Thursday, December 8th, 2022, 5:18 pm
Managing or Bullying Staff at Sirius ‘Open Source’?
Filed under: Sirius ‘Open Source’, where bullying and unwarranted bollocking against ‘low-level’ staff became the ‘norm’.
Summary: Sirius was abandoned a week ago (my wife and I resigned with immediate effect), leaving a skeleton crew that’s about 50% ‘management’ (barely qualified or not qualified at all) and 50% ‘low-paid’ geeks (what’s left of them); guess who’s blaming who and who always gets punished
IMAGINE working for a company that’s not only breaking rules but also lying to clients and lying to staff. It has long reminded me of the EPO and I planned my exit for a long time. Pandemic wasn’t a good time to leave (especially a job done purely from our own home).
Yesterday and the day before that we illuminated the payslips and pension scandals, elucidating further with some meticulously-redacted examples (safeguarding people’s and clients’ privacy, even the pension provider’s name).
As we shall show later in the series, when mistakes are made by management there’s no admission of guilt, no responsibility, just deflection of blame along with breathtaking cover-up attempts. No sane person would tolerate that for much longer. I challenged this and spoke out against this many times (internally). There were attempts to spin my polite communications as lacking in manners (totally false). This is a typical Code of Conduct-like manoeuvre. In practice, it helps corporations and heads of corporations (e.g. shareholders, managers) suppress messages from critics.
From the report issued and sent at the start of this month:
“Rules for Thee and Not for Me”
As noted above, with further examples to come later, management was given the liberty to make up all the colourful excuses and no disciplinary procedures were pursued when managers failed to do very essential and sometimes utterly simple jobs (sending payslips is very trivial). In the commercial world this qualifies as gross incompetence. As shall be explained later on, the management oftentimes seems or feels like it’s “missing in action”, like spending several weeks stalking staff, fishing for ‘dirt’ online and inflating or taking out of context the content (which does not infringe privacy, let alone company policies).
Companies worldwide must recognise that every staff member has a personal life too. We don’t live in bunk beds inside the office. Similarly, managers fundamentally enjoy and have a personal life. How would managers feel if staff spent weeks digging years into the past into anything they ever said, even in small private conversations? Or even in public, e.g. the Sirius founder’s Twitter account promoting an insurrectionist, Donald Trump. There seems to be disproportionate selective enforcement and symmetric relationship; the bosses can do anything they want, even violate their own rules, whereas precarious staff is treated as disposable and presumed guilty at all times (e.g. judged based on prejudice and vindication without due process and without regard for access to lawyers, i.e. qualified legal advice). More on that later, for this is a key motivation for this document to put together and carefully crafted with privacy in mind.
