Harassment in the office
SingleSweet
My boss is really a nasty person. During his stay with us, about 10
people were left because of various reasons. I had an issue with him
three years ago. A Indian staff complained me of not talking Indian
with her in the workplace, and he always get Indian customers to me
and asked whether or not I spoke Indian or not. That's about 1 or 2
customer every day i worked there, really annoying. I have denied and
denied that I don't speak Indian, but he kept getting people to me,
looks like he wanted to prove I was wrong in the first place until I
broke down and confess. There were no rules in this country where you
are liable for not speaking your native language to your native
colleagues, besides, the the dialects that my colleague speak is not
the same as mine. I don't know where the justification came from.
I was responsible for lost property of the company. Any lost property
has to be dealt with by ringing the customer. That is a trivial
matter, but somehow my boss escalate that into big customer issues. I
have people deliberately put things on the box, like court attendance
notice, water bill, tax rebate receipt and that the customer won't
respond with my call. i asked the manager and he said just post them
to the customer. I am not sure whether documents of that importance
should be posted with standard mail. So I ask the manager of my
manager by email to see whether any procedure should be followed in
that sense. Then he caught me up one day and told me that I had big
communication problems with him, and that the blame is all on my part
and that I should not complain him ....blah blah blah, and he forced
me in signing the appraisal form that I had communication problem. I
refused to accept it, he had another meeting with me and told me that
my objective this year is to say hello and tell about how I was during
my weekend.... He also says i did not say to my desk partner when I
left the desk, which I insisted that I did. He said he was going to
send me an email to instruct me all about it, but he was not willing
to tell me the nature of that email, or whether I am into the
disciplinary procedure. I feel so upset.
My colleagues are all afraid of him. In one shift, I was found my work
on computer being wiped off completely, and my personal belongings
were deliberately soaked with water and that I was asked to follow
what my team leader said which I knew it was wrong. The manager then
next day asked why I followed that stupid wrong instructions...I felt
so upset at my boss's nasty tactics.
Can you tell me what I should do?
Thanks
richard
Sounds like this rather common for Indian bosses.
Seems to me this same thing was posted a year or so ago.
Tell your damn ignorant boss that if he wants to speak in his native
tongue, then he should move back to India.
As an American citizen, it is necessary that you know English enough to
pass the citizenship test.
Then remind him that there are laws in the state and at the federal level
to which he has to answer and could wind up in jail for being such an
asshole.
In one sentence, you sound like someone who is trying to imitate another
person from a foreign country. Then in others, your words are to well
chosen to make me believe you are not a native US person who is well versed
in the English language.
"You English yes?"
"Yes I am."
"Who is your floor? Good yes?"
An intelligent person can play the role of a moron, but a moron can never
play the role of an intelligent person.
SingleSweet
Firstly, my boss is not an indian, he is american, but he insisted
that my indian coleague is right to complain me about not speaking
indian with him.
Other than that
I don't quite understand the last 2 paragraphs of what you are
saying....did I miss something?
Jordon
> SingleSweet wrote:
>
>> What do you do with situation like this?
>> My boss is really a nasty person.
> enough to pass the citizenship test.
McGyver
As for the boss problem, I believe I have a solution for you - you need
a new boss. How to achieve that is easy to say and harder to do - find
a new employer. I can't help with that, but I can tell you that there is
nothing you can do about having a nasty, ignorant, amature boss except
quit. There are plenty of bosses out there who are nice, smart,
educated, reasonable, sensible and fair. But they are not required by
law to be any of those things. The same is true for their employees who
are assigned to be supervisors. Sorry.
I don't understand any of your statements about being responsible for
lost property and ringing the customer, so I can't tell whether anything
in that story is illegal conduct. It might be that there is some
illegal conduct by the company and if so, you have several things you
can do. But I won't go into any of that unless you tell me about the
illegal conduct. I don't even understand what your job is, much less
whether you are being required to do something illegal.
The other parts of your post don't state or even suggest any conduct by
the boss that is illegal or which gives you any right to do anything
about the silly, nasty boss. Getting a new job is the best answer.
This answer must not be relied on as legal advice for the reasons posted
here: http://mcgyverdisclaimer.blogspot.com . And I am not your attorney.
McGyver
richard
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2011 02:42:46 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>>Sounds like this rather common for Indian bosses.
>>Seems to me this same thing was posted a year or so ago.
>>
>>Tell your damn ignorant boss that if he wants to speak in his native
>>tongue, then he should move back to India.
>>As an American citizen, it is necessary that you know English enough to
>>pass the citizenship test.
>
WTF?
Nowhere did the OP state his location.
Post was made through google groups. Lcoation not given.
The poster did state his boss was an American.
How do you figure the poster is in Australia?
richard
It is not a website operated by attorneys.
Anyone has the LEGAL right to say anything they choose, right or wrong.
Are you a legally licensed attorney in the poster's jurisdiction and
therefore offer LEGAL advice?
What makes you so perfect and correct? Nobody knows your real name and
whether or not you are a licensed practicing attorney.
Caveat Emptor.
You get what you pay for.
richard
country. Trying to imitate how they might communicate. Then you forget
your little charade and sound too educated in English.
So what exactly is it you're bitching about?
Is it your boss who is demanding you speak Indian? Or is it your co-worker?
Either way, that's just to damned bad for either of them.
They speak the language of the country they are in, or they can go home.
I'm sure as hell not gonna bend over backwards to make THEIR life easier
because they are the visitor.
richard
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2011 15:26:26 +0000 (UTC), Jordon
> <seatt...@REMOVE-THISmail.com> wrote:
>
>>WTF?!?!?!
>
> If Ignorance is bliss, bullis is the most bliss full person on earth.
> He's even claimed he was in the same place as a famous RV'er back when
> he took a trip in 1969. Only problem is, that famous RV'er died in
> 1962.
>
> He's tried to backpedal out of his statement, but failed.
Now you say "same place". Before you were saying I had met the man.
backdpedal!
nos...@isp.com
> McGyver wrote:
>
> * * *.
>> First thing to do: Never listen to Richard.
>>
>> This answer must not be relied on as legal advice for the reasons
>> posted here: http://mcgyverdisclaimer.blogspot.com . And I am
>> not your attorney.
>>
>> McGyver
>
> practicing attorney.
construed as a defense, not that he needs any defense, and however
otherwise small a matter this may be, but: I and, I believe, any
number of other persons who have read his postings know what you refer
to as the "real name" of the person who posts to law related
newsgroups under the "McGyver" screen name and that he is an attorney
licensed to practice and experienced in the practice of law in his
state.
> Caveat Emptor.
> You get what you pay for.
"McGyver" postings' concluding cautionary.
Regrettably, because you do not include any such cautionary in your
postings to law related newsgroups, a naive and otherwise uninformed
and unknowing reader may be harmed if s/he acts in reliance on your
almost always law incorrect and also too often outright misleading law
related musings.
richard
If a person is harmed in any way because he followed up on a post from
usenet, is an ignorant fool.
The only person he can blame for HIS actions is himself.
richard
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2011 22:09:57 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>>WTF?
>
> WTF indeed, you idiot.
>>Nowhere did the OP state his location.
>
>>Post was made through google groups. Lcoation not given.
>
>
> IP Is based in Brisbane, AU.
>>The poster did state his boss was an American.
>
>>How do you figure the poster is in Australia?
>
> are liable for not speaking your native language to your native
> colleagues, besides, the the dialects that my colleague speak is not
> the same as mine. "
>
> "Any lost property has to be dealt with by ringing the customer."
>
> "I have people deliberately put things on the box, like court
> attendance notice, water bill, tax rebate receipt"
>
> terms.
> "i asked the manager and he said just post them to the customer."
>
>
> How many more clues do you need that this poster isn't in America,
> bullis?
>
> No, I don't expect a response from you, as usual.
An IP address don't mean jack squat.
If that IP belongs to a usenet news service, and they accept accounts from
other countries, then there goes your theory the poster is from australia.
Then again, there are such things as proxies.
Not to mention remailers.
An IP address resolves to the server, not the user's, location.
Kent Wills
>On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 06:55:11 -0700, Evan Platt wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 9 Sep 2011 02:42:46 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Sounds like this rather common for Indian bosses.
>>>Seems to me this same thing was posted a year or so ago.
>>>
>>>Tell your damn ignorant boss that if he wants to speak in his native
>>>tongue, then he should move back to India.
>>>As an American citizen, it is necessary that you know English enough to
>>>pass the citizenship test.
>>
>> ROTFLOL, you idiot, the OP is in Australia.
>
>WTF?
>Nowhere did the OP state his location.
The headers show Brisbane, Australia.
>Post was made through google groups. Lcoation not given.
>The poster did state his boss was an American.
And?
People can, and do, emigrate to Australia.
>
>How do you figure the poster is in Australia?
The headers.
--
"I could have been ambassador to Moscow by now. Maybe even Private
Secretary. Instead, I'm watching a dinosaur trash my office..."
Kent Wills
Not if one is posting via Google.
>and they accept accounts from
>other countries, then there goes your theory the poster is from australia.
>
>Then again, there are such things as proxies.
Which is possible.
>Not to mention remailers.
Which can't be used with Google.
>
>An IP address resolves to the server, not the user's, location.
In most cases, the server used is close to the physical location
of the user. Close enough that while the exact location may not be
known, the location will be close.
--
2,000 mockingbirds: two kilomockingbirds
richard
In most cases yes. However, it depends on how the information is registered
with ICANN that counts. For instance, my verizon IP might show me being in
Pennsylvania when I'm actually in Phoenix Az.
There is no no known assignment of IP's based upon server locations.
The IP's are assigned to the country, then to the major hosts within those
countries.
If I wanted to, I could post through google groups using my server.
The IP location would show St. Louis, Mo. Even though I'm a few hundred
miles away.
Google doesn't give a shit how you post through it. Just sign up with a
valid email addy and post away.
richard
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 01:51:27 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com>
> wrote:
>
>>An IP address don't mean jack squat.
>>If that IP belongs to a usenet news service, and they accept accounts from
>>other countries, then there goes your theory the poster is from australia.
>
> On google groups, the IP belongs to the poster, not the news service.
>
>>Then again, there are such things as proxies.
>>Not to mention remailers.
>>
>>An IP address resolves to the server, not the user's, location.
>
> Uhh wrong as usual, bullis.
>
> Just for once admit you were wrong.
70.147.108.98
This is my current IP. Please find my current actual physical address from
this information.
richard
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 12:15:28 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com>
> wrote:
>
>>70.147.108.98
>>
>>This is my current IP. Please find my current actual physical address from
>>this information.
>
> You are in the United States of America.
>
> Just admit you were wrong.
IOW, you can't obtain the physcial address of a person's precise location
through the IP even though you stated you could.
If it were that easy, cops wouldn't need a search warrant to obtain that
information from an ISP now would they?
richard
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:18:19 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com>
> wrote:
>
>>IOW, you can't obtain the physcial address of a person's precise location
>>through the IP even though you stated you could.
>
>
> I never stated I could pinpoint a persons precise location. Country?
> Yes. Location? No.
>>If it were that easy, cops wouldn't need a search warrant to obtain that
>>information from an ISP now would they?
>
>
> I gave numerous evidence the OP is in Australia, you're just too
> clueless to realize it.
Backpedal.
The IP may be from Australia. The person may not be.
From an earlier post you made:
No, his headers did.
>Post was made through google groups. Lcoation not given.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.100.217.27
IP Is based in Brisbane, AU.
Do it. Or shut the fuck up.
Kent Wills
>On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 09:31:54 -0700, Evan Platt wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 12:15:28 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>70.147.108.98
>>>
>>>This is my current IP. Please find my current actual physical address from
>>>this information.
>>
>> You are in the United States of America.
>>
>> Just admit you were wrong.
>
>IOW, you can't obtain the physcial address of a person's precise location
>through the IP even though you stated you could.
each post in this thread and I can't recall his making such a claim.
You issued him a challenge to do so, but that's not the same as
his making the claim that he could.
>If it were that easy, cops wouldn't need a search warrant to obtain that
>information from an ISP now would they?
likely to be the suspect's physical location. Odds are they would
already know that.
They would be seeking the logs of the person's activities.
--
Death: Weight doesn't come into it. My steed has carried armies. My
steed has carried cities. Yea, he hath carried all things in their due
time. But he's not going to carry you three.
War: Why not?
Death: It's a matter of the look of the thing.
War: It's going to look pretty good, then, isn't it, the One Horseman
and Three Pedestrians of the Apocalypse.
(from Sourcery, by Terry Pratchett)
Kent Wills
>>Post was made through google groups. Lcoation not given.
>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.100.217.27
>
>IP Is based in Brisbane, AU.
>
>
>You claimed you could identify a person's home address by the IP.
When did Evan make this claim?
Hint: He didn't.
>Do it. Or shut the fuck up.
Since Evan never claimed he could identify a person's home
address, you have only managed to prove yourself wrong. Again.
--
Sanza speme vivemo in disio.
richard
> At one time, not so long ago, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 09:31:54 -0700, Evan Platt wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 12:15:28 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>70.147.108.98
>>>>
>>>>This is my current IP. Please find my current actual physical address from
>>>>this information.
>>>
>>> You are in the United States of America.
>>>
>>> Just admit you were wrong.
>>
>>IOW, you can't obtain the physcial address of a person's precise location
>>through the IP even though you stated you could.
>
> When did Evan present such a claim? I'm fairly certain I've read
> each post in this thread and I can't recall his making such a claim.
> You issued him a challenge to do so, but that's not the same as
> his making the claim that he could.
>
>>If it were that easy, cops wouldn't need a search warrant to obtain that
>>information from an ISP now would they?
>
> If law enforcement is seeking information from the ISP, it's not
> likely to be the suspect's physical location. Odds are they would
> already know that.
> They would be seeking the logs of the person's activities.
IP will instantly give them the user name and physical address?
Only in Hollywood.
ISP's are not required to keep logs. The only logs they do keep is data
usage.
Kent Wills
>On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:31:50 -0500, Kent Wills wrote:
>
>> At one time, not so long ago, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 09:31:54 -0700, Evan Platt wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 12:15:28 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>70.147.108.98
>>>>>
>>>>>This is my current IP. Please find my current actual physical address from
>>>>>this information.
>>>>
>>>> You are in the United States of America.
>>>>
>>>> Just admit you were wrong.
>>>
>>>IOW, you can't obtain the physcial address of a person's precise location
>>>through the IP even though you stated you could.
>>
>> When did Evan present such a claim? I'm fairly certain I've read
>> each post in this thread and I can't recall his making such a claim.
>> You issued him a challenge to do so, but that's not the same as
>> his making the claim that he could.
>>
>>>If it were that easy, cops wouldn't need a search warrant to obtain that
>>>information from an ISP now would they?
>>
>> If law enforcement is seeking information from the ISP, it's not
>> likely to be the suspect's physical location. Odds are they would
>> already know that.
>> They would be seeking the logs of the person's activities.
>
>Let me guess, you watch NCIS and CSI
I've never seen a single episode of either show.
>and believe their BS that knowing an
>IP will instantly give them the user name and physical address?
>Only in Hollywood.
>ISP's are not required to keep logs. The only logs they do keep is data
>usage.
scrubbing them on any regular basis.
This is how the FBI is able to track pedophiles. If your claim
were accurate, they would only know that person A was
uploading/downloading a lot, but would have no idea what was being
sent/received.
Since ISPs do keep logs, the FBI can find out what is being sent
and received.
It's clear you don't know how ISPs function, Richard.
--
Always follow your dream!
Unless it's the one where you're at work in your underwear during a
fire drill.