Timeline for How can I deal with troublesome Professional Engineer?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2016 at 22:49 | comment | added | Wesley Long | @NotVonKaiser - You asked a question (2, actually), I answered you. Not trying to argue. | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 22:47 | comment | added | NotVonKaiser | @WesleyLong These blocks are not a place for argument. I pointed out why I disagree. I have my own post further down that I think explains things better. I have nothing more to say that I haven't already said. | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 22:42 | comment | added | Amy Blankenship | The OP has no way of knowing the engineer is performing differently because he's angry. He could be trying to improve so he gets the promotion next time, as @Alexander suggested. Or maybe the nephew ripped him a new one for letting something slide. | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 22:40 | comment | added | Wesley Long | @NotVonKaiser - Problems have a cause. This person is trying to treat the symptom, not fix the cause. It's like trying to treat a gunshot wound with transfusions. Yes, the patient lives, but you're still bleeding out and eventually will die of gangrene. Management's actions are the gunshot wound. The engineer's actions are the bleeding. If you can't fix the problem, you'll spend the rest of your life treating the symptoms. In this case, gangrene may have already set in, and the limb (engineer) needs to get cut off, no matter how painful (as in expensive) that turns out to be. | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 22:35 | comment | added | NotVonKaiser | The company was in the wrong. My problem with this answer is that it doesn't really address how to fix the issue. "You need to work with higher management, not the engineer" doesn't change the fact that the engineer is angry and is not performing. What do you do if higher management says "nope, we made the move and that's that"? Just say "whoops, I guess we won't produce anything anymore until this guy retires"? | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 22:23 | comment | added | Wesley Long | @Dunk - "Boss's nephew" was not a euphemism. It was the actual statement. ("..related to one of the members of the exec board, ...") The fact that the new hire didn't possess the required certifications indicates it was pure nepotism (using transitive property). If you still disagree, give that ol' downvote button a try. | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 20:41 | comment | added | Dunk | Millions of people are passed over for promotions they think they deserve every year. Just replace "Boss's Nephew" with whatever reason you can come up with. The fact remains that those people still need to do their job properly. So the reason doesn't matter, not one little bit. What we don't "really" know is if the PE was told why they didn't get the promotion. Perhaps he is just doing what has been requested of him, where before he wasn't. | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 19:39 | comment | added | Mason Wheeler | @LeonardoTrimarchi: Responsibilities in a relationship, to deal fairly with one another, go both ways. When one side forgets this, they need to be reminded, particularly if they have demonstrated the inclination to abuse one person and have the ability to do so to many others. | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 17:16 | comment | added | Wesley Long | I understand you guys disagree. That's why there's a downvote button. A few have used it. Personally, I hope I never have to drive over a bridge designed by a firm that puts the boss's nephew above the trained, certified, and seasoned expert. Full disclosure - I have family members in the US with this cert. I know exactly how hard they are to get. | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 17:04 | comment | added | Leonardo Wildt | I disagree with this answer as well. Whatever happened to doing your job? Even if the company screwed him over the guy i clearly has no dignity. Do your job better and prove the point that way. | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 16:42 | comment | added | Alexander | @Jasper If I had worked to standard X, and thought that I did everything as my manager wishes, and now some inexperienced guy gets promoted right into my face, I would come to think that I did something utterly wrong. So I would now test another approach and see whether that approach can satisfy upper management so much that I get the promotion. I think that the P.Eng. is applying such a standard learning algorithm until he gets his promotion. | |
| Mar 10, 2016 at 9:40 | comment | added | Jasper | I completely disagree with this. The company may have been in the wrong: the post never states that this guy was the only qualified candidate (just that he is left as the only P.Eng. after the promotion) nor that the promotion was unjust (only that the person who didn't get the promotion may suspect it was). The guy in question is definitely in the wrong, since he is not doing his work to acceptable standards. We don't know if he picked this up with management or not, but that's what he should be doing instead of trying to sabotage the business. | |
| Mar 9, 2016 at 20:54 | comment | added | Old_Lamplighter | Absolutely correct. The company made several missteps here, first and foremost allowing anyone to become irreplaceable. | |
| Mar 9, 2016 at 19:23 | comment | added | Dan | This post makes me absolutely giddy. I don't blame the PE for suspecting nepotism, and I'm really happy to see him putting the pinch on management. I mean, it's unfortunate for OP, and unprofessional behavior for the PE, but still, it's viscerally satisfying. | |
| Mar 7, 2016 at 22:53 | history | answered | Wesley Long | CC BY-SA 3.0 |