| General > General Technical Chat |
| Strange Company rules and manipulations |
| << < (7/26) > >> |
| jancumps:
--- Quote from: EEVblog on September 20, 2019, 11:57:42 pm --- --- Quote from: Brutte on September 19, 2019, 07:20:05 pm ---One of my former corporations had an official regulation that we were not allowed to archive any emails that "could be of any value to government authorities" in case of a potential investigation and litigation. The limit was set to 3 months, older emails were wiped out. I suppose all corporations have these rules. --- End quote --- I've never heard of such a rule, and never worked at company that had that. --- End quote --- mine has this. We have a maximum retention for all mails, regardless the content. |
| CatalinaWOW:
My company had a similar rule on emails. Which I ignored. And they were happy to take advantage of that to defend themselves from litigation. No one ever said anything about the rule violation. Such rules are a knee jerk response to a perceived problem. In my companies case I knew the incident and problem that was the source of the rule. The rule would have prevented the problem, but no one thought through the whole situation. Same company had a similar rule that no technical data (drawings, specs, test data, analysis and the like) beyond 20 years. Don't know the motivation on this, avoiding storage cost maybe. But it made no sense for a company that was supporting fielded product 30 and more years old. |
| jancumps:
I have a different opinion :) : It's good practice to have a strategy for document storage, archiving, retention. If you don't need it, you don't need it. When you spend a significant budget on storage and access control of mails, and with archiving paper and electronic records, then it's worthwhile taking care to retain every mandatory document and have a way of dealing with the ones that aren't required anymore in a cost efficient way. |
| David Hess:
Applying routine document destruction to email and messaging logs also limits financial cost due to discovery during a lawsuit. I know of at least one case where a company went bankrupt because of having to restore and search archival backups for discovery. Discovery is routinely used to impose costs on the other side encouraging a favorable settlement to a lawsuit. --- Quote from: CatalinaWOW on September 21, 2019, 04:33:09 am ---At a company I worked at there was a formal policy that you could not have your own bandaids, aspirin and the like, and most especially could not share them with co-workers. There was a somewhat logical explanation for this, similar to rstofer's comment. They needed to know how much exposure to injuries they had so that appropriate insurance and treatment facilities could be funded. The practical effect of this, on a huge plant site with hundreds of employees was that a paper cut or other minor injury handled the officially correct way meant a long hike to the nurses location or major drama as the plant fire and rescue team showed up. So many scofflaws kept band aids and other stuff around. --- End quote --- A company were I worked in California implemented the same policy *after* removing aspirin and such from the first aid kits so no drugs were available. I was told both policies were because of liability. |
| VK3DRB:
--- Quote from: DTJ on September 21, 2019, 01:29:07 am ---At a company I worked at in the late 90's an employee was reported to management for sexual harassment. A receptionist had reported him to management for persistently looking down her top when talking with her. He agreed that he did look and told HR that if she was going to wear low cut tops and then he may continue to look. HR had no response and the world kept turning. --- End quote --- Make you wonder what goes on in some peoples' heads. We had a bizarre experience at one large company. The daughter of a manager who worked there went to work with see-through pants on and next to no underwear. One of my engineering mates sat in the cubicle desk next to her. I sat a few cubicles away and I noticed was my engineering mate had a lot more visitors to his desk that morning asking him various technical questions :o. I heard the girl was told by her manager to go home at lunch time and put some decent clothes on. Oh yes, there was an incident where one rather obese woman working on the factory floor one day had brief hot pants on. It was not a pretty sight. Some of her female co-workers had mistakenly thought she had tucked her skirt into her underwear after going to the toilet and one of them gently ask the woman if she had done that. The embarrassment for both when the answer was no would have been palpable. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |