5 ms·

And the moral of the story is: Never talk about any personal/health/financial/existential problem at work, or with people that are anyhow connected with your c

And the moral of the story is: Never talk about any personal/health/financial/existential problem at work, or with people that are anyhow connected with your co-workers/manager... ever. <sarcasm> But please *do* seek help elsewhere on your own time/dime. It wouldnt' do if you end up *actually* shooting your supervisor. </sarcasm>

Johnny555 11y ago
I thought the moral of the story was never threaten to kill your supervisor, or reveal that you've even plotted out the best time to carry out your attack to ensure that the most supervisory "targets" are on site.
- fredkbloggs 11y ago
  Right. If you're gonna do it, then shut up and do it. Otherwise, find another way to solve the problem: find a new job, put in for a transfer, file a complaint with HR, see a physician, or any of a number of other possibilities. Making clear and specific threats against someone in front of others is the worst possible choice; you're going to find yourself in serious trouble (getting fired seems like the minimum), and you're not going to solve anything. That was my takeaway, but then I thought everyone already knew that.
  - afarrell 11y ago
    > Making clear and specific threats against someone in front of others is the worst possible choice; Actually, murder is the worst possible choice.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    Even putting the moral issues aside, the punishment for "do[ing] it" is going to be way worse than the punishment for talking about it. So I really have a difficult time seeing why you say that making threats is the worst possible choice.
    - fredkbloggs 11y ago
      That assumes you're going to just sit there and get caught. Which is certainly what's going to happen if you mouth off instead. Someone who goes out with the intent to commit murder (i.e., malice aforethought or premeditation or whatever language your jurisdiction relies upon) by definition has plenty of planning time to minimize the risk of capture. I'm not interested in the moral issues. The assumption is that you've been wronged and are angry enough that you've decided to do something about it (the fact that the man in this case supposedly has a mental disability is not relevant). I mentioned numerous other ways of dealing with this kind of problem that do not involve violence; each has its merits. If, however, you've decided that violence is the answer, the way to move forward with that plan is to implement it, not discuss it with others. That should be obvious, and is the point I was making. There's no excuse for slipshod planning or halfhearted execution. Whether something is morally or ethically right does not alter the basic imperative that it be done well, or not done at all.
      - mikeash 11y ago
        I would say that being imprisoned for life is about a million times worse than being fired. Thus unless you can guarantee that your odds of capture are literally a million to one, that's not the way to go. (And judging by recent mass shootings, the chances of escape seem to be pretty near zero.)
afarrell 11y ago
> Mayo told three different co-workers that he wanted to kill the supervisor. Yea, I don't know how one would structure a legal principle so as to prohibit firing someone under those conditions but still allow organization a way of removing threatening members.
- crpatino 11y ago
  I am not saying the employer was in the wrong for firing him after the fact. Or that he should be entitled to a job after the fact. Still, the guy would have been better of if he had kept his mouth shut and figured out a way to solve his problem - preferably one that did not involve shooting people. That's all I am saying.
  - afarrell 11y ago
    I'll agree with that. I've been meaning to cook up an essay proposing that our culture develop some form of mental health check-up that is analogous to yearly physicals.
  - orionblastar 11y ago
    I am mentally ill. I am non-violent. When my coworkers discovered I was mentally ill, I was picked on, bullied, and harassed. I don't take things out on others, instead I hold anger in and it made me sick. It made me so sick that I ended up on disability. I was only having depression when I was picked on and I developed schizoaffective disorder from the stress I was under. I don't know what went on in that workplace, but if it was like my workplace and they discovered he was mentally ill and picked on him, he made the wrong choice to make death threats. Not only should there be a mental health screening but a teaching of empathy and compassion for mentally ill people so they are not picked on, bullied, or harassed. I don't know how many public shootings we have to go through where they could have been prevented with mental health screenings and teaching people not to pick on the mentally ill. In my case I am high functioning, have empathy and compassion for others. Not everyone does.
    - mikekchar 11y ago
Spooky23 11y ago
I've been on the other side of this, where an employee decided to make the lives of everyone around miserable due to whatever problem the person had. In my case, the person made a variety of threats against a variety of people. In one case, the person made wild accusations against me that resulted in frivolous criminal inquiry. It's not acceptable to make threats in the workplace, and as a manager I will not tolerate it. If you have a mental illness, that fine, but you need to be able to control your behavior.

Johnny555 11y ago

I thought the moral of the story was never threaten to kill your supervisor, or reveal that you've even plotted out the best time to carry out your attack to ensure that the most supervisory "targets" are on site.

fredkbloggs 11y ago
Right. If you're gonna do it, then shut up and do it. Otherwise, find another way to solve the problem: find a new job, put in for a transfer, file a complaint with HR, see a physician, or any of a number of other possibilities. Making clear and specific threats against someone in front of others is the worst possible choice; you're going to find yourself in serious trouble (getting fired seems like the minimum), and you're not going to solve anything. That was my takeaway, but then I thought everyone already knew that.
- afarrell 11y ago
  > Making clear and specific threats against someone in front of others is the worst possible choice; Actually, murder is the worst possible choice.
- mikeash 11y ago
  Even putting the moral issues aside, the punishment for "do[ing] it" is going to be way worse than the punishment for talking about it. So I really have a difficult time seeing why you say that making threats is the worst possible choice.
  - fredkbloggs 11y ago
    That assumes you're going to just sit there and get caught. Which is certainly what's going to happen if you mouth off instead. Someone who goes out with the intent to commit murder (i.e., malice aforethought or premeditation or whatever language your jurisdiction relies upon) by definition has plenty of planning time to minimize the risk of capture. I'm not interested in the moral issues. The assumption is that you've been wronged and are angry enough that you've decided to do something about it (the fact that the man in this case supposedly has a mental disability is not relevant). I mentioned numerous other ways of dealing with this kind of problem that do not involve violence; each has its merits. If, however, you've decided that violence is the answer, the way to move forward with that plan is to implement it, not discuss it with others. That should be obvious, and is the point I was making. There's no excuse for slipshod planning or halfhearted execution. Whether something is morally or ethically right does not alter the basic imperative that it be done well, or not done at all.
    - mikeash 11y ago
      I would say that being imprisoned for life is about a million times worse than being fired. Thus unless you can guarantee that your odds of capture are literally a million to one, that's not the way to go. (And judging by recent mass shootings, the chances of escape seem to be pretty near zero.)

afarrell 11y ago

> Mayo told three different co-workers that he wanted to kill the supervisor. Yea, I don't know how one would structure a legal principle so as to prohibit firing someone under those conditions but still allow organization a way of removing threatening members.

crpatino 11y ago
I am not saying the employer was in the wrong for firing him after the fact. Or that he should be entitled to a job after the fact. Still, the guy would have been better of if he had kept his mouth shut and figured out a way to solve his problem - preferably one that did not involve shooting people. That's all I am saying.
- afarrell 11y ago
  I'll agree with that. I've been meaning to cook up an essay proposing that our culture develop some form of mental health check-up that is analogous to yearly physicals.
- orionblastar 11y ago
  I am mentally ill. I am non-violent. When my coworkers discovered I was mentally ill, I was picked on, bullied, and harassed. I don't take things out on others, instead I hold anger in and it made me sick. It made me so sick that I ended up on disability. I was only having depression when I was picked on and I developed schizoaffective disorder from the stress I was under. I don't know what went on in that workplace, but if it was like my workplace and they discovered he was mentally ill and picked on him, he made the wrong choice to make death threats. Not only should there be a mental health screening but a teaching of empathy and compassion for mentally ill people so they are not picked on, bullied, or harassed. I don't know how many public shootings we have to go through where they could have been prevented with mental health screenings and teaching people not to pick on the mentally ill. In my case I am high functioning, have empathy and compassion for others. Not everyone does.
  - mikekchar 11y ago

Spooky23 11y ago

I've been on the other side of this, where an employee decided to make the lives of everyone around miserable due to whatever problem the person had. In my case, the person made a variety of threats against a variety of people. In one case, the person made wild accusations against me that resulted in frivolous criminal inquiry. It's not acceptable to make threats in the workplace, and as a manager I will not tolerate it. If you have a mental illness, that fine, but you need to be able to control your behavior.