Which of these two actions is more unprofessional? Verbal Abuse vs. Evesdropping

[Craig H.]

In Reply to Parent Post by Discordian

He makes apparently arbitrary decisions like that.
If I was a psycholgist I'd say it's a power thing.

Well then, it was mentioned giving someone enough rope...

I suspect that the line folks are either angry, if senior is lucky, or they are starting to laugh at the senior manager. If they are laughing, it may be just a matter of time. According to experience in certain shops I have been in, the practical jokes will soon commence, making it difficult for the person to function.

It may be time to keep one's head down...

[Jim Wynne]

In Reply to Parent Post by Jim Wynne

Just out of curiosity, and not to belabor the point, if, instead of "evil *@&&#" the guy had said, "Ernie is a stamp collector" and Ernie was indeed a stamp collector, would you consider that "name calling"?

My point here, and I did have one, is that you can't make blanket declarations of lack of professionalism unless you're sure of the situation. In this case, viewing it from a distance, there are a couple of possibilities:

1. The guy really is evil, and everyone, including the guy's boss, is aware of it, but his peers on the hierarchical ladder ignore it.
2. There is something personal going on between two guys who don't like each other.

In the second instance, I think it would indeed be unprofessional for one to speak disparagingly of the other in front of disinterested parties. What would constitute professionalism would be for one or both parties to realize that it was personal between them, and leave it at that, with neither trying to undermine the other for purely personal reasons.

On the other hand, in the first instance, I don't think there would be a breach of the vague laws of professionalism if one were to verbalize what everyone already knows. In fact, as I suggested earlier, I can visualize a situation where it might actually be helpful; it might help to bring hourly and salaried people closer together in the face of a common problem. In this sense, calling the evil #@#&@ an evil @#@# isn't much different from calling a stamp collector a stamp collector.

[CarolX]

In Reply to Parent Post by Discordian

And 'senior manager' has been here since day 1.

This is really an important component of this situation. Without a doubt, he has and will always have the owner's ear - has very little to do with who screams the loudest. To the owner - it is personal - it's about trust.

[BradM]

I have enjoyed this thread, and the posts on it.

The solution, is that there may not be an easy solution. Many times bosses (to an extent, we all do this) develop blinders in regards to people close to them. They see some value in that person that many others cannot see. Too, they tend to disassociate whatever evil they may do (Cognitive Dissonance).

Until such time that the boss is willing to be a little more realistic in his/her view of this senior manager and their actions, everyone else will have to accept that fact and work around it.

Hopefully, working around that person is bearable. If it is not, then people may have to leave before the boss 'smells the coffee'.

Nothing ever good comes from name calling, and should be avoided at all times. No matter what degree the name/title may be true, all folks are human, and will react negatively should they feel the situation merits it. Insecurity may be one reaction; which may be fueling the evesdropping.

Sorry, did not mean to sound like Dr. Phil. But real situations like this is what drives Stress and frustration.

[Pazuzu - 2009]

Personally you have to search for root cause.

Someone badmouthing someone else is probably derived from previous events...therefore it's a reaction.

Eavesdropping is a sign of:

• insecurity
• questionable ethics i.e. entrapment
• malicious intent

Ipso facto...my vote is eavesdropping to be worse.

[Keith Childers]

In Reply to Parent Post by Jim Wynne

calling the evil #@#&@ an evil @#@# isn't much different from calling a stamp collector a stamp collector.

I think there is a big difference.
Calling someone who collects stamps a "stamp collector" is simply being desciptive, but even if someone does a lot of bad things, calling them an "evil bastard" is just unprofessional, especially in front of subordinates.
I have been in middle management in production in the past, and had situation where I was not particularly fond of some members of senior management.
I see no problem with letting your hourly employees know you understand their situation.
It is also OK, in my opinion, to let the hourly employees know that you do not necessarily agree with the decisions of upper management.
You do, however, have the responsibility to maintain a professional relationship with both the hourly employees and the senior management and that most certainly means NO name calling.

"Stamp Collector" is factual. A guy who collects stamps is a "Stamp Collector".

"Evil Bastard" is simply name calling on a kindergarden level. I guess the next time the Senior Manager should just reply with the "I'm rubber you're glue" defense.

[SteelMaiden]

Perhaps the Imus incident went right over your head, Jim? It is not ok to call people nappy headed hos, evil ba$tards, or red-headed beyotches at work. What you and your best friend do in the comfort of your living room in front of the tube is one thing, at work it is something else. Period. Your stamp collector comparison--- sorry, that dog don't hunt. Middle management calling upper management names in front of the hourly personnel is just not right. There are other ways to tell your subordinates that you are on their side.

[Jim Wynne]

In Reply to Parent Post by SteelMaiden

Perhaps the Imus incident went right over your head, Jim? It is not ok to call people nappy headed hos, evil ba$tards, or red-headed beyotches at work.

Sorry, Steel, I don't see the connection between a flagrant instance of broadcast stupidity (the Imus thing), and saying, perhaps in passing, that an evil bast@rd is an evil bast@rd, when the fact is not in dispute. If yours is something other than an emotional reaction, I'd be interested to hear your reasoning. Simply saying that something is unprofessional doesn't explain anything.

In Reply to Parent Post by SteelMaiden

What you and your best friend do in the comfort of your living room in front of the tube is one thing, at work it is something else. Period.

How would you limit personal discussions, then? Is speaking about anything unrelated to work unprofessional? Who is the arbiter who decides what constitutes unprofessional behavior? Isn't the idea that managers should not speak frankly with hourly workers, or should somehow speak differently to them than they speak to each other, a tad elitist?

In Reply to Parent Post by SteelMaiden

Your stamp collector comparison--- sorry, that dog don't hunt.

It certainly gets closer to the prey than your Imus comparison.

In Reply to Parent Post by SteelMaiden

Middle management calling upper management names in front of the hourly personnel is just not right. There are other ways to tell your subordinates that you are on their side.

Well, we just disagree on this. I think that the mask of "professionalism" is often used to disguise personal neuroses.