Employee accused of skipping work for 15 years(bbc.co.uk)
bbc.co.uk
Employee accused of skipping work for 15 years
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56822571
85 comments
[deleted]
This could rather easily be turned into a decent movie.
That was a good one thanks :)
Slightly nicer format for reading, along with some background info: https://github.com/bibanon/bibanon/wiki/American-Dream
Reading this also reminded me of this: https://web.archive.org/web/20160523114950/https://www.reddi...
Reminds me of this story of a civil servant who was told to stay home until called, fired 5 years later when they discovered he had been paid all that time without working, ordered to pay back those 5 years of wages, fought it in court for another 6 years, and in the end won 11 years of wages.
https://www.hln.be/binnenland/ambtenaar-krijgt-211-000-euro-...
https://www.hln.be/binnenland/ambtenaar-krijgt-211-000-euro-...
> The employee was a civil servant [in southern Italy], and was assigned to a job in the hospital in 2005. It was at this point he stopped going into work, the police said.
> The police have also accused him of threatening his manager to stop her from filing a disciplinary report against him.
The article gives a much different impression than the headline. Corrupt civil servant using threats of violence to siphon money under the cover of "employment" is much different than some rando playing hookey and getting away with it.
> The police have also accused him of threatening his manager to stop her from filing a disciplinary report against him.
The article gives a much different impression than the headline. Corrupt civil servant using threats of violence to siphon money under the cover of "employment" is much different than some rando playing hookey and getting away with it.
I thought it was going to be one of those fun stories about a sysadmin automating his work and it takes years to for their employers to realize that he've been doing nothing.
This one however I feel no sympathy. I hope the public funds parasite gets punished.
This one however I feel no sympathy. I hope the public funds parasite gets punished.
Reading between the lines -- is this Mafia related?
Not an unreasonable suspicion. How often do you get to threaten your manager like that unless you have something to back it up with? And Italy, especially the south, is notorious for Mafia presence. Heck, they bombed a church when Francis condemned them.
The threat was almost certainly along the lines of "you know what happens to cops that narc on other cops" and not one of physical violence.
Edit: yes I was wrong but cut me some f-ing slack for assuming the default.
Edit: yes I was wrong but cut me some f-ing slack for assuming the default.
Since there's nothing in the article even remotely suggesting the nature of the threat I'm curious what your source is.
Anyone who's ever worked for a large organization knows "that would be a politically unwise and you would have no future here" type threats outnumber threats of violence at least 1000:1
Per an additional source (not in English so I'm trusting the translation of someone who's disagreeing on the internet) provided in the comments it appears this guy was the exception to the rule and did pretend to have mafia connections.
Per an additional source (not in English so I'm trusting the translation of someone who's disagreeing on the internet) provided in the comments it appears this guy was the exception to the rule and did pretend to have mafia connections.
Could you explain this a bit for those of us that either never worked for a large enough organization, or that did not pay enough attention to the politics while there?
I get that a manager wouldn't want to put down their team since that puts them down too, but something this egregious seems so extreme that would not have those consequences, not to speak of the effect on the other employees' morale of having someone allowed to not work and get paid.
I don't see how someone can threaten a manager's career without having something over them, either being part of organized crime, be related/friends with a much higher up person in the organization, or have something on the manager for blackmail.
I get that a manager wouldn't want to put down their team since that puts them down too, but something this egregious seems so extreme that would not have those consequences, not to speak of the effect on the other employees' morale of having someone allowed to not work and get paid.
I don't see how someone can threaten a manager's career without having something over them, either being part of organized crime, be related/friends with a much higher up person in the organization, or have something on the manager for blackmail.
Warning: I'm about to make a bunch of generalizations, this kind of crap isn't distributed evenly among government. You'll have good functional departments and you'll have backwaters full of deadbeats and everything in between. Same goes on the team level with a dept.
In government it's pretty common to have dead weight employees who get no real work given to them and collect a paycheck so long as they show up (optional in Italy apparently). They can persist because they have connections higher up in the organization. Sometimes the jobs are just BS that doesn't exist so that politicians or their connected appointees at the top of the org chart can hand them out to people as favors (e.g. the deadbeat relative of a major donor could be given a 100k job as a thank you).
There is also the union angle, we've all heard stories of toxic do-nothing employees who persist because they have seniority which lets them game the system. You get this to some extent in any large bureaucratic organization but the confluence of unions and government creates such a procedurally rigid environment that it makes it worse than you'd get in a BigCo shipyard or some other private sector workplace with lots of unions and bureaucracy
>I get that a manager wouldn't want to put down their team since that puts them down too, but something this egregious seems so extreme that would not have those consequences, not to speak of the effect on the other employees' morale of having someone allowed to not work and get paid.
You'd be correct in inferring that it's terrible for morale. In my observation it is a large part of why enthusiastic civil servants turn into jaded clock punchers who don't give a crap over the course of their careers.
>I don't see how someone can threaten a manager's career without having something over them, either being part of organized crime, be related/friends with a much higher up person in the organization, or have something on the manager for blackmail.
Imagine you get a green new manager that's promoted in from a more effective branch of the bureaucracy transferring into one of the more toxic branches. They notice someone's on their report list but not actually around or doing anything, etc. etc. So they contact the person. And the person responds "this is how things are done here", cites several examples of similar behavior done by people higher up the org chart than their boss that reporting them would threaten and point out why that may be unwise to do as a new manager. The new manager has a nearly infinite list of things that need fixing with the toxic area they've inherited. They know they need buy in from higher ups in order to fix things. If reporting their own 5day/wk deadbeat gets them on the wrong side of someone three levels up who's golfing 3day/week it may very well be a battle they don't pick, especially if they want to do good work and then move up and out. It's just money after all, being down one person or one person's salary is a much smaller problem than dragging that person into the office where they can cause problems or drawing the ire of higher ups.
In government it's pretty common to have dead weight employees who get no real work given to them and collect a paycheck so long as they show up (optional in Italy apparently). They can persist because they have connections higher up in the organization. Sometimes the jobs are just BS that doesn't exist so that politicians or their connected appointees at the top of the org chart can hand them out to people as favors (e.g. the deadbeat relative of a major donor could be given a 100k job as a thank you).
There is also the union angle, we've all heard stories of toxic do-nothing employees who persist because they have seniority which lets them game the system. You get this to some extent in any large bureaucratic organization but the confluence of unions and government creates such a procedurally rigid environment that it makes it worse than you'd get in a BigCo shipyard or some other private sector workplace with lots of unions and bureaucracy
>I get that a manager wouldn't want to put down their team since that puts them down too, but something this egregious seems so extreme that would not have those consequences, not to speak of the effect on the other employees' morale of having someone allowed to not work and get paid.
You'd be correct in inferring that it's terrible for morale. In my observation it is a large part of why enthusiastic civil servants turn into jaded clock punchers who don't give a crap over the course of their careers.
>I don't see how someone can threaten a manager's career without having something over them, either being part of organized crime, be related/friends with a much higher up person in the organization, or have something on the manager for blackmail.
Imagine you get a green new manager that's promoted in from a more effective branch of the bureaucracy transferring into one of the more toxic branches. They notice someone's on their report list but not actually around or doing anything, etc. etc. So they contact the person. And the person responds "this is how things are done here", cites several examples of similar behavior done by people higher up the org chart than their boss that reporting them would threaten and point out why that may be unwise to do as a new manager. The new manager has a nearly infinite list of things that need fixing with the toxic area they've inherited. They know they need buy in from higher ups in order to fix things. If reporting their own 5day/wk deadbeat gets them on the wrong side of someone three levels up who's golfing 3day/week it may very well be a battle they don't pick, especially if they want to do good work and then move up and out. It's just money after all, being down one person or one person's salary is a much smaller problem than dragging that person into the office where they can cause problems or drawing the ire of higher ups.
Or you just make nice and slowly grind on them until they have a break down and/or leave.
> pretend
Why "pretend"? It could be an actual thing. ;)
Why "pretend"? It could be an actual thing. ;)
This kind of thing is rampant in Italy's public sector (and other nations as well). They basically just found one of the worst offenders (i.e. the guy that half the public sector employees aim to be) and are making an example out of him.
The timing relative to other government misconduct in Italy is suspiciously convenient I might add.
If this wasn't broadly considered ok he wouldn't have gotten away with it for 15yr and they wouldn't be going back 15yr to find "alleged threats" he made. Based on my experience the threat was something less like "imma bust a cap in yo ass" and more likely along the lines of "you know everyone does this and if you take a hard stance on this misconduct your career progression is dead" which is something that not everyone has to be explicitly told but a situation that damn near every career public servant (not just in Italy) will have to deal with at some point.
The timing relative to other government misconduct in Italy is suspiciously convenient I might add.
If this wasn't broadly considered ok he wouldn't have gotten away with it for 15yr and they wouldn't be going back 15yr to find "alleged threats" he made. Based on my experience the threat was something less like "imma bust a cap in yo ass" and more likely along the lines of "you know everyone does this and if you take a hard stance on this misconduct your career progression is dead" which is something that not everyone has to be explicitly told but a situation that damn near every career public servant (not just in Italy) will have to deal with at some point.
See my other response about why you’re wrong about threats. This was beyond normal, it’s part of proceedings against 57 people involved in a scheme in the same hospital. Between this and the threats, chances are that “somebody” was managing the hospital as their personal cash machine.
Like I replied elsewhere, my assumption was perfectly reasonable given the information provided by the BBC.
If there was a major plot twist like he actually threatened physical violence as opposed to the usual retaliation should I not be able to count on them to mention that?
If there was a major plot twist like he actually threatened physical violence as opposed to the usual retaliation should I not be able to count on them to mention that?
This was already on HN yesterday (108 points, 107 comments)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26889281
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26889281
Oh I did not catch that.
Since it got points, it means other missed it too :) No worries.
> The employee was a civil servant
Apparently he wasn't. :)
Apparently he wasn't. :)
As an italian, i'm a bit amazed that BBC wrote an article about this, and also that someone posted here on HN.
As someone already pointed out, reminds me of the forgotten employee tale, except this guy is probably mafia.
Came to say this.
A random employee threat to a manager isn’t normally swept under the carpet.
A threat from someone from a ‘ndrangheta background (the Calabrian mafia) on the other hand...
This would explain also why a lot of the other managers involved were happy to forget about him for so long.
This would explain also why a lot of the other managers involved were happy to forget about him for so long.
> A random employee threat to a manager isn’t normally swept under the carpet
Do you think that managers in Calabria actually check if the threat came from an actual 'ndrangheta affiliate or not? I think it's simply a matter of "looking dangerous" and the idea (probably correct) that reporting to the police is much more risky than just doing nothing. Anyone who has little to lose can behave in the same threatening way where there is no repercussion to be feared.
Do you think that managers in Calabria actually check if the threat came from an actual 'ndrangheta affiliate or not? I think it's simply a matter of "looking dangerous" and the idea (probably correct) that reporting to the police is much more risky than just doing nothing. Anyone who has little to lose can behave in the same threatening way where there is no repercussion to be feared.
Lying about being in the mafia can have grave consequences, obviously. Especially if there is a big media storm about it and you happen to live in the vicinity. I think it's pretty normal to give them "benefit of doubt" if they claim to be in any mafia, and stay clear of them, no matter if you think they actually are in the mafia or not.
> Lying about being in the mafia can have grave consequences, obviously
What do you mean? I hope you don’t seriously think that there is a mafia entity that is going around chasing people who casually claim to be part of it. Except for the higher-ups, the mafia is just a loose social network of people who don't mind using intimidation for personal gain. You don't even need (or want) to claim you're part of it, just act as if you're dangerous. The only risk you have (apart from that of the proper authorities) is that of trying to intimidate someone who is even better connected in that social network than you are.
What do you mean? I hope you don’t seriously think that there is a mafia entity that is going around chasing people who casually claim to be part of it. Except for the higher-ups, the mafia is just a loose social network of people who don't mind using intimidation for personal gain. You don't even need (or want) to claim you're part of it, just act as if you're dangerous. The only risk you have (apart from that of the proper authorities) is that of trying to intimidate someone who is even better connected in that social network than you are.
> I hope you don’t seriously think that there is a mafia entity that is going around chasing people who casually claim to be part of it.
Absolutely, that is the case.
> Except for the higher-ups, the mafia is just a loose social network of people who don't mind using intimidation for personal gain.
You are not right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Ndrangheta - tightly organized, hierarchical organization that controls about 3% of Italy's GDP and ruthlessly enforces its dominion with brutal turf wars.
Absolutely, that is the case.
> Except for the higher-ups, the mafia is just a loose social network of people who don't mind using intimidation for personal gain.
You are not right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Ndrangheta - tightly organized, hierarchical organization that controls about 3% of Italy's GDP and ruthlessly enforces its dominion with brutal turf wars.
Look, this is from an analysis document presented at the Italian parliament:
"The criminal density of Calabria [region where the 'ndrangheta comes from], when comparing the numbers of official affiliates to the population, is of 27%. [...] The percentage is worrisome not only because more than 1/4 of the population is involved, in different ways, in criminal activities; but also because around these groups always gravitate thousands of "white collar workers", many of whom beyond suspicion." [1]
So 27% of the population is involved directly, even more are involved in a supporting/ collateral role. Do you really think that they all know who is who and that they're all enrolled in a precise hierarchical structure? Do you think that in this kind of environment to threaten someone you need a certificate? You might not be part of one of the families (because the 'ndrangheta is mostly families), but you might be good friend of someone who is, you might have done some job for them and know them casually. With those percentages, almost everyone who is local can probably claim to have some connection with someone who you'd not want to anger.
I remember this funny little anecdote by some anti-mafia investigator in Italy (though he was concerned with Camorra, the Neapolitan version of it): "When some prominent local mafiosi arrive in Naples with the ferry boat, before disembarking they remove their golden Rolex watches from their wrists, because they know that otherwise they'll be robbed". This is the climate.
[1] https://www.parlamento.it/parlam/bicam/14/Antimafia/document.... (page 4)
"The criminal density of Calabria [region where the 'ndrangheta comes from], when comparing the numbers of official affiliates to the population, is of 27%. [...] The percentage is worrisome not only because more than 1/4 of the population is involved, in different ways, in criminal activities; but also because around these groups always gravitate thousands of "white collar workers", many of whom beyond suspicion." [1]
So 27% of the population is involved directly, even more are involved in a supporting/ collateral role. Do you really think that they all know who is who and that they're all enrolled in a precise hierarchical structure? Do you think that in this kind of environment to threaten someone you need a certificate? You might not be part of one of the families (because the 'ndrangheta is mostly families), but you might be good friend of someone who is, you might have done some job for them and know them casually. With those percentages, almost everyone who is local can probably claim to have some connection with someone who you'd not want to anger.
I remember this funny little anecdote by some anti-mafia investigator in Italy (though he was concerned with Camorra, the Neapolitan version of it): "When some prominent local mafiosi arrive in Naples with the ferry boat, before disembarking they remove their golden Rolex watches from their wrists, because they know that otherwise they'll be robbed". This is the climate.
[1] https://www.parlamento.it/parlam/bicam/14/Antimafia/document.... (page 4)
You are speaking specifically of the Italian mafia in the region the news report is from, you have familiarity of it?
Everyone in these comments is naively assuming the guy threatened to actually harm someone and it's absolutely infuriating. Has nobody here ever seen the kind of deviance that goes on in a large administrative organization or bureaucracy before?!
It's almost certainly a not a "imma bust a cap in yo ass" threat and more along the lines of a "people higher than you and me in the org chart tacitly condone this behavior and your career is gonna be a dead end if you narc on me" type of threat.
It's almost certainly a not a "imma bust a cap in yo ass" threat and more along the lines of a "people higher than you and me in the org chart tacitly condone this behavior and your career is gonna be a dead end if you narc on me" type of threat.
Stop talking of things you don’t know about. From a more detailed source [0]:
> la procura della Repubblica di Catanzaro scrive nell’inchiesta che una persona molto distinta si presentò nell’ufficio della dipendente minacciandola in modo velato, e facendole capire che la sua incolumità e quella della sua famiglia erano a rischio
“The public prosecutor in Catanzaro writes in the filing that a well-dressed person walked into [the witness’s] office and made veiled threats, suggesting her health and the one of her relatives were at risk.”
Well-dressed man speaking softly of physical violence - clearly the guy wanted to appear connected to the local ‘ndrangheta ras.
[0] https://it.sputniknews.com/italia/2021042010438566-15-anni-d...
> la procura della Repubblica di Catanzaro scrive nell’inchiesta che una persona molto distinta si presentò nell’ufficio della dipendente minacciandola in modo velato, e facendole capire che la sua incolumità e quella della sua famiglia erano a rischio
“The public prosecutor in Catanzaro writes in the filing that a well-dressed person walked into [the witness’s] office and made veiled threats, suggesting her health and the one of her relatives were at risk.”
Well-dressed man speaking softly of physical violence - clearly the guy wanted to appear connected to the local ‘ndrangheta ras.
[0] https://it.sputniknews.com/italia/2021042010438566-15-anni-d...
Thank you for the additional context but there was no way I could have known that since I can't read itialian.
Everyone knows threats of "bad things will happen to your career if you do this" outnumber "bad things will physically happen to you" at least 1000:1.
I challenge you (or anyone) to come up with a reason why my assumption was unreasonable using only the information provided by the BBC article submitted.
Everyone knows threats of "bad things will happen to your career if you do this" outnumber "bad things will physically happen to you" at least 1000:1.
I challenge you (or anyone) to come up with a reason why my assumption was unreasonable using only the information provided by the BBC article submitted.
You should maybe take this as a lesson to not try to speak authoritatively about things you are ignorant about. If you don't know, offer speculation sure but statements like 'almost certainly' and arguing all up and down the thread from a position of ignorance rightly earn you downvotes.
How am I ignorant? Just because I assumed the typical case based on information provided in TFA (surely if it was exceptional they would have mentioned it right, the news loves twists).
In several comments throughout here I have described from experience with accuracy how these kinds of phantom employees exist and the nature of the organizations that provide the conditions for them to exist. I get that portraying government as anything but pure unadulterated competency at every level is not ideologically acceptable to many here but unfortunately that is the reality. Nevertheless, even in highly dysfunctional corners physical threats of violence are not the norm.
Do you seriously think that this flew under the radar for 15yr because he made threats? No, it was because the organization was dysfunctional in many ways and his behavior was not far enough out of line to cause problems back when he did it.
I hope you one day inherit management responsibilities in the kind of organization that has this kind of dysfunction sprinkled throughout it.
In several comments throughout here I have described from experience with accuracy how these kinds of phantom employees exist and the nature of the organizations that provide the conditions for them to exist. I get that portraying government as anything but pure unadulterated competency at every level is not ideologically acceptable to many here but unfortunately that is the reality. Nevertheless, even in highly dysfunctional corners physical threats of violence are not the norm.
Do you seriously think that this flew under the radar for 15yr because he made threats? No, it was because the organization was dysfunctional in many ways and his behavior was not far enough out of line to cause problems back when he did it.
I hope you one day inherit management responsibilities in the kind of organization that has this kind of dysfunction sprinkled throughout it.
It's all over all sorts of EU media, I think in no small part fueled by 'remind me why we're giving Italy 222 BILLION euros in Covid recovery money when they spend it like this?' thinking. Which on the one hand is fair enough; on the other, articles like this coming out shows that you're trying to improve things. The general idea in the rest of Europe is that this sort of thing is rampant in the South, I don't know to what extent that is correct. Anecdotes online suggest that it's not a completely isolated incident, at the least.
Reminds me of the Greek island of blind where 10% of population claimed blindness benefits
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2012/0430/Greek-islan...
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2012/0430/Greek-islan...
not sure if you're italian but to add insult to injury italians themselves complain about EU fund usage in the south :)
it is true however that between arrest and initial prosecution the justice system in italy is very trigger happy (whether people stay in jail is a different story) and it makes a good story for the press. there are examples elsewhere where law enforcement is a lot more magnanimous. not defending this case at all but in general this might partially explain why italy is more on the spotlight than other places.
it is true however that between arrest and initial prosecution the justice system in italy is very trigger happy (whether people stay in jail is a different story) and it makes a good story for the press. there are examples elsewhere where law enforcement is a lot more magnanimous. not defending this case at all but in general this might partially explain why italy is more on the spotlight than other places.
Ah! Thanks for pointing this out, i didn't know the news was under such attention on EU media. Corruption and criminal infiltration is indeed very common expecially in southern regions. the worries of mafia getting hands on those money are very real unfortunately...
I thought the last decades had shown that “especially” is not really true anymore. In the South it’s just more officially acknowledged, but these problems are similarly present in the North.
Different countries have different ways of wasting money, but glass houses.
In the USA, wasted money mostly goes to execs and shareholders rather than workers, but I doubt the scale is less. From today's news...
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/21/us/politics/emergent-john...
> Federal Inspectors Fear More Vaccines Were Exposed to Contamination
> Last month, up to 15 million doses of Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine had to be discarded at Emergent’s factory in Baltimore. A new report says problems were not fully investigated and other doses may be compromised.
> …Though the government gave Emergent a $163 million contract in 2012 to ready the Baltimore plant for mass production in a pandemic, the site remained largely untested, and the company did not meet a requirement for demonstrating its rapid-response capabilities… Nonetheless, the government went on to award Emergent a $628 million contract last June…
>… In another finding, the F.D.A. regulators wrote that the Bayview building “is not maintained in a clean and sanitary condition.” Nor is it “of suitable size, design and location to facilitate cleaning, maintenance and proper operations,” they said.
> …Throughout 2020, its founder and chairman, Fuad El-Hibri, cashed in shares and options worth over $42 million, and the company’s chief executive, Robert Kramer, was recently awarded a $1.2 million cash bonus.
In the USA, wasted money mostly goes to execs and shareholders rather than workers, but I doubt the scale is less. From today's news...
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/21/us/politics/emergent-john...
> Federal Inspectors Fear More Vaccines Were Exposed to Contamination
> Last month, up to 15 million doses of Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine had to be discarded at Emergent’s factory in Baltimore. A new report says problems were not fully investigated and other doses may be compromised.
> …Though the government gave Emergent a $163 million contract in 2012 to ready the Baltimore plant for mass production in a pandemic, the site remained largely untested, and the company did not meet a requirement for demonstrating its rapid-response capabilities… Nonetheless, the government went on to award Emergent a $628 million contract last June…
>… In another finding, the F.D.A. regulators wrote that the Bayview building “is not maintained in a clean and sanitary condition.” Nor is it “of suitable size, design and location to facilitate cleaning, maintenance and proper operations,” they said.
> …Throughout 2020, its founder and chairman, Fuad El-Hibri, cashed in shares and options worth over $42 million, and the company’s chief executive, Robert Kramer, was recently awarded a $1.2 million cash bonus.
When I read the bit about threats that was my thoughts "play nice or uncle tony will pay you a visit"
That's a great fluff piece to bury the PM having just been caught in corruption ... can you see that story in the top 10 "most read" ...
The story is there, it's hidden in a "top 5 things about Covid today".
When something random and unimportant hits the top of BBC news in recent years that seems to mean there's a story on Tory failure/corruption being buried.
The story is there, it's hidden in a "top 5 things about Covid today".
When something random and unimportant hits the top of BBC news in recent years that seems to mean there's a story on Tory failure/corruption being buried.
[deleted]
I don't see any corruption article on the BBC page.
It was very difficult to find: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56839459
This, so much this. It's top 5 most read (#5) for me.
The BBC a Tory newspaper?
Wow, that's a new one. Is the NYTimes a Republic rag then?
Wow, that's a new one. Is the NYTimes a Republic rag then?
Real talk, so please read charitably:
1) BBC has a policy of not going hard against the sitting government, this seems to be true regardless of who's in charge.
2) BBC is a large organisation, they have parts which are more pro-tory and others which are more anti-tory, but overall the anti-tory stuff will be a bit more curbed due to point 1.
3) David Cameron stacked the board with pro-tory people, this has little effect on the actual stories since the board has no direct involvement, but this could lead to a tory bias in some cases.
citation on point 3: https://www.ft.com/content/7ba884c2-176d-11e6-b197-a4af20d55...
1) BBC has a policy of not going hard against the sitting government, this seems to be true regardless of who's in charge.
2) BBC is a large organisation, they have parts which are more pro-tory and others which are more anti-tory, but overall the anti-tory stuff will be a bit more curbed due to point 1.
3) David Cameron stacked the board with pro-tory people, this has little effect on the actual stories since the board has no direct involvement, but this could lead to a tory bias in some cases.
citation on point 3: https://www.ft.com/content/7ba884c2-176d-11e6-b197-a4af20d55...
Considering the absolute horror show of sleaze and incompetence of the last few years, the BBC has become notorious for not holding the government to account.
An Italian civil servant is a non-story compared to the £37bn given to the UK's private sector to run a poor-to-nonexistent COVID test and trace scheme.
For comparison the entire annual budget of the NHS is £44bn. And the government refused to increase the pay of doctors and nurses who have more or less singlehandedly held the NHS together through COVID.
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/03/19/covid-19-test-and-trace...
Among other stories. That's just the worst of an appalling raft of cash-for-cronies handouts.
But the BBC rarely publishes news about Europe at all. And when it does it's often negative.
Not only do we have a story about an Italian civil servant, but also - coincidentally - there's news about Malta's EU cash-for-passports scheme.
Which is more or less identical to the UK's cash-for-passports scheme. But less expensive.
An Italian civil servant is a non-story compared to the £37bn given to the UK's private sector to run a poor-to-nonexistent COVID test and trace scheme.
For comparison the entire annual budget of the NHS is £44bn. And the government refused to increase the pay of doctors and nurses who have more or less singlehandedly held the NHS together through COVID.
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/03/19/covid-19-test-and-trace...
Among other stories. That's just the worst of an appalling raft of cash-for-cronies handouts.
But the BBC rarely publishes news about Europe at all. And when it does it's often negative.
Not only do we have a story about an Italian civil servant, but also - coincidentally - there's news about Malta's EU cash-for-passports scheme.
Which is more or less identical to the UK's cash-for-passports scheme. But less expensive.
It's £37 bn over two years. It's not clear how much of that has actually been disbursed yet (I vaguely recall a figure of £5-6 bn in Private Eye, but I'm not sure).
I don’t disagree but the focus on Tories is somewhat misleading. At the end of the day, the last PM to effectively fire the BBC Director General (and the board) because of a report that he didn’t like (while being likely correct) was Tony Blair.
The Tories would love to dismantle the BBC, rather than controlling it, but both parties like the grip it gives on propaganda.
The Tories would love to dismantle the BBC, rather than controlling it, but both parties like the grip it gives on propaganda.
You have to be in possession of a particularly warped mind to believe that this story is published to bury another story. That is conspiratorial nonsense.
What do you think is the most important news today in the UK?
Why do you suppose BBC have published this news story (front page, as of now for me) about how brilliant Dyson is but without any information on the corruption case? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46149743
Why do you suppose BBC have published this news story (front page, as of now for me) about how brilliant Dyson is but without any information on the corruption case? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46149743
They "republish" or "re-promote" old articles & profiles of people who are currently in the headlines to give context all the time.
That article is the same thing that was published in Jan 2019.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190507054620/https://www.bbc.c...
Grow up. Totally pathetic conspiratorial giberish
That article is the same thing that was published in Jan 2019.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190507054620/https://www.bbc.c...
Grow up. Totally pathetic conspiratorial giberish
Massive HR fail or fraud..
Mafia?
Peak psychological safety.
Nice, a real-life case of "Quo Vado" (check it out on Netflix)
Reminds me of the Spanish bloke who studied Spinoza while he should have been working.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/12/long-lunch-spa...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/12/long-lunch-spa...
New York LIRR employees: "he didn't get overtime pay for the fake hours? what a rookie".
No joke. If you work "too hard", apparently fellow MTA employees will kindly as you to "slow down".
https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/09/07/160748725/epis...
This Planet Money podcast pretty much explains it.
This Planet Money podcast pretty much explains it.
About a decade ago (or more) I knew a chap who had worked for a bank in Gran Canaria. He resigned, in order to leave for the mainland, but to his surprise his salary kept being deposited in his account.
Rather than report this, he spent the next year "on holiday" at full pay, until eventually someone realised and the money stopped appearing. He said he felt a bit aggrieved by this - as though he was entitled to it.
There was no follow up action by the bank. I expect that it is a bit embarrassing for a bank to make such a mistake and so they just decided to sweep it under the rug.
Rather than report this, he spent the next year "on holiday" at full pay, until eventually someone realised and the money stopped appearing. He said he felt a bit aggrieved by this - as though he was entitled to it.
There was no follow up action by the bank. I expect that it is a bit embarrassing for a bank to make such a mistake and so they just decided to sweep it under the rug.
There's three phases to any ongoing favour:
1. Gratitude
2. Taking it for granted
3. Expecting it as a right
At least he wasn't slowing anyone down. I have been in several meetings with "Project Managers" who waste everyone's time asking for dates and estimates for their spreadsheet even after I have explained that this is an iterative process and we cannot expect to know in detail what tasks will be complete on which days and that we should give general updates with a rough ETA of completion every 2 weeks instead.
No one expects the date to be right. But you have to have a plan to iterate on and learn from. “Plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.”
> No one expects the date to be right.
I have never seen this in practice. On my experience, every single person that pushes for estimations expects your date to be right.
I have never seen this in practice. On my experience, every single person that pushes for estimations expects your date to be right.
Oh, I've seen the other kind too! Whenever I have a direct manager, the estimation is expected to be right. Whenever I talk to a manager that is not directly tied to me, they always push the "no one expects the date to be right" narrative. I guess the set of managers that have not been my direct managers is what you are looking for!
Then don't write any dates down. It is a basic communication skill to avoid sending out a spreadsheet with dates on it when you know those dates are not expected to be met. Someone reading it is going to assume that there is a problem if tasks are not completed by the date on the spreadsheet.
Just give them a date so they shut up. Whatever date, is fine.
I have an acquaintance who goes to work at a pretty boring 9-5 IT job for a local insurance company. Sits down at his desk for a bit in the morning, then gets a cup of coffee, puts it on his desk, hangs his coat on the back of his chair, and leaves. Heads over to his real day job as a salesman for a local Mercedes dealer. Towards the end of the workday he heads back to the office, cleans up his work area, and goes home. Every day, like clockwork.
Sometimes I wonder how often stuff like that happens and we don't hear about it.
It isn't lost on me that I can (and sometimes do) accomplish a completely satisfactory amount of work for my job in a couple hours each morning. Now that we're remote, if I were so inclined I bet I could hold down a second job and not go over 40 hours of total work time.
Sometimes I wonder how often stuff like that happens and we don't hear about it.
It isn't lost on me that I can (and sometimes do) accomplish a completely satisfactory amount of work for my job in a couple hours each morning. Now that we're remote, if I were so inclined I bet I could hold down a second job and not go over 40 hours of total work time.
> Now that we're remote, if I were so inclined I bet I could hold down a second job and not go over 40 hours of total work time.
It can totally be done... BUT I would not recommend it because the stress load can be extremely high. For one, you're constantly in fear of getting caught (even though many places have a friendly moonlighting clause now). You may have to juggle two meetings at the same time - which can also be done - though there's always that chance you'll be asked to participate actively in both. The money is nice, but the stress sucks
It can totally be done... BUT I would not recommend it because the stress load can be extremely high. For one, you're constantly in fear of getting caught (even though many places have a friendly moonlighting clause now). You may have to juggle two meetings at the same time - which can also be done - though there's always that chance you'll be asked to participate actively in both. The money is nice, but the stress sucks
> Now that we're remote, if I were so inclined I bet I could hold down a second job and not go over 40 hours of total work time.
We had a guy do exactly that recently. He was working another full time job for several months before being terminated. Funny thing is, he got caught because he updated his LinkedIn.
We had a guy do exactly that recently. He was working another full time job for several months before being terminated. Funny thing is, he got caught because he updated his LinkedIn.
Although the body of the story was quite different, the headline reminded me of this, "Forgotten Employee" (also mentioned in yesterday's thread):
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17332440
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17332440
I thought that was only a thing in the Sopranos :-)
I am under the impression that this more of the regular case in Greece. There is no need to threaten your manager, because the manager also would have a second job elsewhere.
This is an obligatory watch with this thread - https://youtu.be/WDiB4rtp1qw
I have a counterexample to this story.
I was once paid an extra £20k pounds by the NHS. I promptly contacted payroll, but just got canned responses. This continued for another 2 months, with me sending repeated emails informing of the mistake. The overpayments stopped eventually, but my constant emails trying to arrange a repayment continued for 1 year. I even went to payroll in person, and they basically asked me to go back home and send a letter.
The whole thing ended abruptly when I sent a "final" email to inform them my contract was coming to an end, and most likely I would be leaving the country after that. I promptly received a letter from payroll saying in angry red letters something along the lines of: "IT HAS COME TO OUR ATTENTION THAT YOU OWE THE NHS MONEY. IF YOU DO NOT MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO PAY WITHIN 14 DAYS PROCEEDINGS WILL BE STARTED AGAINST YOU". So after one year of pestering them to get their act together, they gave me 14 days to arrange payment. Great.
At least this letter meant someone finally opened a formal case, which meant there was now an actual human assigned to the case who I could arrange payment with.
Since the money had temporarily put me at a higher tax bracket, I lost money from tax after repayment. I then spent another 2 years dealing with HMRC Tax Office applying for a refund. I managed to claim some, but not all the extra tax. In the end this whole incompetence parade cost me personally about £1k (not including time and money wasted chasing this up).
I was once paid an extra £20k pounds by the NHS. I promptly contacted payroll, but just got canned responses. This continued for another 2 months, with me sending repeated emails informing of the mistake. The overpayments stopped eventually, but my constant emails trying to arrange a repayment continued for 1 year. I even went to payroll in person, and they basically asked me to go back home and send a letter.
The whole thing ended abruptly when I sent a "final" email to inform them my contract was coming to an end, and most likely I would be leaving the country after that. I promptly received a letter from payroll saying in angry red letters something along the lines of: "IT HAS COME TO OUR ATTENTION THAT YOU OWE THE NHS MONEY. IF YOU DO NOT MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO PAY WITHIN 14 DAYS PROCEEDINGS WILL BE STARTED AGAINST YOU". So after one year of pestering them to get their act together, they gave me 14 days to arrange payment. Great.
At least this letter meant someone finally opened a formal case, which meant there was now an actual human assigned to the case who I could arrange payment with.
Since the money had temporarily put me at a higher tax bracket, I lost money from tax after repayment. I then spent another 2 years dealing with HMRC Tax Office applying for a refund. I managed to claim some, but not all the extra tax. In the end this whole incompetence parade cost me personally about £1k (not including time and money wasted chasing this up).
Edit: I meant exactly what Tomte posted (see below), thanks!