Why? Let me explain.
Back in January I posted a diatribe about my failure to acquire a position in the Customer Service dept. where I work. I carried that around with me for a long time, and even though it is pretty caustic and unnecessary, I still feel that it is, for the most part, an accurate description of my feelings on the matter.
Flash forward: We have an annual employee survey whereby employees can express their feelings about their work experience. It's a great thing that the company provides, and they provided it about a month ago. I proceeded to describe my feelings in a comment box regarding the circumstances surrounding the January diatribe. I was asked to explain my survey comments to my then supervisor, which I proceeded to do. As I thought would happen, the supervisor seemed to become defensive, didn't take any responsibility for their actions, even though I took responsibility for mine, and made it seem as if I was the only one at fault. Fine. That's one reason I didn't want to meet with them in the first place. No win.
About two weeks after that meeting, I was asked into a followup meeting with Human Resources to see how the initial meeting between my former supervisor and I went down. I described the initial meeting, feeling fine about standing up for myself. Before the HR meeting was over I was told that this blog had "recently come to the attention of HR"... that "there is a policy against negative writing in a blog directly concerning the company, whether the company is named or unnamed." It's true. There is that policy. The only problem with that is that this policy concerning blogs was not in place when I was hired. In fact, it's only recently been put into place. I don't even know if it was in place when I wrote the above mentioned diatribe back in January. Nice coincidence. Either way, It was stressed that I wasn't in trouble for the January post, and it was politely suggested that I stop writing negatively about work because this is technically a public forum and more than a few folks from the company read it. It contributes to a negative image. Fair enough. I get it. Linkage, you know.
However, is it any worse than being in a position of power at the company and talking shit about me behind my back? Maybe. Maybe not.
Image.
Even though I still feel the January post was fairly accurate, even though it has been pointed out time and again that this blog is a way for me to get out the nasties, it was pretty caustic, and it's not worth losing my job over, and that's the unfortunate situation I will find myself in if it continues (even though I haven't posted a thing about it since January, and in fact, I was very supportive of the company and people who work there.). The truth is, the company is very supportive of open communication within it's walls, and I should have gone that route. Fair enough. Lesson learned.
I suppose I could be a little flattered that someone thinks little bitchy ol' ME could cause a decline in image and sales because of my issues, but really, I think this is just a sad case of someone feeling the need to have their own little manipulative power. Fine. You win. But it doesn't change the way I feel, and I can guarantee that there are others with similar feelings. I'll just set up a meeting in the future, 'kay?
The lesson here folks is: If you want to rant about those at work whom you feel powerless to change...do it in person. And if you blog it? Go anonymous. Play the game. Become an artist. Get some psychosis.
That being said, I'm sorry for my transgressions. Please forgive me. I love you all.
Peace out. Be nice to someone. Ride your bike. Stop eating animals.
-A
