A cheater's paradise?

Policing employees' performance is one thing that most companies do well. However, being the corporate watchdog is quite a different conundrum. At what point do company code of ethics cross over into personal behavior at work. In some areas it is natural for organizations to provide guidelines for its employees behaviors at work, while quite a hotbed of varying opinions when it comes to what employees do on their own time.

I broached the subject when posting earlier on TheOptioneerJM on how whistle blowers are treated within organizations. 

What bothered me to the core is how an organization reacts to a whistle blower says a ton about their culture. Meaning, you can have policies, guidelines, codes of ethics and beyond, but they become meaningless when managers or employees take it a step too far.

In my example, with anonymity caveats all over the place, it appeared that an employee who blew the whistle on one manager's harassing behavior, to only end up being pegged a "trouble maker" by immediate management. Or being subject of bullying by colleagues, promoted, endorsed, supported, investigated, documented with a black mark on personal profile within a company and doomed career opportunities.

A safe haven?

I caught a short segment on Dr. OZ with Megyn Kelly earlier in the week and it resounded with me because of the train of thought I exuded by helping this individual get the story out. My indignity at the person's poor treatment by their company was what got my keys clicking and clacking.

To Megyn's question to anyone paying attention: is your company providing a safe haven for its employees?  When it comes to any form of harassment, it becomes a great deal more complicated when every form of bullying or social expression requires an encyclopedia or book og guidelines. But the question is direct and clear: how do you treat your employees? This is a loud commentary on how safe is your work environment for its employees?

Ethics and codes

I haven't been party to formulating a corporate code of conduct or ethical guide, I should add. However, I've certainly signed off many times in my career.  I opinionate and conclude that even the best intentions go haywire.

Beliefs and values

Most organizations are intricate in detail on how employees conduct themselves on site, off hours and online seem to be muddled. Yet the core responsibility, in my opinion, lies with a company providing a safe environment to which they owe employees who work for them.

The subject matters are varied and how companies react are the most telling by whether poor treatment, controversial subjects become viral social commentaries, opinions and sharing.

Fine lines merge

What happens when employees' behavior crosses between what they do while at work and what they do with their own private lives? It is becoming a challenge I'm sure, to determine when an employee's corporate responsibility stops and starts now that it has become easier to express oneself through social means, blogging and posting. What a mess?

Affairs, cheating, harassment

What is the difference? Companies do protect their employees to a great extent on sexual harassment. However, there are other areas that cross personal values and beliefs that seem to be grey. 

Bullying

In the workplace, having a mean boss has been around for years. Think Scrooge's treatment of his dedicated long-term employee, Bob Cratchit. (SOURCE: Wikipedia)

___________________________________________________ **

Bob Cratchit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bob Cratchit and Tiny Tim as depicted in the 1870s by Fred Barnard

First appearanceA Christmas Carol 1843Created by Charles Dickens

Robert "Bob" Cratchit is a fictional character in the Charles Dickens novella A Christmas Carol. The abused, underpaid clerk of Ebenezer Scrooge, Cratchit has come to symbolize poor working conditions, especially long working hours.[1]

According to a comment by his wife, Cratchit works for 15 shillings a week at a rate of three pence ("thruppence") an hour for 60 hours per week. Until the decimalization of the British Pound in 1971, one shilling was twelve pence. Thus, fifteen shillings is 180 pence. It would take 60 hours to earn 180 at a rate of three pence per hour.[2] In terms of 2015 purchasing power, this would be approximately £63.00[3] or about $94 US per week.

_________________________________________________**

Imagine the outcry if Cratchit were to find an empathetic media outlet to tell his story today: without a doubt, to me anyhow, it would create a storm of viral fuel, diagnosed, discussed, dissected and opinionated for sure. (Remember public outcry over an employee's challenge to her company CEO's treatment of her? On MEDIUM).

Yet, the bullying part of Scrooge's treatment of Cratchit is more accepted than most of us would be willing to admit.

Perhaps there IS a fine line between harassment and bullying after all. Remove "sexual" it becomes more normalized and less controversial today. Why is that? 

Work affairs and cheating 

Is an area that is vague and a cesspool that most companies stay far removed from. It is tempting to try to police employees conduct outside the work place and many do so with guidelines, policies and disciplinary measures when it comes to those who struggle with addiction, blast their boss or company in their private time through self-expression on social media.

That may be because the company's intent is to protect its reputation, brand and shareholder value, which can deteriorate the financial health of the organization.  Or most would demonstrate that they find it a risk.

But what about the company's responsibility for providing a safe working environment for its employees?  Definitely, there are growing best practices on Emergency Response, and even rehearsals in real time on a terrorist threat. That is a physical example of providing a safe workplace. But what about emotional well being?

Emotional safety

Most allow staff to honor their religious beliefs in most places, by allowing the wearing of turbans or hijab as demonstrative of their faith. That is, unless it is a police department or situation where policies adapt to interpretation of safety. 

For instance, in Canada, there have been stories where RCMP were originally prevented from wearing a turban instead of the traditional uniform that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are identified by. Another instance, was when then Prime Minister of Canada became embroiled in controversy when he tried to mandate that women remove their hijab during Canadian citizenship swearing in ceremonies.

For every seed of controversy remains a grain of belief in these scenarios.

So how many religions, ethical guidelines, or values say it is okay to cheat on your spouse? We know there are bigamy societies that allow it (reference this week's story on young Canadian girls being migrated to the US to become young brides).

Yet, if you ask most reasonable people, who hold themselves accountable for their own behavior, place the blame on their own shoulders if they were to lapse to poor judgement, that agree that cheating on your spouse is simply not okay.

Unless you've been the victim of such affairs, it is difficult to relate to the destruction that it can cause. Yet on the balance beam of right and wrong, it leans far over to the wrong. Very few people would agree that it is permissible and allowed under the sanctimony of marriage vows. And that is not a religious statement. It is a value statement.

Both my now husband and myself were subjects of spouses who cheated on us with someone they work with. We both would agree how emotionally destructive that it was to all involved.  In both situations, it was handled differently by the employers where the matter happened.

Gender is not specific here. It is caused and can happen to either gender of spouse: husband or wife. Yet the downward spiral that it causes does spill over to the work environment, destroys families, splits apart children who, if given the choice, would not have to be forced to make a choice between either parent. 

It can cause a tailspin of gossip and distract a great many people. Yet it is something that few companies want to approach: should cheaters at work get an automatic pass? But what about creating a safe, value-based, environment for work?

I suppose it won't be forced into discussion until a strong journalist, with quality beliefs and convictions that the behavior is wrong, writes or talks about it on the media. 

Granted, we are not stuck in the 50s where home means mom stays at home to make the bacon while dad goes to work to bring home the bacon. The roles have blurred and merged. 

I just don't believe that allowing an atmosphere of cheating should be continued. Like Megyn said so well: it is your company's responsibility to provide you with an encouraging atmosphere (bully and harassment free) and value driven culture (where cheating is added to the behavior that is not condoned or ignored).  But, most of all, safe.

What do you think? 

*** _________________ ***

ABOUT THE HIJAB (Source: Arabs in America)

Women > Veiling > What is the Hijab and Why do Women Wear it?

Hijab is referred to by various names, some of the most common of which are a veil or a headscarf. Most Muslims who wear the covering call it a hijab (حجاب), an Arabic word meaning “cover.” However, there are various forms of hijab that are referred to by different names. While hijab is commonly associated with women, Muslim men also sometimes wear a head covering as a means of showing modesty. Additionally, Christian and Jewish women in some traditions wear a headscarf as a cultural practice or commitment to modesty or piety.

Find out more about the History of the Hijab.

What are the various kind of hijab?

Image by Kalashe

Hijab ( حجاب): The first type of hijab that is most commonly worn by women in the West is a square scarf that covers the head and neck, but leaves the face clear. This form of hijab is most commonly referred to as hijab.

Shayla: The shayla is a long, rectangular scarf that is wrapped loosely around the head and tucked or pinned at the shoulders. Like the hijab and al-amira, this form of hijab covers the head but often leaves the neck and face clear.

Khimar ( خمار): The khimar is a long, cape-like scarf that is wrapped around the head and hangs to the middle of the back. This type of hijab covers the head, neck, and shoulders, but leaves the face clear.

Chador ( تشادر): The chador is a long cloak that covers a woman’s entire body. Like the khimar, the chador wraps around the head, but instead of hanging just to the middle of back, the chador drapes to a woman’s feet.

Niqāb ( نقاب): The niqab is a face-covering that covers the mouth and nose, but leaves the eyes clear. It is worn with an accompanying khimar or other form of head scarf.

Burqa ( برقع ): The burqa covers the entire face and body, leaving a small mesh screen through which the woman can see through.

Why do women wear hijab?

Muslim women choose to wear the hijab or other coverings for a variety of reasons. Some women wear the hijab because they believe that God has instructed women to wear it as a means of fulfilling His commandment for modesty. For these women, wearing hijab is a personal choice that is made after puberty and is intended to reflect one’s personal devotion to God. In many cases, the wearing of a headscarf is often accompanied by the wearing of loose-fitting, non-revealing clothing, also referred to as hijab.

While some Muslim women do not perceive the hijab to be obligatory to their faith, other Muslim women wear the hijab as a means of visibly expressing their Muslim identity (Haddad, et al, 2006). In the United States, particularly since 9/11, the hijab is perceived to be synonymous with Islam. Some Muslim women choose to appropriate this stereotype and wear the hijab to declare their Islamic identity and provide witness of their faith. Unfortunately this association has also occasionally resulted in the violent assaults of Muslim women wearing hijab.

While most Muslim women wear the hijab for religious reasons, there are other Arab or Muslim women who choose to wear the hijab as an expression of their cultural identity. By wearing the hijab, Muslim women hope to communicate their political and social alliance with their country of origin and challenge the prejudice of Western discourses towards the Arabic-speaking world (Zayzafoon, 2005). In many cases, the wearing of the hijab is also used to challenge Western feminist discourses which present hijab-wearing women as oppressed or silenced.

PLEASE NOTE: The writer of this article is neither naming nor alluding to the guilt of any particular organization, company or corporation. It is solely an opinion and discussion launched by writing.  It is not an endorsement of any traits or expression of acceptance about the subject reflected upon herein.

Paradise in ANTIGUA

English Harbor

I have to admit that I have been taken aback at the enthusiasm expressed by the high numbers of readers to my blog on Mauritius.  I've never been there but one can always dream of going.  Perhaps after such receptivity as a travel destination that I would love to visit, I will end up going there.  One can always imagine that at some point, the travel bureau for the island country would extend an invitation to visit to see whether it measures up to the hype resulting from reviewing it and writing about what it has to offer.

It seems appropriate now to write about one of my favorite travel destinations experiences:  Antigua.  January 2017 will mark my 10th wedding anniversary.  It is where we went for our honeymoon.

We spent the big bucks booking our trip through a travel agent after asking Google for the best, most romantic destinations for a honeymoon and the Sandals resort on Antigua was the response.

  

Antigua *source:  WIKIPEDIA

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the island. For the sovereign state that includes the island, see Antigua and Barbuda. For other places named Antigua, see Antigua (disambiguation). For the Guatemalan city, see Antigua Guatemala.

Antigua

Native name: Waladli or Wadadli
Map of Antigua showing the parishes
Geography
Location	Caribbean Sea
Coordinates	17°5′N 61°48′WCoordinates: 17°5′N 61°48′W
Archipelago	Leeward Islands
Total islands	2
Area	281 km2 (108 sq mi)
Coastline	87 km (54.1 mi)
Highest elevation	402 m (1,319 ft)
Highest point	Mount Obama / Boggy Peak
Administration
Antigua and Barbuda
Largest settlement	St. John's (pop. 32,000)
Demographics
Population	80,161 (2011 Census)
Pop. density	285.2 /km2 (738.7 /sq mi)
Ethnic groups	91% Black or Mulatto, 4.4% Other Mixed Race, 1.7% White, 2.9% Other

Antigua (/ænˈtiːɡə/ an-tee-ga),^[1] also known as Waladli or Wadadli by the native population, is an island in the West Indies. It is one of the Leeward Islands in the Caribbean region and the main island of the country of Antigua and Barbuda. Antigua and Barbuda became an independent state within the Commonwealth of Nations on 1 November 1981.^[2]

Antigua means "ancient" in Spanish after an icon in Seville Cathedral, "Santa Maria de la Antigua"—St. Mary of the Old Cathedral.^[3] The name Waladli^[4] comes from the indigenous inhabitants and means approximately "our own".^{[citation needed]} The island's circumference is roughly 87 km (54 mi) and its area 281 km² (108 sq mi). Its populationwas 80,161 (at the 2011 Census).^[5] The economy is mainly reliant on tourism, with the agricultural sector serving the domestic market.

Flights
Antigua is an unlikely destination from where I live:  Calgary, when there are closer, more direct flights from Western Canada.  However, my new husband and I wanted a unique, memorable experience so we didn't let the flight itinerary discourage us.  

We long to return even though we now know it requires a strong resolve to commit to the taxing flight travel to get there.  We flew out of Calgary in the late evening, to arrive in Toronto in the early hours (about 2 am).  Our travel agent had us booked into the airport hotel to rest.  Upon reflection, I would not recommend the extra expense.  Booking into a hotel in the wee hours with a 7 am wake up call to be at the airport for the rest of the journey was overkill.  We should have just found a corner to put our feet up to nap after going through security and wait for the flight boarding at 9 a.m.

As part of our honeymoon experience, we flew first class the entire trip on Air Canada.  It was a nice  to have the royal treatment, especially given the long flight.  However, I don't recall the flight attendants overly friendly or attentive.  The main goal was to avoid the cramped vacation flights per the norm to allow my 6ft1in hubby more leg room and comfort.  

Hotel
The SANDALS RESORTS brand is a great choice if you are looking for an environment with other couples (COUPLES ONLY) instead of a rowdy party atmosphere of ADULTS ONLY or noisier, rambunctious FAMILY approved.  At the time, the Sandals Grand Antigua was under heavy construction next door.  Our room was at the corner of the resort, right beside the new one, but the noise wasn't an issue.  We went with the Butler experience and that didn't disappoint.  We were on the bottom floor just steps from the ocean, which allowed us to see the moonlight beaming off the water from our comfortable bed with the windows curtains wide open to take in the magnificent beauty.

The couple upstairs were from Toronto and we couldn't help but notice that they had probably frequently traveled with the Butler option because at one point they rudely interrupted our butler with a long list of demands while they were out.  We were much more humble and appreciated the bucket with champagne on ice with fruit and cheese tray he'd have ready for us upon our return from our excursions.

Activities
The nice part about Sandals Resorts is that all the water sports like a Hobie Craft or snorkeling is included in your fees.  It is easy to sign up for snorkeling and even though I was nervous, the captain was very attentive and took my hand, even diving down deep to bring a sea urchin up to place in my hand while hubby had the disposable underwater camera handy to take pictures.

With it being a couples only resort, the onsite activities were geared to its audience.  We had a blast being participants in the Honeymoon Game, even if we were far older than the other contestants.  We didn't win, but we did place respectably 2nd place.   The point being the onsite activities kept honeymoon, anniversaries, weddings, vow renewals in mind.  The nice part being you could be as social as you wanted to be or low key and private.  We met people from the UK and the US who were not just there to honeymoon, many celebrating anniversaries and renewing wedding vows on the beach.  

ATTRACTIONS
We were really thankful that we stepped outside our comfort zone, with our butler as our guide, to hire a taxi for the day to take us around the island to take in the sights.  It was THE way to go.  It ended up costing the same as an excursion fee, with a hefty tip included.  A win win for everyone.  We were able to travel the entire island in a day, stop when we wanted to, with our driver as our host taking us to local specialties like sugar cane freshly chopped or roadside corn on the cob.  Our host and driver was a personal friend of our butler, Rodger.  We thoroughly enjoyed our local tour guide in a spotless, air conditioned van.  He gave us snippets of history, information on life on Antigua, historical tidbits while showing us  the best the island had to offer from a local.  The beauty of this arrangement was his willingness to pull over so that we could take snapshots of quaint tiny churches on a road side.  We visited the lush rain forest that could have been an excursion all on its own (at the same cost as what this cost us for an entire day).

Devil's Bridge
Is a really cool spot on the island where we were told it was the last land mass before West Africa.  The geysers were alarming and unexpected, lending to the wonderful experience and picture taking panorama.

Betty's Hope
Betty's Hope was a sugarcane plantation in Antigua. It was established in 1650, shortly after the island had become an English colony, and flourished as a successful agricultural industrial enterprise during the centuries of slavery.  (SOURCE: Trip Advisor Attraction reviews)

World Cricket
Our host and guide even took us to the stadium under construction for the world cricket cup it was about to host.

Antiguans are more than a little devoted to cricket. The island has historically been a very strong contributor to West Indian and international cricket, and the Antigua Recreation Ground is one of the finest places in the Caribbean to take in a local, regional, or international match. Devotees of the game can visit the Antigua and Barbuda Museum for a look at the infamous cricket bat of Vivian Richards, native Antiguan, former captain of the West Indies Cricket Club, and one of the greatest batsmen of all time. Matches can be found almost anywhere on the island, at almost any time.  SOURCE:  Antigua Barbados.org

Monzerat
One of our favorite excursions was taking a helicopter ride over the island of Monzerat, with its smoldering volcano and eerie setting of devastation.  Unusual sightings was wandering donkeys on the abandoned island.  This trip we booked on our own because our butler and Sandals would not sponsor or endorse it.  It made me wonder if it was truly due to the danger or more because Sandals didn't get a kickback from recommending it to its guests.  

All that can be seen of Plymouth, Montserrat, is a scattering of roofs and the top floors of the tallest buildings, just poking out from a barren landscape of ash and boulders.

The rest of the town is buried: a modern Pompeii slowly being reclaimed by the mountain.

Away from the centre, vegetation has grown over homes and buildings which escaped the pyroclastic flows. In the lobby of a luxury hotel outside town, dusty papers still sit on the reception desk. One of them is a form for hurricane insurance.

Standing amid the ash, Cecil Wade pointed to the Soufrière Hills volcano, still smoking in the distance.

“That is the devil, man,” he said, shaking his head. “That is Satan at work.”

The faint smell of sulfur hung in the air.

In 1995, a series of eruptions began that almost completely destroyed two-thirds of the tiny island, a British overseas territory in the eastern Caribbean some 30 miles from Antigua. Years of ash and boulders from the volcano have buried most of Plymouth, although the town is still officially the capital.  SOURCE:  The Guardian, UK

If you can't stomach a helicopter ride, there are excursions by boat available.

Deep Sea Fishing
Our butler, Rodger, set us up for a deep sea excursion, which included the shuttle from our hotel to the marina.  He thoughtfully paired us up with a pair close to our age who were also celebrating their honeymoon at our resort.  

You should take a gravel before you leave or test your sea legs and stomach on the choppy waters.  Of our group of four, I was the only one that didn't do the heave-ho off the side of the boat.  We all caught something, nothing major like a sword fish, although we thoroughly enjoyed ourselves and our company.

Dining
As with any all-inclusive resort, there are a lot of choices for dining without going anywhere.  We discovered the most incredible experiencing just by exploring the shore beaches not far from our resort.  I had a grilled lobster and hubby had his favorite:  tuna.  What was the most delightful of all, was running into our butler with his fiance dining there with another couple.  We had already been thrilled with our experience in finding the gem, but it was still magnified when we discovered it was where the locals went on their time off.  I can still taste how incredible it is, craving another one.

Beach 

Having the white sand and beach only a few steps from our room certainly made our experience worth while.  Even with so much to do, the sound of the gentle lap of the ocean upon the shore with crystal clear water, relaxing was a treat in itself.  In fact, the water was warmer than the pools.

Shopping
In Antigua was lovely.  St. John's was only a 10 minute drive from our hotel, with the shuttle arranged by our butler, Rodger.  We got caught up by the atmosphere of the markets, shops and boutiques.  Even the duty free shops had beautiful jewelry with  As with any stop for cruise ships, the prices went up when the ships docked and settled back down when there weren't any.  There are markets to explore, shops to discover.  The best part was simply talking to the people who were so friendly and welcoming.

ENVIRONMENT
I always seem to associate Antigua with lovely.  Of course, what I call lovely others may think of cleanliness, friendliness & happiness commonly shared by all whom we met.   Unlike Cuba where time has lapsed almost to a standstill caught in a bubble of an era (I will have to blog about that visit later on)::... Cuba was poor, the people seemed worn, downtrodden with Antigua the complete polar opposite side of the Caribbean in what they call the "West Indies".  

The entire island has this verve of being unto a world of its own.  Precariously close to a live by a Volcano and yet far enough east towards Africa to avoid destructive hurricanes that decimate other countries on islands like Haiti.  


I commonly refer to my hubby Rob as the HUNKSTER HUBSTER in earlier posts (which our blended children voice in unison:  "EWWWwwww").  To say he is handsome, may mean that beauty or handsomeness is in the eye of the beholder.  I can attest that he is handsome based on our Honeymoon.  The flight attendants (not gender specific either) fawned over HH bypassing me completely to tip the champagne til the cup almost spillith over onto my lap.  Or his, if I wasn't gritting my teeth and trying to smile to disguise my annoyance.  My hackles stood up when this elegant blonde on the arm of a moneyed boyfriend, pronounced to me and our Japanese dining companion (not an environment where conversations are exactly hush hush to those in the room, including the servers) :::..... she graciously said to me in her wonderful, south United States drawl ::.... "My girl, your husband is the absolutely most beautiful man in the world."  But nothing was going to spoil that honeymoon and memorable trip, where I can still remember seeing the moonlight glimmering serenely off the ocean and hearing the gentle lapping of the waves on the shore, just outside, a butler room with Rodger as our guide::.... *sigh* Antigua::..... can you adopt us?

As we were leaving the luncheon buffet to catch our long journey home, the head waitress, a matronly islander with a gaggle of beautiful young lady locals giggling behind her, asked me:  "You are not taking him back to Canada are you?  Why don't you leave him here?"  No, I didn't feel smug.  I just thought if he can keep his act together and stop saying "irregardless" we could have a long and happy life together.  With 10 years anniversary right around the corner.  Maybe I'll do more virtual travel and dream of other faraway places we could visit to share the start of at least another 10 more.  To infinity and beyond :::.......

Dr. Jekyll and Mr/Ms Hide

 WIKIPEDIA ::.....
Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde is a novella by the Scottish author Robert Louis Stevenson first published in 1886. The work is commonly known today as The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, or simply Jekyll & Hyde.^[1] It is about a London lawyer named Gabriel John Utterson who investigates strange occurrences between his old friend, Dr. Henry Jekyll,^[2][3] and the evil Edward Hyde. The novella's impact is such that it has become a part of the language, with the very phrase "Jekyll and Hyde" coming to mean a person who is vastly different in moral character from one situation to the next.^[4][5]

A strange world straight from a  1886 novella

Many organizations host split characters disguised behind title and empowerment .  On the one hand, you can have a manager or leader who presents themselves well for executives, leadership or bosses (Dr. Jekyll) while being quite the nightmare when they are dealing with employees (Mr or Ms Hide). 

That's where the play on words for this title comes from.  There are people in organizations who are genuine, friendly and personable in front of their leadership and bosses, then quite the nightmare for the employees they supervise.  They "hide" their meanness and vindictive behavior.  

When an employee goes off the rails, Dr. Jekyll readily labels the employee as a "troublemaker".  The company takes the trusted Mr. Hide's word.

As always, my writing reflects various topics on business and leadership, without revealing the source, as a means of communicating real problems that exist in companies.

Whistle blower or trouble maker?
Most organizations have protected themselves from publicity or public scrutiny by activating measures that are designed to allow employees the freedom to express concern without fear of ramifications.  What happens when their manager, Mr. Hide, labels them as a trouble maker? Is that label open for examination or accepted as truth?

Some organizations set out policies and processes to allow employees to express concerns about their managers under various feedback forums and surveys.  It is not surprising that it is a fear injected process or a tattle tale curriculum.  

It seems to always work out in the movies that Mr. Hide is easily identified by the audience without much effort.  Hollywood likes to show how whistle blowers are often discriminated against or labelled negatively in order to protect Mr. Hide's mistakes and not held accountable to making slanderous career-limiting identifiable labels.  

So is a whistle blower really a trouble maker?
How about an employee who follows the companies process only to fall victim of being labeled a trouble maker.

What happens, and it does, when a whistle blowing culture evolves into tattle tales that are lodged as a complaint to disguise a bullying environment or clique that discriminates against their colleagues, who was hired and held up to scrutiny in the same fashion.  

Only in Hollywood is the offensive tattle tale  exposed as a means to discredit someone else as a means to avoid being discovered to have the wrong behavior.   If someone is doing something that is wrong ethically, why is it that their best defense is to go on the offensive?  

Whistle blow or tattle tale?
A whistle blow is not held in the same characterization as a tattle tale.  Yet, the most sophisticated, well-intentioned organizations can fall into this trap.  They have a hard time distinguishing between the two:  whistle blow or tattle tale.

How accountable are organizations in finding managers or leaders who are quick to judge or label employees?  Where does the benefit of the doubt come into the equation?  Who finds fault with guilt until proven innocent allowed?

Often, whistle blowers become us versus them.  The more controversial the claim, the more likely a whistle blower is labelled as a trouble maker.  Even Hollywood loves such a plot:  the underdog versus Goliath.  

Why even bother expressing concerns of unprofessional conduct of a manager when one knows that they will only be labelled as a trouble maker, easily expendable?

Why not examine the differences between a tattle tale and a whistle blow?  If it is easy for Hollywood and Televisionland to identify the culprit in the story as someone who accuses someone else of doing something wrong in order to protect themselves from being found out, why can't companies?

Seems like an easy plot, easily identified with, but rarely considered in the real world.

I get that a complaint lodged has to be examined and considered without bias.   So why do companies allow the manager who is not trained in mediation to be the one to taint an employee's reputation or damage their record?

If a manager knows that an employee has a reasonable concern, why would they go on the offensive instead?  We understand that drama in the workplace is disruptive and toxic.  Yet so is bias from managers.

We must consider that the drama that unfolds can be more likely because someone is protecting their own reputation and in so doing, tries to destroy the reputation of another.

The situation at hand was where an employee considered a workplace romance distracting and toxic to their work environment.  As proof, they decided to take a picture of the cozy duo to bring forward to discuss with the manager.

What exploded was the offenders not only discriminating against the observer, rallying together and calling the battle cry with others to  lodge a formal complaint against an individual.  That individual could have just denied taking a picture because nobody had seen a picture, just the act of taking a picture.  Why wouldn't drawing in a crowd to the incident, harming someone's reputation, placing them as the subject of gossip be considered just as harmful to a positive work environment?

Meanwhile, the offenders are allowed to go into Tattle Tale mode::.... if one reports an incident and makes it sound very disruptive, it is easy for the company to label who the trouble maker is.  Right?  Well, unfortunately, in real instances, the trouble maker should be considered as the parties who lodged the complaint to remove their own unprofessional conduct and transplant it onto someone else.

Wag the dog
Is a descriptive used in themes whereby in order to avoid a controversy, the person(s) at the center of a potential controversy creates drama or an explosive claim or action in order to avoid fielding anything negative or drawing attention to their own poor behavior.

Companies fall into this trap for many reasons.  One could hypothesize or guess that at its core would be legal disasters or damaging reputation being paramount.  In the two instances I am familiar with, confidential sources private, the person or persons lodging the complaint were immediately defended and protected.  The subject of the complaint was not.  Companies don't always have a means to protect the subject of a complaint.  They may not even defend the subject or examine whether the complaint was a proactive defensive offensive move.

It isn't surprising when the person in this situation decides they have nothing more to lose, because they have already been labeled and motions are made to make it uncomfortable for the employee, pushing them to leave the company.  Case dismissed.  Problem solved?

Hardly.  Companies can be their own worst enemy.  They allow skewed perceptions by untrained managers to mediate, defending them-selves and the tattle tale, allowing anyone to be labeled a trouble maker.  Behind closed doors.  Conversed openly with other managers, a nail in the coffin on employable opportunities within the company that would otherwise allow an employee who could prove greater value if they were to move elsewhere within the organization to flourish and contribute more.  Never mind if it were to be leaked while an outside job search is considered.

The employee told me that a central manager displayed a white board outside their work area "are you comfortable with being uncomfortable?"  That seems to communicate the strategy of making life so unbearable for perceived trouble makers that they have little choice but to look for employment elsewhere.  The company loses.  They have gone through the expense to hire, train and coach such employee, increasing in cost when they've been there for a couple of years.  That is a drain on finances and strains resources by stretching other employees to make up for the gap.  It also may take a while to fill in the position, along with expense to bring the next person up to the same level of knowledge and training as the employee that was forced to be so uncomfortable they decided to leave.

In the scenario that was confided to me, the manager's boss, must have seen that whiteboard that displayed those words.  I am writing this blog because I have faith in most leadership.  Such a display of tactical efforts to rid the company by the manager's labeled undesirables or trouble makers would shock others as much as it did me.   It makes it easy to see the tactical culture where one is squeezed to leave, because it is right there out front and centrally displayed and communicated.  Being an optimist by nature, I would think that leadership would be shocked but such display and discipline to the manager's scribe instigated, demanding it be removed.  Unfortunately, if other leaders have been in the area and not done anything about it, it could suggest they endorse the strategy.

While unemployment is higher than average, it shouldn't mean that employers allow managers to take a vice grip style on managing employees.  Ready to scoop up anyone they decide is harder to manage than most, and tactically allowed to pressure employees to leave.  Not easily identified.  Except in this instance by its exact words, the displayed quote on a whiteboard can indicate that it is a philosophy shared not only by the manager, but by the manager's leadership.  Including the boss and the boss' boss, if circulating among staff is a company directive.  

Then again, any employee could observe such an aggressive stance on managing employees out the door.  If they were to take a picture of toxic, discriminatory behavior, they can fall prey to being labeled undesirable, a formal complaint initiated.  That person's career within that company doomed.

What bothered my confidential subject the most was that they were considered guilty long before any investigation was launched.  If they had asked anyone's advice beforehand, they would have been told "deny, deny, deny".  So why not lie in this instance?  Just say that they did not take any such picture for evidence of the cliquey, toxic workplace.

Instead, the employee didn't lie.  They were honest and apologetic, agreeing that their approach was not necessarily the right approach.  However, they did say that they did reach out to the offenders, with proof shown to the investigators, that they did try to resolve the offensive behavior privately between the employees.  Instead, the tattle tale culture prevailed and allowed the victim to become the defendant.  Sound wrong?  

It sounds to me that good intentions can become misaligned when people are caught doing something wrong and then are allowed to disrupt the work environment by making claims that move the spotlight from themselves to another party.  The assumption of guilt can be misplaced when a complaint is launched.  How many companies actually examine whether the complainant(s) are more disruptive and toxic than the party to which they are trying to shift the blame to?

That is what it appears to me anyhow.  What do you think?  Worth considering by companies who have created a tattle tale culture under the guise of allowing coachable feedback to be the norm.

I guess that is usually when the media or Hollywood intervene.  It becomes great plots where the underdog goes up against the great Goliath, the company.   The truth eventually prevails and the underdog becomes triumphant when their reputation is restored and the wrongdoers are identified as the party(s) who launched the complaint in order to disguise their own misbehavior.  

If cheating on spouses among employees, whether real or imagined, is an area companies don't want to pursue, that is fine.  It is not my place to decide.  I just write about it.  However, creating a work atmosphere that allows such antics, a company is allowing toxic behavior to continue that can offend and impact other employees' values, beliefs and trust that the company will protect them against eroding cultural acceptance.

I'm optimistic enough that many leaders of company's would react the same way I did: of the opinion that some managers don't promote employee well being.

Or, taking a chapter from the parenting I had: a  tattle tale is often disciplined more than shifting to the person they are trying to blame.  Then again, parents know and recognize such a tactic.

Some cultural environments are not always in sync with promoting employee well being, even if their public-facing literature says so because it can be undermined by their managers' habits. 

Another example: allowing managers to reach out to communicate by email,  text or phone calls when employees are on official vacation.  That probably isn't a culture of well being underscored.  Instead alarm bells on such practice would be a good start for companies to consider.  Are they allowed to call a reported sick employee and justified by the belief that the employee may be dishonest?  One would think the screening process would be strong enough to identify potential recruits who fake illness to avoid going into work.  It demonstrates mistrust by a manager who is suppose to be an advocate and supporter of the employees that report to them.

My blog and writing is separate from any personal employment and past employers experiences, unless noted.  It is my personal opinion and avoids incriminating any specific corporate philosophy or employer,  past employer or company.  I write to create conversations that potentially change how leadership and business act.  I have not, up to this point, received any monetary endorsement, reward or income from writing this blog.  I honor the privacy of the individual(s) who trust me enough to share their stories and will protect their identity to avoid disciplinary actions taken against them and their reputation.