Management GM Pierre Dorion/Front Office Thread - Part IX [Mod Warning in post 1)

[AchtzehnBaby]

Lol, what other possible interpretation is there of calling the accusations old grudges by anonomous sources with personal scores to settle?

You don't just have blinders on, you've stuck your fingers in your ears and your head in the sand and can't see what's right in front of your face.

Nope. Look in the mirror.

Old grudges, for sure.

 

[Micklebot]

Nope. Look in the mirror.

Old grudges, for sure.

You didn't answer my question. I'm open to another rational interpretation of what LeBlanc's intent was highlighting that sources were anonomous while somehow simultaneously knowing these unknown accusers had scores to settle.

 

[umma gumma]

Oh look!

Well, Melnyk isn't around to put a stop to and chastise someone for it, so...

 

[Tuna99]

nah… i am not the one who has the blinders on

Yes you are

 

[JD1]

Here's the thing that I don't get about all the Melnyk stories.

Harassment in the workplace, constructive dismissal etc are issues that we regularly see in the newspapers with companies being sued. There's been a couple of high profile executive dismissals that had legal settlements reached with NDAs so we don't know how they were settled but why wasn't this pattern of abuse brought to justice while he was alive so that he was made to answer for it? It happens all the time. Why did it not happen here?

 

[Micklebot]

Here's the thing that I don't get about all the Melnyk stories.

Harassment in the workplace, constructive dismissal etc are issues that we regularly see in the newspapers with companies being sued. There's been a couple of high profile executive dismissals that had legal settlements reached with NDAs so we don't know how they were settled but why wasn't this pattern of abuse brought to justice while he was alive so that he was made to answer for it? It happens all the time. Why did it not happen here?

Well, it did in the case of O'Leary, he sued Melnyk, and included accusations of his abusive behaviour in the lawsuit.
The dynamic is a bit tougher with an owner, since you can't fire him, and an owner that has a well known reputaion for being litigious, I believe fear of reprisal was brought up as another reason for people not coming forward earlier.

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

Here's the thing that I don't get about all the Melnyk stories.

Harassment in the workplace, constructive dismissal etc are issues that we regularly see in the newspapers with companies being sued. There's been a couple of high profile executive dismissals that had legal settlements reached with NDAs so we don't know how they were settled but why wasn't this pattern of abuse brought to justice while he was alive so that he was made to answer for it? It happens all the time. Why did it not happen here?

I think the reason is obvious. It couldn't be as bad as some want to make it out to be.

Imagine you own a company… how mad you would be after repeated discussions, one of your staff ignored your instructions? You would want to use some colourful language, but if you have years of training, and high EQ, maybe you would just fire them. Euge never had that training. On a sarcastic note: Maybe he was deprived of the right to proper management training by the organization. HR is to blame!

 

[Micklebot]

I think the reason is obvious. It couldn't be as bad as some want to make it out to be.

Imagine you own a company… how mad you would be after repeated discussions, one of your staff ignored your instructions? You would want to use some colourful language, but if you have years of training, and high EQ, maybe you would just fire them. Euge never had that training. On a sarcastic note: Maybe he was deprived of the right to proper management training by the organization. HR is to blame!

That is quite the leap. We didn't hear about it until now so it never happened?

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

That is quite the leap. We didn't hear about it until now so it never happened?

How do you come to that conclusion? Oh… the blinders.

 

[Micklebot]

How do you come to that conclusion? Oh… the blinders.

What conclusion did i come to? All I said was you made a logical leap. Is it possible things weren't as bad as some think? sure. Is it the obvious conclusion based on what we know? That's a pretty damn dubious claim.

 

[umma gumma]

I think the reason is obvious. It couldn't be as bad as some want to make it out to be.

How do you come to that conclusion? Oh… the blinders.

lol

 

[cudi]

What conclusion did i come to? All I said was you made a logical leap. Is it possible things weren't as bad as some think? sure. Is it the obvious conclusion based on what we know? That's a pretty damn dubious claim.

your views dont align = blinders. Its just the snowflake/woke thing repackaged.

 

[BondraTime]

Give your head a shake, they where very clearly trying to discredit the accusations and by extension those making them.

It’s absolutely pathetic

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

I think the reason is obvious. It couldn't be as bad as some want to make it out to be.

Imagine you own a company… how mad you would be after repeated discussions, one of your staff ignored your instructions? You would want to use some colourful language, but if you have years of training, and high EQ, maybe you would just fire them. Euge never had that training. On a sarcastic note: Maybe he was deprived of the right to proper management training by the organization. HR is to blame!

Wow you really can sling it. How is this even close to the basis of an argument. You have taken the big leap and condemn those that do not agree.. Training issue?

 

[OD99]

Here's the thing that I don't get about all the Melnyk stories.

Harassment in the workplace, constructive dismissal etc are issues that we regularly see in the newspapers with companies being sued. There's been a couple of high profile executive dismissals that had legal settlements reached with NDAs so we don't know how they were settled but why wasn't this pattern of abuse brought to justice while he was alive so that he was made to answer for it? It happens all the time. Why did it not happen here?

Because people put their blinders on.

And some had blinders placed on them lest they get access revoked or lose their jobs.

Wow you really can sling it. How is this even close to the basis of an argument. You have taken the big leap and condemn those that do not agree.. Training issue?

Condemn and censor. Maybe some Melnyk comments hit too close to home.

 

[OD99]

Oh look!

The Senators ended racism!!!

This is a fine thing to participate in and equally a fine marketing item that any organization should have already participated in if they didn't have an owner....well, you know.

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

Wow you really can sling it. How is this even close to the basis of an argument. You have taken the big leap and condemn those that do not agree.. Training issue?

This isn’t any argument. It was a response… and an opinion.

Why so angry? It’s funny how you have to turn everything into a personal attack.

 

[OD99]

This isn’t any argument. It was a response… and an opinion.

Why so angry? It’s funny how you have to turn everything into a personal attack.

How was that a personal attack?

People have a different opinion and you say they have blinders on. Personal attack or no?

 

[Big Muddy]

Lol, what other possible interpretation is there of calling the accusations old grudges by anonomous sources with personal scores to settle?

You don't just have blinders on, you've stuck your fingers in your ears and your head in the sand and can't see what's right in front of your face.

I'm not sure how else you'd to interpret this either, but hey what do I know. Seems pretty clear though. Its also the oldest rebuttal/defense tactic in the books, so no surprise there either.

 

[Emerica]

your views dont align = blinders. Its just the snowflake/woke thing repackaged.

And if the person you’re having a discussion with doesn’t bring facts, you just have to scream Fake news!! And when they do bring facts, you just have to ignore their posts and pretend you didn’t see them.

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

What conclusion did i come to? All I said was you made a logical leap. Is it possible things weren't as bad as some think? sure. Is it the obvious conclusion based on what we know? That's a pretty damn dubious claim.

I interpret your statement as I am saying “it didn’t happen”.

I have to disagree.

 

[cudi]

And if the person you’re having a discussion with doesn’t bring facts, you just have to scream Fake news!! And when they do bring facts, you just have to ignore their posts and pretend you didn’t see them.

or say the media is untrustworthy and refuse to believe anything the dont want to believe. Its one way to live your life. Its not for me, but hey, you do you.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

This isn’t any argument. It was a response… and an opinion.

Why so angry? It’s funny how you have to turn everything into a personal attack.

I'm not angry .. and I am not attacking you. I am sorry you feel that way. Siding with the organization is the mood you seem to be promoting here regardless of the basis for it is that correct? Why is it problematic to be critical of the organization when so much has transpired to be critical or at least dubious about?

 

[ksens]

I interpret your statement as I am saying “it didn’t happen”.

I have to disagree.

No, you've just spent the entire time minimizing the whole thing. Melnyk was just misunderstood, he needed some anger management, things aren't so bad. You've also spent the entire time passive aggressively trolling the majority here with personal attacks and your "lol" reactions and so on.

Good job, well done.

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

No, you've just spent the entire time minimizing the whole thing. Melnyk was just misunderstood, he needed some anger management, things aren't so bad. You've also spent the entire time passive aggressively trolling the majority here with personal attacks and your "lol" reactions and so on.

Good job, well done.

I feel the same way. Let’s bury the hatchet and move on.