Unintentional voyuerism....its the best

While I was off work for our Europe holiday, some of my work was sent to our other office in another city. Unfortunately even in this day and age, some work must still be done on paper, and cannot all be done electronically.

Personally I think the solution is a touch screen, a stylus, and being able to scribble your notes directly onto the screen.

Oh and a system that is 100% failsafe so you never have to worry about backing up on paper.

But I digress.

So when I got back from holiday the girl that had been doing some of this work, shipped all the paperwork back to me again, the day before she left to go and get married.

I was sorting through it all, as you do, really just getting ready to file it since there was nothing I needed to DO with it. I'm not sure how I came to notice it, but one of the documents was particularly thick, whereas they're normally only 4 sheets of paper, this would have been a stack about 5mm. Noticeably different.

Obviously she has the same environmental guilt as I do in an office environment (pun?) and she'd recycled some paper to print this document.

Normally if I'm printing out personal shit though, I either keep it for the reason I printed it, or I shred it, so no one else can see the silly stuff I print.

Not so in this case. This particular document was ALL her personal stuff, all 5mm of it. Some, was a business that her and her husband must be starting/running, as it was business cards in her new married name, with DIRECTOR on them. (Either that or she's secretly running a multi-national company on the side)

Aside from the fact I think its a bit wanky to list your title as "Director" when potentially the company only "employs" two people, she'd demoted her new husband to Assistant! HAhahaha

There was also a resignation letter for a second job she's had as a Vet Nurse (which begs the question if she's qualified to do that she must be on bloody good money with my company because this job is no peach)

The really strange thing however, was she'd printed out the run sheet for her upcoming wedding, and their vows and poems and what to say when they exchanged rings!

It was fascinating reading, and I couldn't help but devour it all whilst I sat! It was bizarre!

I do feel a bit bad, I mean essentially thats a pretty personal thing for someone like me to be reading, someone who doesn't really know her at all. But HELLO! How could you then recycle that paper into WORK stuff!!!!! The whole point of printing these work docs out is to archive them for the requisite 7 years!

~~~~~~~~~~

In other work news, we're being sued by another girl, with another bogus claim, and the timing is ridiculous. Clearly she was waiting for the first girls case to settle to see how much she could go for before bringing her suit, the whole thing just stinks.

That asshole in your rearview mirror might just be me

I'm quite an aggressive driver. I know this, but don't try to tell me, its embarrassing enough knowing it myself without others pointing it out.

Its not that I'm road raging all the time, but I have a tendency to be impatient, especially when I'm running late, which is often. I have been known to beep my horn on occasion, but I draw the line at screaming at someone out my window. That kind of shit gets you arrested.
I have been known to be the person zooming down the lane that is about to run out, but only if I'm really pressed for time so I don't feel guilty about doing it. When I'm not late, I make the effort to sit in the other lanes (I always sit in the lane that won't have people merge into it at all), trying not to fume, and I tell myself "they might have a sick relative they're rushing to get to".

I always wonder if other people on the road are aware of "the rest of us".

An example from this morning. The majority of my journey is on a four lane road (2 each way). There are technically kerbside lanes also but they're full of parked cars, so useless for driving on.

Today there were two cars driving almost parallel with each other, leaving no room to pass either of them, frustrating the hell out of literally every car behind them!

And I'm positive they didn't know each other, different ages, different nationalities, I think they were honestly oblivious to the rest of the traffic trying to co-exist with them.

It drives me nuts!

I kind of hate it too, as I recognise I'm doing it. Almost every morning for the last three weeks I have thought about this post, starting it in my head. Think about that.

Almost every morning for the last three weeks, at some point in my journey to work, I have thought, "I am an aggressive driver". That's so depressing. All that wasted energy.

For a while I drove the back way to and from work, not because it was quicker, it isn't. But because its pretty, the view is nicer, and everyone is just ambling along. Its all one lane, so no passing, but that helps me chill out a bit more. And if I'm not hooning around, and someone is sitting on my tail, I think to myself, "this isn't the faster way, if you wanted to hoon you should have gone the main road" so I don't feel guilty about sitting on 55 km/h (still technically speeding in a 50 zone anyway!)

My most shameful driving incident to date, was a few weeks ago. I had just left work, didn't have a good day, so already on the wrong foot.

I've done a diagram to explain it better. I'm in the Pink car (of course)

So I was approaching the traffic lights, and just as they went green, the car in front of me (blue) stopped to allow a car from the side street (purple)to ease into the traffic. I was immediately pissed off as in my experience, whenever that happens, both the cars in front of me will make it through the lights, but I won't*.

And that's exactly what happened, I only just missed the green light.

So what did I do?

What every rational person does of course, I leaned on my horn, repeatedly, to express my frustration as the car drove through the lights and off into the sunset. I was that frustrated I could have cried (and nearly did). I may have kind of screamed at myself. (With all the windows up)

It was absolutely ridiculous!

I felt like an utter twit after I'd calmed down, the light changed again and I drove away, the rest of the journey incident free. To exacerbate matters, M was away on business for the night so where I would normally come home, have a vent and a hug, and felt ten times better, there was just our empty house and my ridiculous temper tantrum to keep me company.

*(not without running a RED light, which for all my law breaking, I don't do, even when very annoyed)

When does a Receptionist start being a PA?

Having mixed feelings on this one.

Basic run down : From Jezebel

Tamara Klopfenstein was hired to be a receptionist/data entry clerk.
After working for a few weeks, her (male) bosses asked her to get their coffee for them. She declined, and her manager e-mailed her, saying:

"This is not open for debate. Please don’t make an easy task a big deal."

Klopfenstein felt that getting coffee "reinforced outdated gender stereotypes," so the next day, when she was asked to get coffee again, she sent an e-mail that read:

"I don't expect to serve and wait on you by making and serving you coffee every day."

Nine minutes later, she was fired. Klopfenstein promptly sued the company for sexual discrimination and sexual harassment.
The judge ruled: "The act of getting coffee is not, by itself, a gender-specific act," and dismissed the case. But Klopfenstein's attorneys argue that "Some tasks are inherently more offensive to women."

Slightly more background, from Classical Values adds

In her suit, she claims that the office environment was tinged with sexism from the very beginning when a vice president of the company made a note after her initial interview that she "looks nice, dresses well."

After just a few weeks on the job, Klopfenstein claims that a male co-worker invited her to lunch in an e-mail that said

"I feel bad you have been working here for a couple of weeks and we haven't gotten to know each other yet."

I will add here that these two points are part of her argument for a "hostile work environment" but :
A> There is nothing wrong with noting that presentation is good, when you are front-of-house. When I was present for interviews for a Reception co-worker we saw some shocking outfits on the candidates, and I recommended against them partly on that criteria. As it was, the girl we hired still occasionally dressed inappropriately for a receptionist (reasons to ignore fashion trends when dressing for work!!!), but she was well presented at interview.
B> He may have been asking her for a date (she feels he was), but all she needs to do is politely decline. Unless her boss TOLD that guy to ask her out, her employer has little to do with it. If he isn't asking her on a date, there is nothing untoward about a co-worker asking her if she wants to have lunch, to help her settle in.

Now there's a bit of debate going on at both those sites, and over at Ask A Manager, where I first encountered this story. I'm kind of torn. Some commentators are saying Klopfenstein is being too precious, a bit spoilt brat.
While I agree with the following points which can be argued

1. She was only six weeks into her position. She should be a bit more flexible with her duties.
2. Not everything you do in your job is actually IN your job description, that doesn't mean you don't do it.
3. The receptionist can be a bit of a shit kicker.
4. If her second email (above) was verbatim, and that's ALL it said, her email manner definitely needs work. (And lunch-co-worker's email manner possibly needs work also if he hasn't conveyed his platonic message well enough)

However part of me still thinks she did the right thing. Her job description was Receptionist/Data Entry. I don't think she has to assume "personal/executive assistant" in there. (I include Executive as it appears she was asked to get more than one person [assuming higher management] their coffee). There is debate about the difference in whether she would have had to make or simply fetch the coffee. If its making it, is it plunger/carafe/drip filter/instant. I personally think its irrelevant how difficult the task is, BUT I do think its pertinent, if is IS fetching as to whether she was already going to get coffee.
I am the one that gets coffee every morning in my office. There are exactly 4 employees in my office however. Only three of us drink coffee, and I usually only have to buy 2 coffees, and obviously one is for me. I have coffee every morning. So it makes exactly NO difference to me how many I buy whilst I'm there. I don't pay for them all, I collect money before I go, its a complete non-issue.
I have noticed however, that if I don't go right away, no one is leaping to say "I'll get the coffee this morning". Its not a big deal though.

I used to work for a much larger company as the receptionist. After doing things I hated, that I didn't think I should have had to do, for the entire time I was there, I can see why, six weeks into a position, she would hold her ground and say she didn't want to be the coffee-getter. I don't think its unreasonable to try to set a precedent that there's things you don't want to do, because if you can foresee that its something you're never going to warm to as a task, and you think you can get out of it, then I say go for it. Its always harder to say "I don't want to do X Task" if you've been doing it for a while already.
I was lucky, I had a boss that had been managing Reception long enough to recognise the tasks we should and shouldn't have been doing, and shielded us from being someone else's shit-kickers. (Because we were HER shit-kickers of course)

So on one hand I say, good on her, she shouldn't be doing that crap. But on the other hand, I can see how this would easily fall into the scope of her job. But I also struggle to imagine them asking a guy to do it in the same position. I also can't help but think that this makes her a PA, not just a Receptionist. Theoretically there should be enough Reception work for her to be too busy to be running off to get/make coffee.

At my old job, the CEO and CFO shared a PA (technically making her an EA in my book) and one of her duties was to make coffee for them both. Firstly there was a drip filter which was for their coffee ONLY. Under pain of death, you were not allowed to drink that coffee. Later the company bought an automatic Espresso machine for general staff use, and she made it using that.
However if she wasn't in, they made their own. If she was not in the office, I could be asked to make it, and I did (because by hell you jumped if they asked) but only if the phone wasn't unattended, and it was usually only if they had a guest. BUT If there was no one else to answer the phone, that was my primary duty.

Its a grey area really, but I can't blame her for trying to make it black and white.

So, over to you, what do you think?

A round of Margarita's, barkeep!

Well the verdict on these, because I know you've all been waiting with bated breath.
I didn't mind them. The "Margarita" ones (right) weren't as nice as a real Margarita, like I'd had in a restaurant mere days before I drank these. But it was passable.

Especially passable (can something BE especially passable?) as a key factor in the taste of a real cocktail margarita is the salt on the rim, kind of hard to salt encrust a premix bottle, so they've somehow mixed it into the flavour of the drink. Pleasant, drinkable, I could envisage myself spending a night on them without gagging by the third bottle (I'm talking to YOU vile blue and orange WKD things).
Sierra Tequila, for those of you you aren't tequila aficionado's is the tequila that you see with the little red hat on the cap. Interestingly when I looked them up, they actually have Gold and Silver tequilas, whereas I've only really seen the Silver, and thought they didn't do gold. Personally I prefer gold to silver, which is why I usually stick to Jose Cuervo for my tequila consumption.

Anyway the "Tropic" flavour was quite nice also.

Pet Hate # 65238:
giving things stupid names that don't actually help with defining the flavour/scent/colour of something.

"Tropic" flavour is pineapple, orange & mango juices (complete with floaty pulp stuff for authenticity), with Tequila and Triple Sec. Very pleasant, and as there was such potential for the margarita flavour to be like poison and undrinkable, I bought a single of it, and a four-pack of the "Tropic". We'll see how I go with more than one, they were equally pleasant tasting, the margarita probably more so though.

Note I only had one of each drink, as I was the Designated Driver for the evening, which brings me to the second half of my evening, my first Random Breath Test!
I find it amazing I made it to 24 before having one!
I'd only had one each of the tequila things, and at 1.1 standard drinks (Re) + a glass of red wine, Thankfully I decided not to imbibe any further at the pub(s) after dinner as we'd reached that part of the evening where we could leave anytime, and I didn't want to sit there waiting for twenty minutes for the sake of a bit of vodka.
So by the time I saw the flashing lights I was actually totally confident I would pass. I was actually more concerned about possibly running down a policeman on the way into the lineup.
Interestingly, every person of driving ability I have mentioned this to, without exception, has remarked that regardless of guilt, even if they've had nothing to drink that night, they get anxious when waved in for a RBT. I couldn't count on two hands the number of times I've been waved on that I haven't almost melted in relief, so maybe that's why I wasn't worried at all, even though I had had drinks earlier in the evening.
One of the worst parts was M was passed out in the passenger seat, which probably didn't look very good.
btw- does anyone know why they ask you if your address is current on your licence? As he waited for the reading, he casually asked if I was still at "XXX Mulberry Lane" which kind of confused me. "no, I've actually moved since then, do you have a label I might use?"

To come: My account of my only other brush with the boys in blue.

In yet another ridiculous reflection of how litigous our society has become, two parents have gone to court over where their daughter's 7th Birthday will be held. Dad wants a Maccas party with friends and family, including his new 7 month-old baby, Mum wants a party somewhere else with no family.

The parents have been before the court "a number of times" since they split up early last year.

The judge ruled the father could be with his daughter between 3pm and 5pm on her birthday at the local childcare centre - alone. She said the girl should meet her half-sister sooner rather than later but in an orderly and sensitive way and not at a birthday party.

Michael Taussig QC said if somebody came to him asking to run a case in court about a birthday, he would tell them to see a psychiatrist.
"Unfortunately the Family Court has to deal with dysfunctional people constantly and this is just one example," he said. His suggestion would have been two birthday parties - one with mum, the other with dad.

You'd think they could get their act together enough to work out something as basic as this without it tying up valuable court time. And they only split last year, what hope have they got if they've already been to court "a number of times".

How sad is it that this is what this little girl will remember for this birthday. Me? When I turned 7 I wore a yellow dress and played "Drop the Hanky" in the backyard.

Doctor, Doctor you have to help me out! Certainly, which way did you come in?

I bet this doctor is regretting his actions, now that its gone to court....

A SELF-CONFESSED footy fanatic is appealing a landmark ruling that upheld his sacking for taking the day off work to watch AFL legend Kevin Sheedy coach his last game for Essendon.
Mr Anderson, 27, obtained a medical certificate after telling a doctor, Eric Salter, that he wanted to see Sheedy coach his last game - against the West Coast Eagles - in Perth on September 1 last year.
He was warned by Crown not to take sick leave to attend the game, but flew to Perth, later insisting he had been suffering "emotional distress" at the thought of missing the match.
Mr Anderson told The Australian last night that he was "very disappointed" by the decision and had filed an appeal. "I wouldn't have taken the day off (through sick leave) had Dr Salter not written the certificate and Dr Salter and I still think he wrote the certificate on valid grounds. The court didn't see it that way ... "it's not as if I went to the doctor and told him I had diarrhoea and then went off to the footy. I was upfront with my situation and I still got done. I lost my job."

I mean come on. This story was run on news.com.au under Australia's sickie tradition "under threat". Of course it should be under threat! It shouldn't exist! Ever since Bob Hawke famously said 'Any boss who sacks a worker for not turning up today is a bum.’ there has been almost an enshrined "right" to chuck a sickie.

Lets look at this turn of phrase for a moment.
To "chuck a sickie" - take the day off sick from work when you're perfectly healthy
Other phrases with "chuck"? To chuck a tantrum, to chuck a spaz or a wobbly. Yep, its all above board guys....

What an idiot this guy is to think that he could have this overturned going to court. Sick leave is there for a reason. Annual Leave is there for such frivolities as deciding you don't want to go to work on this particular day, you want to go to the footy instead. Can you imagine what sort of horrible precedent would have been set if the magistrate HAD overturned the termination and re-instated him?

When I was at school, there was a girl in the year below us, Nicki, that seemed to have lots of private tutoring type sessions with the Head English teacher, Mr Sinclair. There were of course whispers about something sordid going on, but no one really beleived any of it at the time, we were just high school students trying to spice up our day.
After we left school however it was revealed (on the NEWS) that they were in fact having an affair, that did start when we were watching them through the windows (ok that bit sounds creepy, but I have distinct memories of walking past classrooms with side windows and noticing them, time and time again).
This may seem like a total deviation from the above story, but go with me-

SO they ended up on A Current Affair etc, there was quite a furore at the time, I think they may have even scored a cover of SMH-which I bet she never wanted THAT to be how she became front page news.
Now I don't care much whether they got together or not, young love/old love/new love/illicit love, each to their own. One outcome of this however was that Mr Sinclair was removed from the school during our final year in a shroud of secrecy. Again with the rumours about Nicki, hotly contested by some of the girls in my year who had him as a teacher and worshipped the ground he walked on. He was quite a good teacher.
As students we asked other teachers what had happened and we were told he'd taken "Administrative leave" and was working at the Dept of Education HQ "for a while". All this while he had 2-3 Year 12 English classes he was taking, not exactly ideal conditions for your teacher to be yanked out of class.
However an extraordinary precedent was set in the aftermath of this by the Workers Compensation Commission:

...the recent decision of the Workers Compensation Commission awarding Sinclair generous benefits, you would think he was the victim.

It makes for surreal reading. The compensation arbitrator, Bruce McManamey, found that Sinclair suffered a "psychological injury" because of the way the Department of Education handled the allegation that he had developed a "close personal relationship with a student".

McManamey awarded him $28,000 in back pay to the date of his sacking last August plus $317.20 a week from January 21 this year "to date and continuing".

McManamey complained that it(Edu Dept) had "not sought to tender any of the material which formed the basis of the investigation". He said it was a difficult investigation because Nicki would not co-operate "and in fact denied the allegations".

McManamey said Sinclair was treated unreasonably because he was told only that he had "developed a close personal relationship with a student", which Sinclair found "quite confusing". "There are many relationships between teachers and students which could be described as close and personal which nonetheless are not improper conduct," McManamey wrote.

The decision to transfer Sinclair to non-teaching duties during the investigation was also "not reasonable". He "was placed in the position of not being able to assist Ms Shackle in what was for her a personally very difficult time".

A large part of the evidence tendered were emails between the lovers, which I won't share as they turn my stomach to think of Mr Sinclair as writing them. However Sinclair denied they were written by him, they have no signature and it is not an email address associated with him.

I don't think I'm alone in thinking its patently ridiculous for this to occur.

The affair has since ended, with Nicki gaining a new boyfriend and going overseas for a spell. Sinclair hasn't seen a penny of the money since as its still wrapped up in appeals, and he's not allowed to teach ever again.

I heard a rumour his wife might take him back, I don't necessarily think that would be a bad idea.

ooh hopping mad!!!!!

What are the point, I ask you, of School Zones if no one bloody well slows down anyway?
Including, the POLICE.
I drive through three school zones on my way to work now, and this morning followed a police car through all three. The first was fairly good traffic, all obeying the rules and the police car was nestled in amongst us all. The second and third were absolutely ridiculous. The police car paid no heed whatsoever to the school zones and these are those ones with the flashing lights on the signs at appropriate times. The police car zomed through the school zone, sitting directly behind a car who also didn't bother slowing down.
What is the blooming point of being a law abiding citizen when the enforcers A) don't bother themselves {which is no surprise to anyway really} and B) don'y bother pulling up anyone else for the offence.