Lunch with Colleagues - don't know what to do

Fitzmichael

gibson123 wrote: »

I really don't want to get my Manager involved ......... I don't want her to get into trouble at work, but would like my money back.

The employer should be involved: if she'll steal from you, she'd probably steal from them, if she thought she could get away with that, too. If you knew she was stealing from work, would you also not want her to get into trouble, and let her carry on, or just have "a quiet word", so that she could carry on doing it elsewhere?
I grew up in an age with the maxim "once a thief, always a thief"; doubtless it's not 100% true, but the behaviour of bankers, MPs and many others who have brought about the current economic crisis, pretty well with impunity, shows where you get to when individual honesty is replaced by formally observing rules while knowing you have produced the result they were supposed to prevent.
The difference between this culture of dishonesty and a previous one where your reputation could not be impugned can be seen in the risk-all for reputation reaction to a case of alleged petty theft:
http://www.staflaenen.be/testarea/Winslow.htm , important enough to have been made into a play and film http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Winslow_Boy . Watch it.

tooldle

Unless the OP can prove that "Thingy" and all the others at the table both knew and agreed to leave the same amount of tip and, that Thingy understood the tips monies and the money for the bill were all bundled together, I cannot see how she can reasonably be certain of theft.
I've been out to several lunches this week. I cannot hear the person two seats away let alone at the other end of the table, over the general noise of a restaurant.
It is perfectly possible that "thingy" didn't want to contribute to a tip, and was not aware that she had to separate out the cash into bill and tip money.
As it happens I had to throw in an extra £15 at lunch yesterday, to settle a bill. I am not about to start accusing others at the table of theft. We all had been enjoying a few drinks, in those circumstances it is easy to make a mistake in not contributing enough, or perhaps fogetting that only a small deposit was taken in advance leaving a balance to pay.

emsywoo123

skintchick wrote: »

Yes, although those of us who have been on here a long time probably still treat it like it used to be - pretty small, with no-one you ever met in real life having heard of it. Now you can;t move without people saying 'I saw it on MSE'.!

It used to be very different on here, a smaller community, friendlier, not so many mouthy trolls.

Sometimes it's hard to remember that.

I remember when Martin was delighted to hit 2million people on the email and now it is 7 million! :eek:

The forums have expanded as well, so there's loads more people on here than there used to. It's partly why I don;t post loads on here any more. This used to be my at-home social life lol, I'd never dare share so much on here now. (Although obviously it's all in the archives somewhere...)

THIS. A Hundred times this!!! :T :T :T

Fitzmichael

Nicki wrote: »

I am utterly amazed that some posters think deliberately excluding someone from work based social outings is not bullying!

So that's more important than being a thief?
Transport this to the school setting: Your child and the rest of the class pay the teacher for an optional outing. She pays by card and gets a discount for the group, but puts all the cash in her account. OK?
And what's this bullying? If I want to go out with a group of friends, whether all or some are from work or not, for a social gathering which has no relevance to my employer, why should I not try to avoid someone I don't like? The poster hardly seems to want to take an open opportunity to disadvantage someone, where they really deserve it.
If Thingy were shown on another occasion to have fiddled her expenses, ie her employers in this way, and the employers found out that Gibson knew her dishonest tendency and said nothing, they might well also wish to take issue with Gibson.

[Deleted User]

Nicki wrote: »

I am utterly amazed that some posters think deliberately excluding someone from work based social outings is not bullying!

Transport this to the school setting and apply it to your children. Your 10 year old daughter is left on the sidelines at every playtime and never invited to birthday parties, etc because one strong character in the playground dislikes her and has taken it upon themselves to tell untruths about her/put the worst possible interpretation on everything she does and broadcast it widely. Do you all HONESTLY not think that is utterly classic bullying behaviour (and by coincidence also what has happened in this case). Can I just point out once again for anyone who missed it, that even before this incident a strenous attempt had been made to exclude "thingy" from the lunch by someone who had no knowledge at that time of the other gossipy allegations against her, and who pointedly snubbed her at the lunch itself by ostentatiously choosing the seat furthest from her.

Whilst this situation you describe could be bullying, think of it in a different way - what if you find out your daughter has been stealing these girls' lunches, or their stationary out of their drawers or their sweet money. If these girls are leaving her out because of this behaviour, that is not bullying.

In a workplace environment it's harder, because you are expected to act professional no matter what.

In this situation with 'Thingy', the OP mentioned it was difficult because of bullying being brought up before and she was concerned that whatever her actions, 'Thingy' would somehow turn it into another bullying case with her being the victim. So I can see why she's taken the grown up approach by not making a scene.

Whilst I think it might be an idea to mention something to management - not proposed as a 'Can you please sort this out' but 'Just a heads up - we had a bit of an incident at lunch last week and I'm worried about working relationships, as arguments and tension might mean an affect on the business'. That way, management is prepared for 'Thingy' to come running to them saying the OP has been bullying again.

I also think it would be fairer for the rest of the girls to know about the situation, as I know I'd want to know if my money intended as a tip for a nice lunch had gone into the pocket of a troublemaker. But that is the decision the OP has come to, fair enough.

The decision to just not include her in any more social events is a good one. 'Thingy' has alienated herself completely from those she works with. What gives her the right to spoil everyone's lunches/evenings out because of her behaviour? Besides, it sounds like a large company, and from what was said before, sounds like people tend to go out as teams. If 'Thingy' is not part of that team, which it sounds like she isn't, excluding her is definitely not bullying. If my whole company went out (200 people) but excluded one person that would be harsh, but if my team of 6 went out and didn't invite someone from a completely different team, no one takes offense at all.

poet123

Deleted_User wrote: »

Whilst this situation you describe could be bullying, think of it in a different way - what if you find out your daughter has been stealing these girls' lunches, or their stationary out of their drawers or their sweet money. If these girls are leaving her out because of this behaviour, that is not bullying.

In a workplace environment it's harder, because you are expected to act professional no matter what.

In this situation with 'Thingy', the OP mentioned it was difficult because of bullying being brought up before and she was concerned that whatever her actions, 'Thingy' would somehow turn it into another bullying case with her being the victim. So I can see why she's taken the grown up approach by not making a scene.

Whilst I think it might be an idea to mention something to management - not proposed as a 'Can you please sort this out' but 'Just a heads up - we had a bit of an incident at lunch last week and I'm worried about working relationships, as arguments and tension might mean an affect on the business'. That way, management is prepared for 'Thingy' to come running to them saying the OP has been bullying again.

I also think it would be fairer for the rest of the girls to know about the situation, as I know I'd want to know if my money intended as a tip for a nice lunch had gone into the pocket of a troublemaker. But that is the decision the OP has come to, fair enough.

The decision to just not include her in any more social events is a good one. 'Thingy' has alienated herself completely from those she works with. What gives her the right to spoil everyone's lunches/evenings out because of her behaviour? Besides, it sounds like a large company, and from what was said before, sounds like people tend to go out as teams. If 'Thingy' is not part of that team, which it sounds like she isn't, excluding her is definitely not bullying. If my whole company went out (200 people) but excluded one person that would be harsh, but if my team of 6 went out and didn't invite someone from a completely different team, no one takes offense at all.

But, the crux of the matter is: would you be happy if your daughter was excluded without proof of the above, but purely on the hearsay/anecdotal evidence of someone she has a history with?

tara747

Deleted_User wrote: »

Whilst this situation you describe could be bullying, think of it in a different way - what if you find out your daughter has been stealing these girls' lunches, or their stationary out of their drawers or their sweet money. If these girls are leaving her out because of this behaviour, that is not bullying.

In a workplace environment it's harder, because you are expected to act professional no matter what.

In this situation with 'Thingy', the OP mentioned it was difficult because of bullying being brought up before and she was concerned that whatever her actions, 'Thingy' would somehow turn it into another bullying case with her being the victim. So I can see why she's taken the grown up approach by not making a scene.

Whilst I think it might be an idea to mention something to management - not proposed as a 'Can you please sort this out' but 'Just a heads up - we had a bit of an incident at lunch last week and I'm worried about working relationships, as arguments and tension might mean an affect on the business'. That way, management is prepared for 'Thingy' to come running to them saying the OP has been bullying again.

I also think it would be fairer for the rest of the girls to know about the situation, as I know I'd want to know if my money intended as a tip for a nice lunch had gone into the pocket of a troublemaker. But that is the decision the OP has come to, fair enough.

The decision to just not include her in any more social events is a good one. 'Thingy' has alienated herself completely from those she works with. What gives her the right to spoil everyone's lunches/evenings out because of her behaviour? Besides, it sounds like a large company, and from what was said before, sounds like people tend to go out as teams. If 'Thingy' is not part of that team, which it sounds like she isn't, excluding her is definitely not bullying. If my whole company went out (200 people) but excluded one person that would be harsh, but if my team of 6 went out and didn't invite someone from a completely different team, no one takes offense at all.

:T:T:T:T


EXACTLY.

!!!!!!, they're all adults. Everyone has friends at work and socialises in smaller groups. Nobody should be forced to invite anyone to a non-work social occasion. End of.

Having said that, a word with management would be prudent, just to ensure that they're aware in case Thingy DOES allege bullying because of this.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

poet123 wrote: »

But, the crux of the matter is: would you be happy if your daughter was excluded without proof of the above, but purely on the hearsay/anecdotal evidence of someone she has a history with?

And a history of other thefts with other people, occuring only ever when she was around, don't forget.

tara747

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

And a history of other thefts with other people, occuring only ever when she was around, don't forget.

+1

FWIW, I believe the OP 100%.

aliasojo

Nicki wrote: »

I am utterly amazed that some posters think deliberately excluding someone from work based social outings is not bullying!

Transport this to the school setting and apply it to your children. Your 10 year old daughter is left on the sidelines at every playtime and never invited to birthday parties, etc because one strong character in the playground dislikes her and has taken it upon themselves to tell untruths about her/put the worst possible interpretation on everything she does and broadcast it widely. Do you all HONESTLY not think that is utterly classic bullying behaviour (and by coincidence also what has happened in this case). Can I just point out once again for anyone who missed it, that even before this incident a strenous attempt had been made to exclude "thingy" from the lunch by someone who had no knowledge at that time of the other gossipy allegations against her, and who pointedly snubbed her at the lunch itself by ostentatiously choosing the seat furthest from her.

I'm sorry but for me that analogy just doesn't work.

Adults (by and large) are aware of cause and effect. They know they are responsible for their own behaviour. Children are still developing that skill. You would expect an adult to appreciate the fact that if they behave badly/unpleasantly/selfishly then they will reap the consequences of that behaviour, i.e. becoming unpopular and avoided. A child often doesn't appreciate the potential lasting effects of being unpleasant to another, so some leeway can be given due to the child still learning, maturing etc.

Also, you are working on your assumption that the OP is in some way displaying bullying behaviour. I absolutely do not agree with your interpretation of events.

In your scenario above, you have specifically stated the case to be one where a single strong character manipulates things or lies, so another child is left out.

This is not the same situation as the one in the OP's posts Unless you know for sure something the rest of us don't.