17 yr old dismissed despite not being at fault

j.e.j.

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

The course cost £200 and was 9 days long - the OP has talked about it before.

I could be wrong, but somewhere in this thread I think that OP has since said that the qualification in question is not that one but a higher one costing much more..?

daska

FATBALLZ wrote: »

This is pretty sad really, (some) older people are always so quick to fully accept and shout about negative stories about young people in the Mail and other stirring rags, yet when they hear something about a young person who is an exceptional achiever at a young age, well that can't possibly be right can it?

Even decades of experience doesn't automatically make you a more useful employee than somebody who is young but very good at the job, I've worked with some right old dossers over the years, who've learnt and progressed little because they don't have the skills, attitude or motivation to succeed.

Maybe the OP is exaggerating, maybe she isn't, but some young people are exceptional and should be praised, get over it.

Thank you. The sad thing is that I'm not exaggerating. In the case of what led me to post originally I dearly wish I was, what's on here is really the tip of the iceberg.

mountainofdebt

I have no idea what this qualification could be but if the top guy is aware of the OP's SD having this qualification and the doggy do they will be in now that she's gone (to say nothing of the other party in this whole mess) surely she has nothing to worry about.....I would have thought her immediate reinstatement was on the cards

Sambucus_Nigra

FATBALLZ wrote: »

This is pretty sad really, (some) older people are always so quick to fully accept and shout about negative stories about young people in the Mail and other stirring rags, yet when they hear something about a young person who is an exceptional achiever at a young age, well that can't possibly be right can it?

High achievers don't get the sack on trumped up charges...if they are that brilliant [to an organisation] then they are nurtured not sacked.

But my issue is not to do with the OP's DSD - it's the game that the OP is playing with the wider MSE community. Making out that this DSD's job must not be named but still drip feeding information. Either it is confidential or it's not. The OP is the one that posted information not relevant to the situation, not the DSD.

FATBALLZ

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

High achievers don't get the sack on trumped up charges...if they are that brilliant [to an organisation] then they are nurtured not sacked.

That really depends on the organisation, some organisations nuture young talented people, some are run by bitter under-achievers who resent people who are on the path to better things, and some don't really give a crap and just let everyone bump along. I'm sure you don't really think most companies are run on an entirely meritocratic basis, it certainly isn't my experience.

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

But my issue is not to do with the OP's DSD - it's the game that the OP is playing with the wider MSE community. Making out that this DSD's job must not be named but still drip feeding information. Either it is confidential or it's not. The OP is the one that posted information not relevant to the situation, not the DSD.

Well she has said she doesn't want to give exact details, if you perceive this to be a distasteful game, why are you playing it?

ILW

daska wrote: »

Fair question, 10,500 who could/have have potentially benefitted from it in the last year. And very few out of the demographic who wouldn't be affected, I'm trying to find some figures so I can take a stab at deducting specific groups where the take-up rate might be reduced.

And yes, she got others involved, but she was the one making the phonecalls etc. and no it wasn't work related, the benefit to people from that was very small in number but potentially far more valuable to those individuals.

Sounds like she may be involved in "curing" gays or something equally distasteful.

All beginning to sound a bit religeous.

meer53

OP, your DSD has been sacked for doing something she shouldn''t have done. Whether she runs the company single handed or has more qualifications than anyone else alive doesn't really matter now does it ? Why not just put it behind you and move on ?

poet123

Is it a CISCO qual?

daska

ILW wrote: »

Sounds like she may be involved in "curing" gays or something equally distasteful.

All beginning to sound a bit religeous.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

While I get a tissue to dry my eyes from tears of laughter, could you point me in the direction of the legislation that insists on a professional gay curing qualification?

mountainofdebt

oh for goodness put up or shut up.

What qualification has your Step daughter got? Just telling us that would mean you wouldn't be identifying her.