Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    Maybe we need some sort of abitration board, composed of 
    moderators (or just plain old noters :-) )from a variety of 
    conferences, to hear and (hopefully) resolve disputes ?

    dana

	LESLIE::EMPLOYEE_INTEREST_NOTING

	(A recently created conference)

					--D

    
    =maggie,
    Thanks for updating us as soon as was reasonably possible.
    I, for one, feel more comfortable having received your information.
    
    I would support the idea of the forum for drafting the resolution
    document being out of =wn=.
    
    And I agree that moderators from other conferences - and noters -
    should be invited to participate. If we are creating a document
    that may become official policy, and therefore affect all noters,
    it would be fair to have input from all.
    
    However, in my experience of group meetings, reaching a resolution
    with a large number of people inputting information can be
    timeconsuming. And I would assume that the objective of such a forum
    would be to draft an agreed document as speedily as possible. 
    
    So....
    Maybe a guideline for the conference could be that each
    person who participates should post their *own* "template" for an
    agreement containing, at the very least, their ideas on which key
    points would need to be covered in the document.
    Each template should be the basenote for a topic.
    By posting your own template you "earn" the right to comment on other
    peoples templates.
    This would ensure that all members contributed positively as well
    as picking holes in other people's ideas (which is relatively easy
    to do).
    
    Just a few ideas....
    'gail
    
    

How about Ron Glover (or other local personnel representative) making a
 decision on any noting dispute escalated to them. The decision could,
as far as I am concerned involve discplining of the complaining person,
eg requesting that they do not participate in Non-business noting.

Them we could get back to discussion and interest in files, instead of threats
and other boring thing we've had lately.

Jane

...'hem...just read an earlier note outlining new policy...sorry

    
    
    RE: .4
    
    Interesting statement.....your note reads such that you feel the
    complaining person is the one that deserves punishment.  Shouldn't all
    complaints be viewed as valid?
    
    I mean, if a person makes a complaint, shouldn't the complaint be
    investigated?  And WHY should the complaining person be disciplined?
    What's your justification other than the complainer might not agree
    with you?  
    
    What has the complaintant done, by virtue of complaining about
    something, that is wrong and deserving of punishment?
    
    
    Punishing the complaintant is the most ridiculous thing I've ever
    heard!
    
    My question to you is.....WHY?  And with what justification?  What GOOD
    is our democratic system if people strive to prevent other people from
    challenging the system?
    
    I simply do NOT understand.  Very few countries in which Digital does
    business are dictatorships.  And frankly, I'm not too keen on making
    NOTES a dictatorship either.
    
    Challenging policies is a GOOD thing.........and isn't that one thing 
    NOTES is about anyway?  Challenging our viewpoints?  Challenging
    ourselves and our beliefs?
    
    I just don't understand...
    
    kath
    
    

    Employee interest notesfiles are just that.  Interesting.  They are not
    necessary to my job performance.  Lack of participation will not affect
    my personal or emotional well being.
    
    I have been with DEC for nearly a year and have been noting for 4 or 5
    months.  Being on the outer fringes of the realm (also known as the
    "field office") I have little opportunity to meet other noters.  But
    I've read enough notes to discern that feuds exist between noters in
    various interest conferences.
    
    Frankly I am appalled that anyone would consider a feud a matter which
    should involve personnel.  To have a co-worker's file tagged with some
    complaint of mine that I feel harrassed...simply boggles my mind. 
    Regardless of provocation, this type of action has a bearing on
    evaluations, raises, promotability, and tenure.  And to instigate it
    over employee interest notes?  I would consider my personal ethics
    terribly skewed to do such a thing.
    
    I have all kinds of options and choices.  I have no need to make a
    stand in any notes file.  If I can't resolve a situation with the
    individual off-line, then I feel I have several choices.  I can ignore
    the individual; I can choose not to respond to his/her notes; I can
    choose to stop noting; I can find a home in another conference.
    
    But I would never jeopardize a co-worker's job and livelihood over a
    notes feud.
    
    I feel the whole issue of noter disputes is out of control.  Obviously
    this is my opinion.  Obviously there are those who disagree.  And
    please allow me to clarify that this not is not directed at anyone in
    particular.
    
    IMO, corporate policy is not needed.  What is required is that people
    grow up.  Failing that, peer pressure works wonders.  A series of notes
    to the effect of "Grow up, take it to e-mail, we're not interested"
    should get the message across.  Should none of the above work, ignoring
    the feuders and their minimal contributions to the conference would
    help.  Escalating the situation by giving it credibility is definitely
    NOT the answer.
    
    --Judy     

    
    
    RE: .9
    
    Huh???
    
    kath

    Re .11
    
    I agree with you and I'm sure that when people read .8, they took even
    more notice of .7! I know I did!
    
    
    Don
    *8-)
    

    Eric's statement was a very mild and careful one.  I certainly don't
    find it at all objectionable for someone to say, in effect, "I think
    you would view it differently if you had more information".  
    
    Whether someone should or shouldn't take a question to Corporate
    Personnel, the fact remains that several people have done so, and a
    corporation-wide policy is now in the works to define how future
    disputes will be resolved without continuing to involve Personnel or
    corporate management.
    
    Let's make no mistake, there *will* be such a policy...if we choose not
    to particpate in the development process, then we leave the welfare of
    our community in the hands of others.  I hope that idea frightens you,
    because it certainly frightens me.
    
    						=maggie

    
    
    
    RE: .11 (-d)
    
    I just read it a completely different way.
    
    I read what EDP said as saying that basically many of the average
    noters have NO CLUE what goes on behind the scenes.  .7 might find it
    to be outrageous that someone would do that, but .8 (EDP) is saying
    that "It happens".
    
    And believe me, it happens A LOT.
    
    The majority of people who are in notes have NO IDEA was is going on
    behind the scenes.....and, I read it as EDP was simply acknowledging
    that fact.
    
    kathy
    kathy

re: 64.6 (Kath Gallup)
   
> I simply do NOT understand.  Very few countries in which 
> Digital does business are dictatorships.  And frankly, I'm not 
> too keen on making NOTES a dictatorship either.
    
	I don't understand your reaction, Kath.  

	Jane Cox merely said that (my emphasis below)

* The decision ***could***, as far as I am concerned involve 
* discplining of the complaining person, eg requesting that they 
* do not participate in Non-business noting.

	I don't understand how this could be interpreted as her
	wanting to turn NOTES into a dictatorship...

> Punishing the complaintant is the most ridiculous thing I've 
> ever heard!

	Why?

							nancy b.

    
    
    
    RE: .16 Nancy
    
    Pushing the complaintant does nothing to address the complaint itself.
    A complaintant makes a complaint because of something they feel is
    WRONG.  They themselves have DONE nothing wrong by complaining.
    
    By addressing complaints (made by complaintants) and resolving them
    (either for OR against the complaintant) is the best answer.  Not
    punishing someone for making the complaint in the first place.
    
    Take for example, EDP and Robert Brown.  They are both voicing
    complaints, and people are attempting to punish them for doing so. 
    They both feel that their complaints are valid.  The proper way to
    resolve such complaints is to work at resolving them, to meet with all
    parties resolved and to work thru it to an aquitable solution for ALL
    involved (which might include compromise from all parties).  Instead,
    many in here feel that to silence them without discussion is just
    punishment.
    
    If I feel I have a case against a man for sexual harrassment.  And I
    present that case to a board (compromised of all males).  Should that
    board tell me to shut up and go away, or should they listen to and
    invetigate and possibly help to resolve my complaint (regardless of
    whether or not they think I'm right in making the claim of
    harrassment)???????????????????????????????????????????????????????
    
    A person voicing a complaint does so because they feel they see an
    injustice of some sort.  That person could be right or wrong, who
    knows.  But that person deserves to be heard and deserves a fair
    investigation into the complaint.  
    
    On what grounds do you feel that the complaintant SHOULD be punished
    for voicing their complaint?  Are you wishing to abolish such policies
    as the Open Door Policy (for notes)?
    
    
    I'm mega confused on the issue of even WANTING to punish the
    complainant.  What does a complaintant do wrong by virtue of
    complaining?  Shouldn't all complaints of any nature be addressed
    fairly and with no bias?
    
    
    Sign me totally confused...
    
    kathy

re: .16, .17:

False accusations are not new phenomena, and I can well imagine someone
carefully examining an accusation and coming to the reasoned conclusion
that it was false, and made with malice.

I sincerely doubt that the complaints about Womannotes' policy would
be judged as malicious (from what I know about them).

Martin.

    
    
    RE: .18
    
    Agreed, Martin.  The type of complaints I were referring to were ones
    that the complainant felt were valid.
    
    I wasn't referring to malicious complaints.  In that case, yes, I do
    support punishing the complaintant if malicious intent can be proven. 
    Unfortunately, many times it can't.
    
    kath

 
 .6

 >>   Interesting statement.....your note reads such that you feel the
 >>  complaining person is the one that deserves punishment.  

  No I don't feel this is always true. It COULD be true.

 >>Shouldn't all complaints be viewed as valid?
    
  Yes, and investigated. However as .18 says there is the phenomena
  of false accusations.

  If someone repeatedly complained, and was found to be wrong repeatedly
  then they might be viewed as a 'professional complainer'....crying
  wolf perhaps.

  .16
  
   Thankyou, I was not suggesting a 'notes dictatorship', this interpretation
   is reading too much into my words. 

   BTW A lot of the policies that noters abide by (or not !), come
   from Digital 'policies and procedures'...written and issued by
   personnel....this is why I used the analogy.

   Jane