Abbey-Roads2

A “no-obligation to do anything”  holiday. 

Now this is a public holiday which is essentially all about taking a day off from work and having a good time.  That’s pretty much it.  The origins of the holiday go back to the late 1880’s, and the sole purpose was to honor the working man, and to give he and his family a holiday in which to rest and recreate.  Other countries celebrate May 1st, but that was much too Socialist for the U.S., so the 1st Monday in September was maintained.  Only later did it become politicised with the politicians and Union leaders butting in, making speeches at various rallys after the parades.  It has never been a Church thing either, or a Liturgical observance.

Local parish closed for the holiday.

Labor Day is a national, secular holiday, so my local parish is closed today, the Church locked up tight.  Monday’s are the pastor’s day off, so it would have been Liturgy of the Word today anyway.  Since parish churches have become such ‘mega-employers’ and the staff must have similar benefits to secular institutions and businesses, it is to be expected they get their paid holidays as the rest of us.  But there are other businesses open today, and many people are working today and will either be compensated for it with holiday pay or another comp-day off.

Entitlements and leisure.

The priest of my parish has been gone a lot this summer.  Vacations, days off, other assignments in the archdiocese, 2 retreats - one with the Archbishop and priests of the archdiocese. and last week he was gone again to finish his vacation time.  While he was gone, at least the Church was open, and Communion Services were made available.

Elsewhere, some parishes will have one mid-morning Mass today, with patriotic music and the proper Mass for the Blessing of Human Labor.  Even though this is not a liturgical feast for labor, “God Bless America” will most likely be sung.  At least these churches are having Mass, even though all parish offices will be closed.  If the parish happens to have an adoration chapel, that will most likely be open of course.  But in parishes like mine, Jesus must be on holiday too - I guess he went to the lake or something,  he maybe had to get away too.

I’m just wondering.

Is the Church too secularized?  Is the priesthood just like any other job?  Are parishes a business?  Is it a good thing that pastors commute to their ‘jobs’ rather than live on the parish campus?  Maybe Sunday Catholics really only need a Sunday pastor?  I’m not bitching about this, I’m just wondering out loud.

When I first entered the monastery, I asked if we got to sleep in on Sundays (we rose at 3AM for vigils), the Father Master looked at me curiously and said, “This is a monastery, not a country club.”    

My initial reactions. 

The very night it happened, as I watched the television coverage with a friend, in order to break the tension once in awhile, I would bring up the idea that the collapse had something to do with our failing infrastructure.  In other words, it wasn’t an “accident” in the classic sense - it was negligence - which meant it was an accident waiting to happen.   In the days since, the latest news reports tend to verify my opinion.  In fact, the evening of the collapse, Leah McLean (pictured) of Channel 5 Eyewitness News, was given a short bite of air time concerning her research into the inspection history of the I-35 W bridge.  (To my knowledge - and I watched every channel, no other local news agency even bothered with background research that evening.)

John Mason and Cyndy Brucato were anchoring the coverage of the tragedy and momentarily turned to Leah McLean for what she had - no face time for Leah, just audio.  She, within an hour or two of the collapse, came up with the 2006 inspection records which documented the structural deficiencies of the bridge.  I suddenly had that “ah-ha!” moment - because I knew I was correct in my assumption regarding negligence.  I thought McLean was brilliant to uncover this information.  The 5 News team were obviously not impressed - and the story was never aired again.  Why?

Sensationalized reporting.

That wasn’t my only problem with local media as the days unfolded.  The news stations - especially Channel 5  just kept going over and over the same angles, guesstimating the number of injured and dead.  I told my friend the night of the collapse, the number of dead will only be around 10 people - although he was with the news media, assuming 30 to 40 people.  Media always needs to sensationalize coverage - for drama and to hold viewer’s attention.

Although the local media covered the event well, every agency mostly focused upon the dramatic - but none were quite as over-animated as the Eyewitness News team journalists, who verged upon soap-opera style drama in their presentation.  On the other hand - Network news was more subdued and much more thorough in their coverage, covering angles local news agencies apparently never even considered.  In fact Drudge, along with one or two blogs had better coverage than local news.  (I don’t read newspapers, so I wouldn’t know about their coverage.  Do  people still read newspapers?) 

Network profesionalism.

Martin Bashir of ABC’s Nightline, even had more information than local media.  The focus of Nightline’s coverage came off much more polished and professional, with more in-depth stories - something the continuous coverage on local news could have easily done, since they were doing non-stop coverage as it was.  Maybe they need a new news director? 

For instance, it was on Nightline that images of the Somali woman and her baby who are still missing, first appeared - yet even the next day, our ABC affiliate,  Channel 5, never posted the Somali woman’s photo until the evening news.  While local media focused upon rescue workers and survivors, along with constant live replay of destruction footage,  those still missing and their families were largely ignored.  At the same time, the Network journalists were the people who uncovered similar information to what Leah McLean was digging up; previous inspection reports, engineering analysis, photos, etc.  Yet local news just kept up their repetitive visual shots and redundant commentary.

Face-time.

At one point in the first night’s coverage, Cyndy Brucato (pictured), who once worked for the State Government, broke into coverage, obviously excited because she contacted a friend, an expert who worked for MNDOT (or at least he had a role to play with that agency, I can’t remember) and informed the audience he would be in studio to discuss what may have gone wrong with the bridge.  As she spoke, interrupting her co-anchor John Mason, he kind of gave her what I considered a condescending look, and threw his pencil down, reluctantly allowing her to speak.  My impression was that he felt she was ‘horning’  in on his air time as lead anchor.

Channel 5 Eyewitness News can surely bring you minute to minute coverage on anything from a summertime thunderstorm with pea-sized hail, to this bridge collapse, but the depth of their coverage is often lacking in substance.  It is usually sensationalized, and often about face time for the anchors and continuous airtime for the station. - in other words, ratings and who got to the scene first.  It’s fairly well known that Channel 5 is one of the worst stations in the Twin Cities area for employment longevity - the only long-term, on air personality they have is Dave Dahl, and that is because he’s the best meteorologist in the State.

What’s in store for KSTPNews anchors now?

Surprisingly, I saw Leah Mclean only one other time in the days following the collapse, she captured some camera time while at the site of the disaster, doing a rather forgetable report.  McLean is supposed to be one of their main news anchors, but Mason and Brucato had all the air time.  (Although McLean may have wanted to be in the field rather than the studio.)

Locals may recall that in the 1980’s this same station fired Brucato because they thought her looks and delivery were too hard.  Since her stint as Press Secretary for Governor Carlson’s Administration, that experience may be what changed her luck with management. 

I may be wrong, but it seems obvious to me, as regards  John Mason (pictured), that he has been coached by stylists as regards his on camera image.  (Of course they all are.)  Over the past several months he seems to have acquired this forced smile while reading the news - or maybe it’s just me who sees that.  Knowing the reputation of Channel 5 management, he probably will not be there that much longer, no matter how hard he tries.  As for Leah McLean - I wonder what will happen to her?  She’s one of the best female anchors they’ve had since Julie Nelson - who is now at KARE 11, an NBC affiliate.  Management at Channel 5 appears to be rather chauvinistic, so if they decide to replace Mason, they are sure to do so with another man, rather than have Brucato and McLean carry the news.

Obviously, I’ve watched much too much coverage on this National tragedy.  (If time and space permitted, I’d post my critique of WCCO’s Don and Amelia - they actually make KSTP look good.)   

“Whatever I feel like!  Gosh!”

From what I understand my resignation was announced today at my former workplace.  Not a few are waiting to hear the why and wherefore from me, but I’ve not answered the phone nor responded to emails.  As far as a job it was only a blip on the radar screen of my life.  It was fun in the beginning, yet being the company I worked for was a family business, I sort of got sucked into their dysfunction.  I’ve blogged about it before, numerous times, and pretty much got myself in trouble for it - only insofar as some people were not pleased by my candor - I never was reprimanded.

So what went wrong?

On some level, troubles began with my blogging, both for the company and on my personal blog.  I had a voice suddenly.  Although a couple of people did not like what I had to say.

I wrote about the negative culture in the workplace, inconsistencies of management regarding employees; benefits, hiring practices, as well as termination issues.  I for one was more or less obliged to terminate people with disabilities who, although they met my standards, they were not considered productive enough by management, or were disliked, either by management or some other employee who had their ear.

Recently, an employee had become a victim of discrimination, having been arbitrarily refused full benefits, mainly because he is disliked.  He was hired without my consultation, and I was expected to document his shortcomings for an eventual termination, if that came to pass.  He has been consistently mistreated by management, not always overtly, rather more through subterfuge.  He would be ignored, and in every situation when he approached the HR representative, he was treated with hostility.  Of course, that is just her personality.

Negative culture.

Sadly, management and HR, that is the family, have an attitude of total mistrust towards their employees, they look down on them, considering most of the employees to be losers or misfits.  The reference has been made innumerable times in my tenure there. Hence, the negative, or toxic culture I grew to recognize in the workplace, I came to realize was undoubtedly generated from the top.

For instance, in the six years I worked there I have never once had a conversation with the original owner of the company.  Since he does the banking, when I would have a calculation error on a deposit, rather than approaching me about it, he went to a co-worker to have her bring it to my attention.  It would be no big deal to have approached me, yet it illustrates the passive aggressive behavior in the family’s management style.

I cannot say they are dishonest per se, yet they are decidedly passive aggressive in their interpersonal relationships, with one another and their employees.  Rather than managing a couple of employees internet abuse for instance, they chose to remove one employee’s PC and replace it with an ordinary data entry terminal, without saying a word to the employee, yet exposing her to humiliation in view of all the other employees who knew the story behind the move.

In another situation, an employee who was abusing the internet privilege was blocked from internet use, although nothing was said to her by way of explanation.  She was never talked to about internet usage on company time, nor was she advised the privilege was denied.  An employer can do that, yet not to manage and direct employees, or to explain policy, let alone speak to the offender about the problem, not only contributes to the negative culture, it leads to mistrust and low morale, that in the end affects productivity and employee loyalty.

So what happened?

Monday night, I discovered my access blocked to the blog I wrote for the company.  I immediately thought access had been denied me because of a more or less controversial post I created.  I was shocked that my immediate supervisor had not advised me and asked me to take the post down, which had been our understanding.  I did not sleep at all that night.  I couldn’t believe they were doing to me what they had done to other non-exempt employees.  I decided I could no longer work for a company like that.  I could no longer work in an environment of mistrust, back-biting, gossip, and just plain subterfuge.

The next day when I arrived at work, I cleaned out my office of my personal effects, and I was pretty much Peter Gibbons for the rest of the morning.  I was paged repeatedly to go and see my boss - she’s actually the president of the company.  She has recently become this hyper-active, micro-manager, constantly checking on every little detail of minutae in day to day business - not just with me, but everyone else as well.  (Business is down, so that could be part of her problem.  Plus, her brother recently sold his share of the company and left, so it’s probably more a control thing between her and the other sibling owner.) 

The straw that broke… 

Finally I went to see her - since she wouldn’t tell me what she wanted on the phone.  It turned out to be an HR thing about time cards.  What?  I don’t do payroll.  Her daughter does.  (She’s the HR person with the attitude.)  She starts to scold me for an employee’s time records via the time clock not lining up with the schedule I created - despite the fact it is the emplyee’s responsibility to write up a slip if there is any discrepency.  I then asked, “Why couldn’t your daughter ask me about this since she does payroll?”

She muttered some excuse and I interupted,  “No!  It’s because she will not talk to me!  She doesn’t like me!”  (She doesn’t like anyone save for 1 or 2 employees.)

“I don’t know about that…”  the boss began.

And I said, “Oh yes you do.  You know what?  I quit - I’m out of here.”

I realize this incident sounds rather petty, but there had been a long build up involving multiple factors; inconsistencies, dissimulation, etc.  I got to the point that I had it with the manipulation - playing people against one another - along with the passive aggressive, dysfunctional behavior.  I left, as I had been thinking of doing if things got worse, but not without a bit of drama with the little princess in HR - I so wish she was held to some performance standards - or had to work for a real company.

Speaking of performance standards, did I mention I never had an appraisal for last year?  My review was due in November - although my hire date is August 16, and when I asked about it in January, I was told, “You can wait just like everyone else.”  They have always been late with my review, and the raises were never retroactive, as they would be in most companies.  Not a lot of incentive there when you’ve worked 10 or 11 hour days when necessary, sometimes coming in on Sundays and holidays.  Health issues of the past 3 or 4 months aside, which I was harassed about, I normally work at least a 9 hour day. 

But that’s it folks - that’s the story some of you have been waiting for - maybe some all day long.  I have to take care of myself right now.

Here is an interesting tidbit on the topic of toxic culture in the workplace:

Robert Bacal, noted author and management consultant, says that a toxic organization is like a dysfunctional family. It shows two specific characteristics: first, a history of poor performance and poor decision-making; and second, very high levels of dissatisfaction and stress that go beyond normal workload issues. Additional signs of a toxic workplace include:

• culture of fear, non-communication or miscommunication
• atmosphere of high stress and conflict
• inability to achieve goals
• disparity between mission statement and how the company actually functions (Huge issue!)
• bullying, gossip, malicious rumours, disrespectful behaviour (A daily thing.)
• increase in health problems and accidents
• more resignations/turnover/loss of talented employees (Another huge issue.)
• feelings of helplessness and indifference
• low productivity

In a toxic environment, employees are treated as expenses not assets (no matter how much rhetoric the organization puts forth). Employees are not supported, and are consistently under attack. They are burdened with unreasonable workloads and deadlines and unclear expectations.  - Toxic Workplaces

All of the above: Veritas!  (Especially the part, “In a toxic environment, employees are treated as expenses not assets” - That is certainly the case where I worked.)