• RF (unregistered)

    Would you be able to mail me a copy of this story? I need to verify it somehow.

  • notme (unregistered) in reply to Vaughn
    Vaughn:
    I tell my wife all the time that she can't get so upset with people because they are paid to follow procedures, not to think. There would be chaos if everybody started thinking for themselves.

    It's called "freedom".

  • I'm a humbler guy than you will ever be (unregistered) in reply to ProSlasher
    And yes, it is from a 17 year old. I have strong work ethics and strong school ethics. I am more mature than you will ever hope to be.
    I understand where you're coming from - I had comparable beliefs about myself when I was seventeen.

    Here's a useful tip for making a better impression in the future: bragging about how mature you are for your age to strangers on the internet is a fairly blatant sign of lack of actual maturity. "Show, don't tell," as the writer's adage goes.

  • Nerf Herder (unregistered) in reply to I'm a humbler guy than you will ever be

    Nazi's also blindly followed rules just because they were orders given. Just because something is a rule doesnt mean things shouldnt be questioned!

  • Chloe (unregistered) in reply to Tuomas

    Maybe she was just messing with you, but you didn't get it?

  • Remy (unregistered) in reply to Tuomas

    The stupid is you, they probably record the call so in case of any problem with HR or else, they can spot who didn't make the job right or who didn't investigated what you're claiming

  • a rational mind (unregistered)

    So, an alternative theory. You could have been lying saying you were the owner/operator of the company. She had to check. Employees do the wierdest things. Granted, she probably should have looked up your companies phone number in the phone book, but ...

  • BTF (unregistered)

    As with so many things, its about the procedure not about whether it makes any sense. Must follow procedure...

  • (cs)

    Hi All,

    OP here. I've worked for this particular company (until it's recent demise) on and off for nearly 15 years. Verified by a friend who worked in HR, there is not now, nor was there ever a procedure to record phone calls of verification of employment. The woman was in no way flirting with me (she was reasonably hot and blond, and I'm at least 20 years older than her, fairly geeky and very very married).

    Most of my posts of the past year were about this particular WTF-factory. Our new owners seem extremely procedure-oriented, and I have no doubt that the onslaught of WTF's will continue.

  • (cs)

    Back in about 1989, I worked for a company which used all of the latest technology (faxes, email, pagers, nice AT&T Merlins with multiple lines, etc). One day, I sent an email (PROFS, anyone remember that?) to my supervisor who worked in the next cubicle, 5 feet away. When he made a comment about sending an email when asking him would do fine, I replied:

    "OK, next time, I'll call you." ROLF

    The real WTF is my current manager (in the office next to mine) routinely calls me. And I call him back. :)

  • (cs)

    He lost a great opportunity to have some fun.

    Paula: Hello — this is Paula from Initrode Global, calling in reference to Snoofle's employment. Him: Hello Paula. You know you have a very sexy voice? Would you like to discuss a little more about Snoofle over lunch? Paula: Err... I only need to verify the dates of Snoofle's employment at VirtuDyne, Intelligenuity and Initech. Him: Hey, easy baby, we can discuss all about it at lunch. Him (not talking to the phone): Hey Paula, is he hitting on you? He can be a real jerk sometimes, that's the reason I quitted, you know? Let me talk to him! Paula: But you are him, wtf is going on? I can't give you my phone! Him (on the phone): Hey baby, what's your phone number? Him (off the phone): Don't give him your phone number, he'll just call you all the time. I've seen it! Paula: How do you know he asked for my number? Him (off the phone): Did he already? Him (on the phone): Hey Paula, who are you talking to?

    And that's when Will Smith comes in naked holding a trout.

  • ? (unregistered) in reply to real_aardvark

    Maybe it was on a recorded line and she needed to make sure the conversation was taped rather than in person.

  • Kevin (unregistered)

    The sec doesn't sound so stupid. All companies have policies that always need to be followed. Always. "Cover your own ass," as they say.

  • its me u should know by now (unregistered)

    maybe those type of calls are recorded and need to be done over the phone for that reason

  • Anonymous (unregistered)

    Has anybody yet mentioned that the call might have been recorded? Because I don't think it has been mentioned that the call might have been recorded.

  • _khAttAm_ (unregistered) in reply to real_aardvark

    WTF...

  • K von M (unregistered) in reply to real_aardvark
    real_aardvark:
    K von M:
    what's really sad is that as an executive assistant, i totally understand the procedures thing. i also understand that idiots like that one are what give those in my profession a bad name.
    Interesting that an Executive Assistant would analyse the OP in terms of what the secretary did wrong, while so many people on this thread try to dissect it in either in terms of "what Snoofle misunderstood" or "don't fight the Law 'cause the Law wins." Or, in extreme cases, "La la la I'm not listening this never happened."

    This confirms my existing prejudice that a good Executive Assistant (much like the Personnel/HR thing, they used to be called Secretaries in the old days) is worth their weight in gold.

    it also confirms my existing theory that dumbass secretaries that can't see past their filing cabinets and procedures manuals make me look that much better for being able to use my brain. it's amazing how many people don't realize just how much better things work when you have a really GOOD admin in the company.

    so... you hiring? ;)

    real_aardvark:
    Dumb-ass programmers are, unfortunately, a dime a dozen.
    *sigh* so are dumbass bosses who don't recognize or appreciate the admins who make everything happen.

    to the rest of you who kept responding "oh, she's just following procedure", realize a couple of things... 1) procedures are not set in stone. there are always extenuating circumstances to every situation. procedure covers 90% of the operating process. individual intelligence covers the other 10%. and 2) humans are not computers, they cannot always recognize when there's a conflict between 2 procedures or a procedure and laws or ethics. if an HR admin following procedure leads to a multi-million dollar lawsuit down the road, who do you think will be the first person fired: the person who wrote the procedure, or the admin who was too stupid to realize they were leaving the company wide open to serious damage?

  • the biz (unregistered)

    Ever consider that they needed a recorded telephone conformation? otherwise thats just stupid.

  • robert s (unregistered)

    lolololololololololololololololololol

    ask her of her prevous job (mcdonalds cleaner, fired for making the room dirtier)

  • Mike (unregistered) in reply to WTF
    WTF:
    I think the real WTF here is that so many people here defend her actions as reasonable (for whatever reason). Must be a US thing what with all your lawsuits and fear of being sued. Nicely indoctrinated people there apparently.

    I guess that's why we're the leader of the free world and you're not. :) Have a nice day.

    Seriously though, your country doesn't have organizations run by rigid rules and enforced by heartless bureaucrats? Sometimes you just have to go along and save up the stories for later.

  • Nate (unregistered) in reply to Tuomas
    Tuomas:
    You must obey the process. Always.

    Resistance is futile... You will be assimilated...

    (and yes... I know its a geeky reference, but what can I say I've been coding since the age of 12)

  • Dragna (unregistered)

    hehehehehehe

    $500 bucks said it was a blonde

  • (cs) in reply to Dragna

    I don't understand why no one has pointed out yet that calling someone to verify self-empoyment doesn't verify anything. The whole reason you make these calls is to get information about the prospective employee from someone other than the prospective employee. Could I seriously just write "self-employed" on my resume and gloss over any gaps in employment? Couldn't she have at least asked for clients to use as references? Am I seriously the only one who thinks this particular aspect of the story is a massive WTF?

  • (cs)

    Maybe they are obviously a "droid" (see the jargon file).

  • Michael (unregistered) in reply to NCBloodhound

    So they produce undocumented spaghetti code with a bunch of inexperienced coders over seen by an idiot MBA. And when the client complains that the code is garbage they don't have any legal recourse given the lack of proper contract.

  • (cs)

    She is so brillant I can't believe it!

  • keith (unregistered)

    She would have fit right in with Der Fuhrer and his cronies.

  • (cs)

    Maybe the HR secretary was fired for not dotting the i's and crossing the t's of some arbitrary company process in one of her previous jobs.

    Even if there is no formal process/procedure at her present job for the employee verification task then she is just creating the records to cover her own ass in case things go wrong and the witch-hunt starts for the least senior person to have made a mistake. Example for the log-headed among us forum users:

    (1) Snoofle f***s up brillantly on a project, gets found out and fired. Company loses money big-time and bammm!!! witch-hunt.

    (2) As part of the witch-hunt, the secretary gets called on the deck and is questioned: "You say here that you verfied his employment history ? How did you do that ?" Her answer: "I called his previous employers on the telephone numbers documented in his file. My extension is xxxx; you can verify the calls in the company's telephone logs."

    (3) And so - TADAAAA - due diligence is proven.

    Remarkably, nobody brought this up in any of the previous 227 posts.

  • (cs) in reply to jk
    jk:
    jtl:
    Secretaries have it hard. My fiance' was fired for not picking up the phone before the 2nd ring.

    could have been worse, (s)he could have been fired for not picking up the phone before the 1st ring...

    picks up handset

    "Hello, XYZ corp. How may I direct your call?"

    hangs up and immediately picks up handset again

    "Hello, XYZ corp. How may I direct your call?"

    ...

  • (cs) in reply to shMerker
    shMerker:
    I don't understand why no one has pointed out yet that calling someone to verify self-empoyment doesn't verify anything. The whole reason you make these calls is to get information about the prospective employee from someone other than the prospective employee. Could I seriously just write "self-employed" on my resume and gloss over any gaps in employment? Couldn't she have at least asked for clients to use as references? Am I seriously the only one who thinks this particular aspect of the story is a massive WTF?

    Yes. Its absolutely the right thing to say in your resume that you were a "Self employed independent contractor" during your unemployment. If they ask who you worked for, you can say "I'm sorry, but that's confidential, I signed several DNAs." That usually impresses them enough that you'll be hired on the spot.

  • Sarath (unregistered)

    That's really funny. As the first commenter said, you will have to obey the process or their process lacking something to recruit people like self owned sole employees :)

  • (cs) in reply to aflag
    aflag:
    And that's when Will Smith comes in naked holding a trout.

    That's also the moment when, presumably, the HR woman's head implodes.

  • Reid (unregistered)

    It's called "covering your ass" people! She knows how stupid it is to have to call a person standing right in front of her, but if she didn't and some problem arose, she could be held at fault for deviating. It's that simple.

  • blah (unregistered)

    This sort of blind rule following would normally only ever happen in Japan.

  • (cs) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    Has anybody yet mentioned that the call might have been recorded? Because I don't think it has been mentioned that the call might have been recorded.
    No, she was flirting with him ;)
  • (cs) in reply to ProSlasher
    ProSlasher:
    And yes, it is from a 17 year old. I have strong work ethics and strong school ethics. I am more mature than you will ever hope to be.

    Many couples say "let's have a baby". Nobody says "let's have a teenager".

  • (cs) in reply to Random832
    Random832:
    Seems similar to hospitals sending a bill for emergency room/ambulance, see how far you get refusing to pay those.

    That this might be a real person's real opinion is very scary. If a person's life is in danger when I am in a position to help, everything I possess is theirs for the asking.

    EDIT: That part of random's post was chosen arbitrarily. The entire post is what I'm referring to.

    Charging for hospital care in a civilised country is still an oxymoron though.

  • Paolo G (unregistered)

    We have a name in the UK for people like this - they're called jobsworths (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobsworth).

  • 36% Genius (unregistered) in reply to Random832
    Random832:
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    C. F. Martin:
    Recently, at a local drug store, A woman went into diabetic shock. A nurse, further back in line made the clerk-monkey get an emergency kit and a container of OJ which she used to save the diabetic's life. The clerk-monkey threatened to call the police if nobody paid for the items right there on the spot.

    It made the news and the drugstore reimbursed the nurse for the 25$ worth of stuff the clerk-monkey thought she had "stolen."

    Less and less speeple are capable of thought to the point where common sense is becoming a rarity.

    It's a shame really.

    I hope that bozo was summarily fired for being an idiot. If he had refused to get the kit and OJ, I would have tried his ass for murder.

    It's not clear to me why the store is just expected to take the loss on something like that - for PR purposes it may be a good idea, but have we really, as a society gotten to a point where it's immoral to expect payment for use of a product?

    I mean, if he just said "I'm going to call the cops" out of the blue, that's one thing, but if he's already asked, what right does the victim have to refuse to pay? Seems similar to hospitals sending a bill for emergency room/ambulance, see how far you get refusing to pay those.

    (I get the impression from your story that the immediate danger had in fact already passed before he demanded payment - if he'd made them ring it up before opening the kit or OJ, I'd agree that's horrible. But without that, he's not endangering someone's life, and there's nothing morally wrong with a policy of "you use it, you buy it")

    Nurses don't usually pay for the equipment they use. He should have gotten his money from the patient.

  • Williams... (unregistered)

    Don't noticed the WTF here. The phone conversations are very likely being recorded so she needs to make the call to get the statement recorded by the corporate system. It doesn't matter where the person she's talking to really is. She still needs to validate it and have it recorded. It makes sense, in a weird way...

  • (cs)

    I think someone's broken the CAPTCHA and is trying to make all the unregistered readers of the site look like fucking morons.

  • (cs) in reply to NeoMojo
    NeoMojo:
    I think someone's broken the CAPTCHA and is trying to make all the unregistered readers of the site look like fucking morons.

    They'll fit right in.

  • Geoff (unregistered) in reply to cogo
    cogo:
    Winslow Theramin:
    Another made up story. How stupid do you think we are? This simply never happened.
    The fake is a lie.

    That's not true!

  • (cs) in reply to cklam
    cklam:
    Maybe the HR secretary was fired for not dotting the i's and crossing the t's of some arbitrary company process in one of her previous jobs.

    Even if there is no formal process/procedure at her present job for the employee verification task then she is just creating the records to cover her own ass in case things go wrong and the witch-hunt starts for the least senior person to have made a mistake. Example for the log-headed among us forum users:

    (1) Snoofle f***s up brillantly on a project, gets found out and fired. Company loses money big-time and bammm!!! witch-hunt.

    (2) As part of the witch-hunt, the secretary gets called on the deck and is questioned: "You say here that you verfied his employment history ? How did you do that ?" Her answer: "I called his previous employers on the telephone numbers documented in his file. My extension is xxxx; you can verify the calls in the company's telephone logs."

    (3) And so - TADAAAA - due diligence is proven.

    Remarkably, nobody brought this up in any of the previous 227 posts.

    Actually yes, they did, repeatedly. Nobody bothered to go into so much detail about the procedure for covering your ass because it assumed that everybody knew. Nobody except maybe that secretary needs a three step process to tell them that once they have a phone record they can tell someone else to go review it.

  • (cs) in reply to Dragna
    Dragna:
    hehehehehehe

    $500 bucks said it was a blonde

    Confirmed - you win!

  • D. T. North (unregistered) in reply to Jeroen Brattinga
    Jeroen Brattinga:
    OMG! What's next? People e-mailing someone who's just 10 feet away? Oh, wait...

    I used to have a friend who's mom would e-mail her to let her know Dinner was ready.

    Then again, that might be more of a commentary on the friend...who was pretty well addicted to the web (AND MUD).

  • (cs) in reply to notme

    A donut hole is a small spherical pastry designed to look as though it came from the center of a donut. In practice they are typically larger than the actual hole of the donut.

  • JJ Walker (unregistered) in reply to real_aardvark

    Or it is recorded for legal reasons and that's the way she's gotta do it...

  • jk (unregistered) in reply to 36% Genius
    36% Genius:
    Random832:
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    C. F. Martin:
    Recently, at a local drug store, A woman went into diabetic shock. A nurse, further back in line made the clerk-monkey get an emergency kit and a container of OJ which she used to save the diabetic's life. The clerk-monkey threatened to call the police if nobody paid for the items right there on the spot.

    It made the news and the drugstore reimbursed the nurse for the 25$ worth of stuff the clerk-monkey thought she had "stolen."

    Less and less speeple are capable of thought to the point where common sense is becoming a rarity.

    It's a shame really.

    I hope that bozo was summarily fired for being an idiot. If he had refused to get the kit and OJ, I would have tried his ass for murder.

    It's not clear to me why the store is just expected to take the loss on something like that - for PR purposes it may be a good idea, but have we really, as a society gotten to a point where it's immoral to expect payment for use of a product?

    I mean, if he just said "I'm going to call the cops" out of the blue, that's one thing, but if he's already asked, what right does the victim have to refuse to pay? Seems similar to hospitals sending a bill for emergency room/ambulance, see how far you get refusing to pay those.

    (I get the impression from your story that the immediate danger had in fact already passed before he demanded payment - if he'd made them ring it up before opening the kit or OJ, I'd agree that's horrible. But without that, he's not endangering someone's life, and there's nothing morally wrong with a policy of "you use it, you buy it")

    Nurses don't usually pay for the equipment they use. He should have gotten his money from the patient.

    would have been easier too, as the patient was in shock.

  • me (unregistered) in reply to Tuomas
    Tuomas:
    You must obey the process. Always.
    oh please ... you call that a 'process' ...

Leave a comment on “Stupid Secretary WTF”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article