u/Adventurous_Fix1730

We might have all been there: a colleague that shouldn’t be in a role that they’re in. In this case it was a junior tech position.

The normal, sensible advice: just let their manager deal with it.
I did and they were fired four years ago and I have yet to say a word about it to them.

What is now happening now is that despite this person being a junior (and subsequently fired for it), he has gone through five different roles since being let go from my company. Each of these roles he’s managed to secure a level higher example:

- Junior role - was fired after 12 months
- Junior role - was fired after 12 months
- Mid level role - was fired after 8 months
- Senior level role - was fired after 10 months.
- Senior level role - was fired after 3 months.

Each time he has blamed the employer, but as I am still in the same industry and have colleagues in his company, and I have attended most of his HR firing meetings as his support person and have heard direct examples that he isn’t meeting really any criteria of a senior.

I have chatted to him previously about up skilling, or looking back into a more junior role, but they were adamant that the last four years demonstrates his seniority and that he has been an amazing employee this whole time “who only makes 1 or 2 mistakes like everyone”. I am from an older career philosophy where seniority is bred partially from tenure as you have had to be there long enough to see full financial cycles and impacts in budget/scope/KPIs. I cannot fathom how being fired multiple times in a row for performance, leads them to believe that they’re good performers.

So auscorp, if you’re watching an ex colleague flounder in an incredibly tough job market, do you be that person to have a heart to heart and hopefully ease their transition back to employment with lower role expectations, or do you leave it and just lend a sympathetic ear?

It’s feels like I’m in a Dilbert’s comic strip.

Morning auslegals, I will keep this fairly generic in hope to seek guidance/perspective.

I work as a consultant for an engineering company. We have been assigned a difficult client who is known to our offices globally as difficult, and most of our staff in other regions refuse to deal with the client (some have threaten to quit and two moved to different countries to avoid working with them again).

Each time we push back on a direction they are giving us (often conflicting with their own prior decisions), they lodge formal complaints with our management. Three of has have been taken off the project before by refusing to change the system which would break the third party collusion/free market requirements. After a month of not working with the client, they realised they still need us and then demanded us to be reassigned back to the project.

The complaint topics are often intangible such as “their tone is wrong” and none of us have faced internal disciplinary action for these complaints (two people have been promoted even with their complaints).

This then leads the complaint (as there is no evidence) to be retracted as long as you go back to the project and be a good yes man.

Over the course of the four years working directly for this company this is the only client we’re allowed to work with (only Australian client) and it is getting to the point where I am unsure if our management should be responsible for forcing us into unsafe work conditions where we either say yes or our careers are put in jeopardy?

Additionally, these complaints feel like purely retaliatory, then how would we gather enough proof that their behaviour is exactly that? In prior roles where I have worked in legal negotiations the intent was the hardest item to prove and often could only be considered when there is proof such as admission in writing.

I was contemplating making an ROI directly from the company but I do not believe companies are required to adhere to such civil processes. I currently have a timeline of dates of pushbacks versus complaints which so fair details five different complaints from three different client individuals (same role, same dept).

Would love to know your thoughts on this.

It’s my birthday coming up and usually I am solo travelling and dine alone. This year I am in my hometown and wanting the same experience of dining alone and sampling (gorging) myself on a variety of appetisers/entree/dessert. I’m game for any cuisine, but after either degustation style (unsure if it’s commonly offered) or the ability to have a little intimate dining experience. I have dined ar Otto when it was in 480 Queen, but I don’t want that much pasta (I can’t have Milhouse having two spaghettis in one day).

Price doesn’t matter but I’m not after wanky rich just for the sake of it, I am not trying to impress - only to dress in a pretty dress for myself, enjoy amazing cuisine.

Would love to know where you would go