I actually recommend against this. This will likely result in your co-workers being irritated at you for taking away their Internet as well.
What I would do is abstain from non-work Internet for about six months, and then see if you can't find a way to get onto, say, just Gmail and just for a few minutes a day.
Also, could you perhaps ask your boss to give you concrete deadlines for projects? As in, "You need to have these four books catalogued by 11:30"?
I disagree. Rules are rules. Boss can enforce them equally or not. I can't believe you would tell Kippur to just quietly ignore and accept illegal discrimination like that. What's next? Close your eyes and think of England?
If he's not enforcing them equally, he's leaving himself open to a multi-million dollar discrimination lawsuit.
Kip wouldn't be taking away their internet. DOUBLY SO since they're not supposed to have it in the first place.
If they have an issue with lack of internet, they can take it up with the boss, who wrote the rule they've been breaking in the first place.
If they want to give her grief over this, it goes to HR for a harassment complaint.
You don't put up with bullshit like this at work. That's why there are LAWS about this. Telling someone to just tolerate abuse and discrimination is utterly reprehensible. It's even worse telling her to then be sneaky about breaking the rule that nobody has to be sneaky about.
Please reexamine your priorities and check your privilege.
Ditto all this. Plus, no decent boss would go tell all his employees that it was Kippur who turned them in. If he did, Kippur would have ample grounds for a harassment complaint.
I'm here from library_mofo because I couldn't post anonymously there. Posting anonymously because one of my library co-workers has Asperger's, so I know a bit of what you're dealing with, but the rest of us aren't supposed to know she has Asperger's so I don't want to be identifiable when I talk about it.
So...the Internet thing. I suspect that what was actually happening was that your co-workers were doing non-work stuff online when you or other people close to them in rank were around, but not when any supervisors could see them. That's kind of how it works in a lot of workplaces, not just libraries. But as you said, you (quite logically) assumed that since you saw other people doing it, it was actually not forbidden at all, so you apparently didn't try to hide it from your supervisors. Basically, your co-workers can mess around online because they hide it, but you got in trouble because you got caught. I know this is totally unfair and will make no sense to you, but that's the way it is
( ... )
Ratting out specific co-workers is not an inherently good thing... I should have been more clear that the noting of incidents should be in the aggregate, and then presented as an anonymous "lump".
Like "You are enforcing the no personal internet rule when it comes to me, but not with any other employees. In the last week, I have observed various other co-workers using the internet for personal reasons at least 20 times. This uneven enforcement of the rules is discriminatory."
Also sucks that, regardless that you accidentally sent in the wrong article, it was an article that would bring some amount of attention to your library-slash-university, and for writing said article you are reprimmanded for something that seems a bit petty and has no direct corrilation to anything.
(...oh god, I just accidentally had an actual slash fic/picture of a library & university pop in my head, ohgoditwon'tleave)
Comments 16
Once you have a dozen or so of these incidents, bring it back to the bossman.
Make a clear statement that if a rule is going to be enforced, it must be enforced equally.
To forbid you internet usage, but to ignore others breaking the same rule is discrimination.
Then simply say
"You do understand that workplace discrimination on the basis of my disability is unacceptable."
If Bossman doesn't start making changes after that, come talk to me and we'll discuss the next step.
Reply
What I would do is abstain from non-work Internet for about six months, and then see if you can't find a way to get onto, say, just Gmail and just for a few minutes a day.
Also, could you perhaps ask your boss to give you concrete deadlines for projects? As in, "You need to have these four books catalogued by 11:30"?
Reply
Rules are rules.
Boss can enforce them equally or not.
I can't believe you would tell Kippur to just quietly ignore and accept illegal discrimination like that. What's next? Close your eyes and think of England?
If he's not enforcing them equally, he's leaving himself open to a multi-million dollar discrimination lawsuit.
Kip wouldn't be taking away their internet.
DOUBLY SO since they're not supposed to have it in the first place.
If they have an issue with lack of internet, they can take it up with the boss, who wrote the rule they've been breaking in the first place.
If they want to give her grief over this, it goes to HR for a harassment complaint.
You don't put up with bullshit like this at work.
That's why there are LAWS about this.
Telling someone to just tolerate abuse and discrimination is utterly reprehensible.
It's even worse telling her to then be sneaky about breaking the rule that nobody has to be sneaky about.
Please reexamine your priorities and check your privilege.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Talking to bosses is never easy. I'm glad your mother was there for you and I'm sorry that you had to lose your internet usage.
Reply
So...the Internet thing. I suspect that what was actually happening was that your co-workers were doing non-work stuff online when you or other people close to them in rank were around, but not when any supervisors could see them. That's kind of how it works in a lot of workplaces, not just libraries. But as you said, you (quite logically) assumed that since you saw other people doing it, it was actually not forbidden at all, so you apparently didn't try to hide it from your supervisors. Basically, your co-workers can mess around online because they hide it, but you got in trouble because you got caught. I know this is totally unfair and will make no sense to you, but that's the way it is ( ... )
Reply
Ratting out specific co-workers is not an inherently good thing... I should have been more clear that the noting of incidents should be in the aggregate, and then presented as an anonymous "lump".
Like "You are enforcing the no personal internet rule when it comes to me, but not with any other employees. In the last week, I have observed various other co-workers using the internet for personal reasons at least 20 times. This uneven enforcement of the rules is discriminatory."
Reply
l, so you apparently didn't try to hide it from your supervisors.
Or didn't hide it very well, at least.
Reply
Also sucks that, regardless that you accidentally sent in the wrong article, it was an article that would bring some amount of attention to your library-slash-university, and for writing said article you are reprimmanded for something that seems a bit petty and has no direct corrilation to anything.
(...oh god, I just accidentally had an actual slash fic/picture of a library & university pop in my head, ohgoditwon'tleave)
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment