David Warner's drunken tweeting

[Prince EWS]

Nah, you're getting towards reductio ad absurdum there.

Obviously I wouldn't just not do something; I'd raise my objections and, if there were ignored, I'd probably go over my manager's head.

Which makes it not comparable at all to homeworkgate. They just didn't do it.

 

[Spikey]

and they didn't get fired

 

[BoyBrumby]

Which makes it not comparable at all to homeworkgate. They just didn't do it.

In that particular incidence, frankly I think "I don't see the point" is about all the task deserved.

& if I were asked to do something similar I'd probably do the same. Although even the Civil Service isn't quite that pedantic.

 

[Spikey]

well yeah, no-one cares about improving the performance of the civil service

 

[Spikey]

Thing is if you were one of the players that got banned then you would want some sort of action against Warner. CA need to handle this carefully or it could split the dressing room.

also these are professional sportsmen - they'll be too busy celebrating warner's fight with the media to care about the punishment compared to the punishment of other offences

 

[Howe_zat]

thread's gone a bit weird

 

[Spikey]

anyway. warner wasn't drunk, he was just mad the article in question, when warner read it, was carried with a picture of himself and sreesanth at the top of it (which is no longer the case)

 

[Jono]

Warner incensed after image linked him to IPL corruption

Yeah says it there.

Warner is always drunk though tbf, even if he's not out drinking alcohol.

 

[Spikey]

I'd change the thread title before Warner sends you an angry VM

 

[Jono]

Why would he send it to me? Vic has the first post #suckitspikey

 

[Spikey]

Warner may not be able to understand that the author has no real authority over what picture is used with their article, but he'll be able to understand that you created this thread you monster

 

[sledger]

Haha wow this is the biggest straw man I've seen in months

Haha, it's really desperate, isn't it?

 

[Jono]

Why are you here? Go watch Newcastle vs. Arsenal you s.o.b

Support your team!

 

[sledger]

If you come round and watch it with me, I will.

 

[Prince EWS]

If you come round and watch it with me, I will.

If you were really sorry then you'd post up a photo.

 

[sledger]

If you were really sorry then you'd post up a photo.

ok

 

[Jono]

thread's gone a bit weird

indeed

 

[watson]

Nah that's ridiculous IMO. You can't be given a task by your employer or boss, make your own decision as to its worth and then just not do it

If you think a task is pointless then you should argue the instruction up front and give your reasons; not just decide you're not going to do it and stay silent on the matter until it's due. I don't care if it's public or not - you either raise the issue with whoever set the task or you just do it. "I didn't see the point" is not even close to being a good excuse.

This assumes that your boss is rational, reasonable, and nice. But what if they're none of those things and instead a complete git who is incapable of an open and fair discussion?
I'd say that the appropriate response to such a person would be to ignore them and treat their stupid request with the contempt that it deserves.

The mere fact that Mickey Arthur chose to go public rather than apologise and admit that his 'homework' request was unfair and ridiculous indicates to me that the Australian players are dealing with a stupid git who is incapable of an open and fair discussion. The response of Pattinson et al to their 'boss' was very likely the correct one.

 

[watson]

Love the photo Sledger!

 

[silentstriker]

Maybe it's because I work in a unionised industry, but there's no way I'd be fired if I had a solid reason for not doing something I saw as pointless. I'm a little staggered people are so accepting of BS from managers.

But my point is really about the punishment fitting the crime; being banned for a game for not doing a piddling bit of homework that is completely incidental to their actual job (playing cricket) is not a proportionate response.

Well, I've never worked in a unionized industry but after having my objections noted and told the decision still stood, I'd either have to go ahead and do it or be fired. And I'd have no recourse either (unless what they wanted was unethical/illegal or something extraordinary) - it's not my place to question every decision the company makes. I'd hope they listen to me but in the end, it's not my company. If I were running a business, I'd do the same thing. I'd want my employees to be honest if they thought something was inefficient or stupid, but in the end, you have to make a decision one way or another and they have to deal with it.