Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Egan_BW]

The typical adaptation cycle is to ignore a problem until it shows up on their reports, complain at workers that the reports aren't clean and hand out discipline until 3/4 of the workforce quits in frustration, then promote whoever is left among the remaining 1/4 and tell them to fix whatever caused that to happen.

Why bother telling them to fix it? I mean, the 3/4ths already left, and the problem was obviously their fault. Problem solved! And it was all because of your hard work, so you should take a vacation till the lazy bastards among the 1/4th come to you with a totally separate problem to the one that you successfully solved.

[Starver]

What's new is trucks are now legally required to be equipped with digital meters that log driving times.

Mild surprise, there.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachograph#In_the_EU

Until I remembered how averse to suffering the tyranny of guaranteed annual vacations, public healthcare and other diabolical regulations the 'Merkin population is...

[SalmonGod]

What's new is trucks are now legally required to be equipped with digital meters that log driving times.

Mild surprise, there.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachograph#In_the_EU

Until I remembered how averse to suffering the tyranny of guaranteed annual vacations, public healthcare and other diabolical regulations the 'Merkin population is...

More like the pressure to compete here is so goddamn strong that people will literally drive themselves to the point of near death to ensure their value to employers.  Shit rolls downhill, and truckers are at the very bottom.  Production schedulers hire forwarders, who hire transport brokers, who put out bounties taken up by dispatchers at hotshot trucking companies like XPO, and dead last is the guy who climbs in his truck and actually physically moves the stuff.  That production planner tells the forwarder those auto parts need to get from LAX to El Paso overnight, or the assembly line shuts down and costs millions of dollars - and then threatens to pass on those costs if promises made by clueless salespeople aren't met.  That threat moves right on down the chain to that poor trucker.  Anybody along the way says no to the verbal abuse, and that gets reported straight to their boss.  Which would be fine if there were solidarity, but instead our workplace culture is death cult-like.  Everybody wants to say no, but anyone who does gets quickly made an example of.  So everyone says yes, knowing that they too will be alone if they ever reach their breaking point and rebel.

The sort of talk you're referring to is just cognitive dissonance.

[Starver]

We've been seeing a lot of banking/payment mechanism failures in the UK recently. It's news enough if it's a (whole lotta independent) generic Tech Fail sorta thing. I'm beginning to think that some of them, at least, are actually malicious meddlings.

(Though they say never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.)

[SalmonGod]

(Though they say never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.)

I've always thought that this saying is extremely convenient for those truly guilty of malice who want to hide behind plausible deniability.

[IcyTea31]

(Though they say never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.)

I've always thought that this saying is extremely convenient for those truly guilty of malice who want to hide behind plausible deniability.

Better a false negative than a false positive; I'd rather see a guilty man run free than an innocent man behind bars.

[Tack]

They’re guilty of incompetence though.

[Egan_BW]

If that's a crime then we'd better get around to executing all humanity, then.

[MrRoboto75]

If that's a crime then we'd better get around to executing all humanity, then.

Its treason, then.

[Kagus]

If that's a crime then we'd better get around to executing all humanity, then.

Its treason, then.

A criminal missed-your-mind.

[bloop_bleep]

(Though they say never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.)

I've always thought that this saying is extremely convenient for those truly guilty of malice who want to hide behind plausible deniability.

Better a false negative than a false positive; I'd rather see a guilty man run free than an innocent man behind bars.

Especially since if an innocent man goes behind bars the guilty man runs free anyway.

[Starver]

The rain it raineth on the just
And also on the unjust fella;
But chiefly on the just, because
The unjust hath the just’s umbrella.

[SalmonGod]

(Though they say never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.)

I've always thought that this saying is extremely convenient for those truly guilty of malice who want to hide behind plausible deniability.

Better a false negative than a false positive; I'd rather see a guilty man run free than an innocent man behind bars.

At this point in my life, I don't 100% agree.

For people in positions of authority, this sentiment should be reversed.  The higher the authority, the more people are put at greater risk as the price for offering that benefit of the doubt.  Otherwise, positions of power are easily abusable, and all the more attractive to those who would want to abuse them.  Letting anything an authority figure does go if it can possibly be explained as incompetence makes us all easy victims to malice.

[IcyTea31]

"Innocent until proven otherwise" is an important pillar of any justice system. Important things should be investigated to find if incompetence or malice truly was the cause (and if it was incompetence, how to idiotproof the system), but until then, nobody can be held responsible.

Besides, if an authority figure uses incompetence as an excuse, honestly or not, is that not reason enough to replace them? In a position of trust, an incompetent person can be as dangerous as a malicious one.

[SalmonGod]

Besides, if an authority figure uses incompetence as an excuse, honestly or not, is that not reason enough to replace them? In a position of trust, an incompetent person can be as dangerous as a malicious one.

Authority figures don't themselves use it as an excuse, but I hear it brought up all the time when discussing the actions of politicians.