An interesting post regarding the attitude of a company called Cardone towards privacy is here. If you have time, why not take a look and make up your own mind?
Well, everything else aside, I do feel is it a bit silly to - on your first day at a new job - post publically about it on the Internet calling your new employers "mental" and "Jesus freaks".
I'd certainly be disappointed by someone's character if I employed them and found them doing that.
Exactly. Yes, they're mad fundies; but the OP clearly wasn't applying the standards of responsibility and disrection that even a reasonable employer would expect.
I don't argue that there's no breach of trust, but he has stated, crudely and in public, that he is in fundamental opposition to one of the principles that the company operates by - indeed the one that they list first and seem to hold most dear - and holds in open contempt the belief system that gave rise to that principle.
The fact that that principle refers to someone who doesn't exist and is couched in terms of one particular monotheistic belief system is neither here nor there.
As an aside, I'm highly amused at the Guardian-reader reaction to this. Had it been an company run on Islamic lines, and had a blogger working there had said in public "Hey, that Allah! My employers tell me to honour him but stuff 'em, they're just Mohammed-freaks!" the blogger would no doubt still be reeling from the condemnation. ;)
The original post did not state fundamental opposition. That would have been along the lines of "what a shame that I now work for a company that values the very faith that I seek to destroy and undermine at every opportunity with a range of destructive acts". Simple disagreement, even if not particularly politely stated, does not qualify, and neither do I consider it contempt.
In what way does what he said in the original post impair the company's ability to do business or negatively influence their customers in any way? Plenty of people who do not believe that performance-related pay works and said so have played a perfectly diligent part in implementing them, for better or worse. Had he said to customers "this company is Christian and I think that is rubbish but hey, it's a job", again that would be different. Yes, blogs are public. Blogs are also actively looked for, or not. No-one is forcing anyone to search for his blog, or to read it.
I'd certainly be disappointed by someone's character if I employed them and found them doing that.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
The fact that that principle refers to someone who doesn't exist and is couched in terms of one particular monotheistic belief system is neither here nor there.
As an aside, I'm highly amused at the Guardian-reader reaction to this. Had it been an company run on Islamic lines, and had a blogger working there had said in public "Hey, that Allah! My employers tell me to honour him but stuff 'em, they're just Mohammed-freaks!" the blogger would no doubt still be reeling from the condemnation. ;)
Reply
The original post did not state fundamental opposition. That would have been along the lines of "what a shame that I now work for a company that values the very faith that I seek to destroy and undermine at every opportunity with a range of destructive acts". Simple disagreement, even if not particularly politely stated, does not qualify, and neither do I consider it contempt.
In what way does what he said in the original post impair the company's ability to do business or negatively influence their customers in any way? Plenty of people who do not believe that performance-related pay works and said so have played a perfectly diligent part in implementing them, for better or worse. Had he said to customers "this company is Christian and I think that is rubbish but hey, it's a job", again that would be different. Yes, blogs are public. Blogs are also actively looked for, or not. No-one is forcing anyone to search for his blog, or to read it.
Reply
Leave a comment