Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 3/8/2006 8:29:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/8/2006 8:32:20 AM EDT by fxntime]
Work this morning and we had a meeting about hazmat and ORM-D proceedures and such. After it was over they handed out a Packet with our names on them and told us it was a CONFIDENTIAL survey on how we rate the company and supervision. I glanced at it and noticed a tracking number [letters actually] that corrosponded to the tracking number on the "CONFIDENTIAL" survey inside. Typical BS psychological type questions interspaced amongst the "feel about the boss" ones. I handed it back blank and told my boss'es boss I was embarressed to work for a company that thought I was so stupid that I could not notice that everyone had a different tracking number and that the survey was anything but "confidential". Told him if I had a problem with my boss or him I would tell him to his face. I then walked out and went to work.

So, since it's anything but confidential and was not mandatory [but recommended] and since I consider them to have blatently lied to me as such about the confedentiality of it can they put anything derogatory in my file? I don't really care and I consider anyone that filled it out to be both foolish and a sheep but I can't stand liar's and consider it to be unethical to claim it to be confidential when it certainly is not.

No wonder so many workers anymore could give a shit less about a company they work for when they pull this crap.

Wonder if a lawyer could find this of interest just to be a prick about it. Some of the questions/answers were not something I would answer if I knew my boss would read it.

My Dad always said, never write down how you actually feel about 99% of what goes on at your workplace. I believe him.

After I called BS, [in front of everyone, I'm not very PC] I told my boss it's no wonder there are trust issues here, when they pull this.

Sorry Company, you don't own my ass and never will!!

So, would you have filled it our or told them to piss off? Or just lied thru your teeth?
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:32:49 AM EDT
way to go! next thing you know they are going to search your vehicle in the parking lot for weapons
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:34:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:35:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Napoleon_Tanerite:
way to go! next thing you know they are going to search your vehicle in the parking lot for weapons



I have enough tools I carry for work that most ANYTHING could be a weapon if I was so inclined. I'm not tho, no workplace is worth that much.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:35:35 AM EDT
good catch, fight the good fight!
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:36:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/8/2006 8:37:38 AM EDT by deej86]
I would have told them to piss off.

Good show fxntime! Nice job!
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:36:21 AM EDT
There is nothing confidential in business.

Yes, it is quite likely that somehow your answers (if truthful and unflattering) would have come back to haunt you.

I say this from experience.

They were pretty stupid with the give away on the numbers.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:39:34 AM EDT

Your ASSUMPTION that they were deliberately lying to you, and intended to match names to surveys, is not necesarily correct.

Don't get me wrong - it MAY be correct, but it doesn't have to be. Depending on the type (and purpose) of the survey. I sometimes collect data that is CONFIDENTIAL, but I NEED to have the names of people, so that they (as cases in my data file) can be matched to other information that is necessary for my analysis - like demographics, test scores, etc - that I have in other databases, by name.

So I'll sometimes collect data where I ask people to identify themselve, so that they can be "matched" with the correct data, and as soon as the match takes place in my data file, I erase their names. In such a way, the data ARE completely confidental, and no names are associated with any data or results, but the individual identification is necessary as a step in the correct coding of the data.

I'm just saying that is what MAY be going on in your case, and not some nefarious attempt to deceive and trick you. If so, they should have explained it better - but you should perhaps not have jumped to conclusions either.

In my experience, if you are going to stand up and accuse people of being dishonest, you better be 100% SURE that they are actually dishonest. I cannot tell if that is the case in your scenario.

Just feedback on my part - not taking sides or attacking you.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:43:08 AM EDT
Ahh Grasshopper. You need to learn how to play the deep game. The company's purpose in such a survey is to learn potentially damaging information about you. Your goal, however, is to put your best face forward. I would have ignored the fact that I knew it was not truly confidential, and submitted answers that made me look good. You lost a perfect opportunity for a disinformation campaign to your advantage.

Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:44:42 AM EDT
I'm pissed just hearing about it.

Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:45:43 AM EDT
I understand your anger, but if you knew it was tracked, fill in what they want to hear. be a team player, by facing your boss it put a mental note that you are not. I hope it works out for you.. unemployment sucks.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:54:08 AM EDT
Never trust the confidentiality of any thing. We had consultants come in at my last job and interview us. Everything we said was supposed to be confidential. Well someone snaked a copy of the consultants report to the owners and in that report was every negative thing said about the company and management and who said it. I was smart enough to not say anything stupid but others were not. In a few months those who bitched the most were gone. I left on my own about 6 months later after I found a new job. I was not interested in working for people that play like that, plus there was a host of other issues that made me want to get out.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 1:13:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/8/2006 1:27:05 PM EDT by fxntime]

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
Your ASSUMPTION that they were deliberately lying to you, and intended to match names to surveys, is not necesarily correct.

Don't get me wrong - it MAY be correct, but it doesn't have to be. Depending on the type (and purpose) of the survey. I sometimes collect data that is CONFIDENTIAL, but I NEED to have the names of people, so that they (as cases in my data file) can be matched to other information that is necessary for my analysis - like demographics, test scores, etc - that I have in other databases, by name.

So I'll sometimes collect data where I ask people to identify themselve, so that they can be "matched" with the correct data, and as soon as the match takes place in my data file, I erase their names. In such a way, the data ARE completely confidental, and no names are associated with any data or results, but the individual identification is necessary as a step in the correct coding of the data.

I'm just saying that is what MAY be going on in your case, and not some nefarious attempt to deceive and trick you. If so, they should have explained it better - but you should perhaps not have jumped to conclusions either.

In my experience, if you are going to stand up and accuse people of being dishonest, you better be 100% SURE that they are actually dishonest. I cannot tell if that is the case in your scenario.

Just feedback on my part - not taking sides or attacking you.




No offense taken from me at all.

Problem was, many of the questions were like. "Do you think management does a good job?" "Do you think that the CEO is taking the company in the right direction?" " Do you trust your supervisor?" "Are you frustrated with your job or management?" "Do you look foward to coming in to work?" "Do you get angry sometimes?" That along with psychological type questions are not something I would answer and be confidant that it would not be used against me later.

And truthfully, I'm not much of a "team playa." I don't suffer fools easily and think management is overstaffed by about 50% as they all try to boss each others employees and have no idea what the whole picture is because they pass off work they don't want to do.

Anyways, I've outlasted 3 CEOs, 5 Vice president, 5 managers, 4 supervisors and I'm still here.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 7:54:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By fxntime:


Anyways, I've outlasted 3 CEOs, 5 Vice president, 5 managers, 4 supervisors and I'm still here.



not for long

Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:12:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:
Ahh Grasshopper. You need to learn how to play the deep game. The company's purpose in such a survey is to learn potentially damaging information about you. Your goal, however, is to put your best face forward. I would have ignored the fact that I knew it was not truly confidential, and submitted answers that made me look good. You lost a perfect opportunity for a disinformation campaign to your advantage.




Big +1. This is the way the game is played, you need to come off as the happiest employee around. They don't value or care for your opinion about how the company is run, if they did, they would give a position where it could be put to use.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 8:18:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Ranxerox911:

Originally Posted By happycynic:
Ahh Grasshopper. You need to learn how to play the deep game. The company's purpose in such a survey is to learn potentially damaging information about you. Your goal, however, is to put your best face forward. I would have ignored the fact that I knew it was not truly confidential, and submitted answers that made me look good. You lost a perfect opportunity for a disinformation campaign to your advantage.




Big +1. This is the way the game is played, you need to come off as the happiest employee around. They don't value or care for your opinion about how the company is run, if they did, they would give a position where it could be put to use.




How true, how true. They do not keep malcontents and troublemakers (i.e., non-sheep) in their employ. Only the patients that have successfully gone thru a frontal lobatomy are allowed to remain.
Top Top