Timeline for Why would HR think it's inappropriate that I visited a coworker in the hospital?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 10:59 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Jan 29, 2019 at 9:02 | comment | added | Fax | I admire your calm. I would have given HR person and anyone else involved both middle fingers, accompanied with a lot of yelling and swearing. The notion is incredibly offensive to me. | |
| Jan 25, 2019 at 16:28 | comment | added | Monica Cellio | @Trilarion covering all the possibilities would be too broad, but I added a bit to the answer to clarify (I hope). | |
| Jan 25, 2019 at 16:26 | history | edited | Monica Cellio | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
per comments -- trying to cover all the possibilities would be too broad, but this is meant to be a first step not the only step
|
| Jan 25, 2019 at 15:32 | comment | added | Mason Wheeler | @SpeedOfRound Even that sounds strange. I'm not aware of any of the various companies I've worked for ever having a policy against coworkers having personal (platonic) relationships outside of work. At my last job, several coworkers had even established a regular D&D gaming group and everyone was fine with it. | |
| Jan 25, 2019 at 15:25 | comment | added | Old_Lamplighter | This is the absolute best advice I have seen in some time: | |
| Jan 25, 2019 at 13:15 | comment | added | luk32 | @Trilarion That's what I was after with my comment, but Monica correctly said that situation is too murky to assess and it would be a guess game (that how I understood the reply). It might actually make a nice question on itself. "What do I do in case of unfair disciplinary action?" But asking it for a general case is probably too broad. | |
| Jan 25, 2019 at 11:58 | comment | added | VLAZ | @Trilarion I think this would be too broad to tackle at the time. Perhaps the HR person misunderstood the handbook themselves. Perhaps they understood the policy but the handbook didn't express it. Perhaps they are trying to bend a different rule for some reason. How you deal with each would vary. | |
| Jan 25, 2019 at 9:39 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | "...if it turns out the HR person is wrong, you can deal with that later" This answer would even be better, if it would detail a bit more how to deal with that later in case the HR person turns out to be wrong. | |
| Jan 25, 2019 at 1:42 | comment | added | Monica Cellio | @luk32 there are lots of possibilities, depending on what the details are that aren't in the question. Rather than speculate about them, I suggest the OP ask directly. Possibly it was unwanted contact (the employee wanted to keep it private), possibly there's a concern about asking a sick employee who might go out on disability to do anything work-related, possibly there's a concern about accidental disclosures of corporate secrets, possibly the HR person is mistaken... asking to see the policy should move things forward. | |
| Jan 25, 2019 at 1:40 | comment | added | Ovi | @Erguy Could you please let us know what happens? | |
| Jan 25, 2019 at 0:20 | comment | added | luk32 | I think this is the best answer, but I am really curious if HR not being able to provide this information makes company susceptible for creating a hostile environment... It would be a groundless action against a basic humane reaction of empathy. I understand this might be out of scope of the answer, but I got personally upset, and maybe it's worth of addressing or a question of it's own. Should it be legal to punish an individual for caring for another one bearing no professional nor immediate business consequences. I completely fail to see reasoning behind such policy. Antistalking? | |
| S Jan 24, 2019 at 23:00 | history | suggested | CommunityBot | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
The $ sign seems to be some insinder between programming people and is confusing for other people. Had to do some other change for the requirement about editing 6 (six) characters
|
| Jan 24, 2019 at 22:46 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jan 24, 2019 at 23:00 | |||||
| Jan 24, 2019 at 20:43 | comment | added | Ben Barden | @Erguy if you think this is the correct answer to your issue, you can indicate that by clicking the green checkmark. Alternately, it can be worthwhile to wait a bit in case soemone else comes along with a better idea. | |
| Jan 24, 2019 at 19:45 | comment | added | SpeedOfRound | I mean, it's most likely going to be some passage along the line of respecting co-workers boundaries or maintaining a strictly professional relationships, which is completely up to interpretation. | |
| Jan 24, 2019 at 19:35 | comment | added | DarkCygnus♦ | I like that phrasing, as it is polite and non-confrontative. It seems OP has already pushed for details, let's hope this email will shed some light... otherwise I'd say reading the handbook (again?) would be a good idea. | |
| Jan 24, 2019 at 19:32 | history | answered | Monica Cellio | CC BY-SA 4.0 |