log on your body while at work, and have the total log properly secured elsewhere offsite, and not at home. Tell no one, including spouse, about the log or where it is hidden. Leave directions to log location in safety deposit box.
A person who hurts no one, tries to do his job, and trusts too much is an easy victim for a bully who wants to steal time, ideas, discoveries, credit, etc. for his own use, especially if the bully controls the job status, or higher degree status, of the victim. It is really horrible to have a bully in control of one's time, job, career, higher degree, salary, future, etc., etc. A worker, intern, or student should think long and hard before he accepts a position with a bully boss.
Some theory examples of bully bosses:
--- one who got underling taken away from a big project he co-founded that was getting more attention than the boss was.
--- one who connived with an enemy to get worker demoted and salary cut.
--- one who delighted in violating job preformance evaluation directions and giving bad job reviews to workers to keep them on "their toes."
--- one who put major report of underling in closet and "forgot about it" until almost past the deadline.
--- one who violated many laws, rules, and policies and then delighted in telling complaining victims to "hire a good attorney."
--- one who delighted in slandering those not liked and using them as "teaching/intimidation" tools to keep others in line.
--- one who delighted in holding "fixed" "kangaroo court" hearings to justify illegal/immoral actions against those not liked.
--- one who delighted in leaving nasty notes for the workers.
--- one who worked people very hard without allowing leave time, etc. for a year and then fired them so there would be a constant turnover of fresh eager bodies and so there would be no raises given.
A bully boss will intimidate (under threat to job or professional degree) and bully people into:
---working overtime and holidays for free.
---working through break or lunch time.
---putting his (boss) name on ideas, projects, reports, inventions.
---giving up rights (to him) to any new discoveries.
---not claiming sick, vacation, or comp time.
---training his buddy who is destined to either be your new boss or your replacement and you can do nothing about it.
---spying on others for him.
---taking blame for, or covering up, his mistakes.
---letting him take credit for your work, ideas, inventions, discoveries, etc.
---covering up for him if he leaves work early.
---using private resources in support of job/work for bully boss.
Some really delight in being a bully boss, exercising their absolute control over the professional futures of their underlings. Horrible in many ways!!
Some thoughts: Bully scientists are essentially nothings. One cannot be a seeker of the truth and be a BULLY at the same time. He's just a bully.
One cannot say he's a scientist seeking the truth IF he lives/acts like a BULLY never seeking the truth before bullying/slandering.
Google "bully bosses" to get a wide range of information about such people.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2012 --
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)