The anger and resentment, delayed for now
Sunday 11 March 2012, 1.01am HKT
(Updated 11 March 2012 to fix typos and errant phraseology)
9.17pm local time / 14°C (57°F) windy and overcast
AND RATTA has decided to delay her resignation until Monday or Tuesday next week, for the sake of earning two more days’ wages.
She was to have called it quits this morning.
There’ll be two more new hired hands coming in next week, so Ratta also wanted to make sure the new guns get settled in.
Now that’s what I can be responsible-minded.
That’s why Ratta — and not them lot — have been put in charge of high-end luxury sportscars worth millions of dollars at her previous workplace.
Advisory: This will hopefully be the last of my totally angry, totally emotional, totally out-of-order, totally vicious and totally brain-baffling post — quite frankly, even I have had enough of this angry crap.
* * *
I’m not emotional
— and don’t you say I am either
I have a couple of highly emotional reactions about her workplace.
I too can be arrogant, establishmentarian, Tory (conservative), disciplinarian, prescriptivist — choose the words you like best (as Marc Antony said to Cleopatra) — especially to those peasants.
Pay attention! Class is in session!
You won’t even allow Ratta to answer calls on her own mobile phone.
Your workplace is an office. It isn’t a construction site or a railyard where answering phone calls could be dangerous.
Even some prisons have payphones and allow un-effing-restricted phone access by convicts.
Tell me exactly what kind of place you’re running, or you leave.
Your goddamn job is to teach young kids. F@#king learn your manners.
This is your principal job. You do this, or you leave.
Your website is a disgrace to the online community.
Your ‘professional’ organisation cannot even manage the simple task of putting in the right materials into the right webpage.
Your English-language blog page (based on your ‘en_’ URL) is f@#king entirely in Chinese, written by your ‘principal’ in poor bloody Chinese grammar and poor bloody Chinese diction.
By the way, when you’re head of an educational establishment for preteens, your proper title is headmistress, you fat, smelly runt.
This is your principal online task for your website. You do this properly, or you leave the online sphere (or be put out of it).
You are mistaken. You are not professionals because you are not a Professional.
A ‘Professional’ is a person who is trained and/or practising in the Professions.
Classically, there were only three: divinity, medicine and law — the so-called ‘Learned Professions.’
Today, architecture, engineering and (believe it or not) plumbing have been added into the Principal Professions.
A ‘Profession’ is defined as a vocation founded upon specialised educational training, the purpose of which is to supply objective counsel and service to others, for a direct and definite compensation, wholly apart from expectation of other business gain.*
* Paragraph 123 of “Architect Services” (Chapter 7) of a United Kingdom Competition Commission report dated 8 November 1977, quoting a New Statesman article dated 21 April 1917 by Sidney Webb and Beatrice Webb. This definition is applicable worldwide to a greater or lesser extent.
The main milestones** that mark an occupation being identified as a profession are:—
- It became a full-time occupation
- The first training school was established
- The first university school was established
- The first local association was established
- The first national association was established
- The codes of professional ethics were introduced
- State or national licensing laws were established
** Perks, R.W. (1993). Accounting and Society. London: Chapman & Hall, ISBN 0412473305. Page 2.
Even the thoroughly brain-damaged Wikipedia does NOT even include educationistas in the lineup of Professionals:—
- Actuaries (i.e. insurance accountants)
- Advocates (i.e. barristers a.k.a. trial lawyers)
- Archivists (does not include librarians)
- Chefs (does not fulfil criteria 5–7, thus does not qualify as a Profession as described above)
- Diplomats (career diplomats only)
- Engineers (includes electricians)
- Financial analysts (who are now too big to bail out)
- Journalists (even yellow hacks)
- Lawyers (i.e. solicitors a.k.a. non-trial lawyers)
- Pharmacists (but not pharmacologists)
- Philosophers (does not fulfil criteria 5–7, thus does not qualify as a Profession as described above)
- Physicians (i.e. non-surgical doctors)
- Professors (only full sitting professors on tenure)
- Scientists (does not fulfil criteria 5–7, thus does not qualify as a Profession as described above)
- Social workers
- Surgeons (i.e. butchering doctors)
I am a Professional by training and qualification and general recognition.
Your work is not professional because you are not a Professional. This is your actual social and work status. You accept it, or you leave.
As you are not a Professional, I have no interest whatsoever in entertaining your unsubstantiated un-Professional opinions, which are worthless for my Professional purposes.
(Notwithstanding the foregoing, some of my esteemed readers are professional (and Professional) teachers and educationists, and I should hope they too object to your brand of professionalism in education.)
You refused to even speak to your new hired hands, even for something as simple and innocuous as casual chitchat.
Ratta sits around in the office with absoeffinglutely none of the usual office conversation happening.
If you are a jobhunter, this should raise all your red flags about a problematic workplace.
If you are an employer with a workplace like that, you are part of the problem of running a problematic workplace and not the solution.
Your principal job is to run a comfortable, on-going business for profits. I too run a business, comfortable enough, as profitable as it could humanly be. You are to provide a proper workplace with no undue stress for your employees, or you leave.
Your co-workers won’t even talk to each other while dining together at lunchtime.
Red flag. Clearly these people have deep-seated psychological problems.
Untalkativeness or refusal to have social interaction is a strong indicator of high sexual frustration and psychologically traumatised personalities. (I know: my first degree was in psychology and statistics.)
Basically, you need to see a doctor at the first opportunity because I srsly believe the children under your care are under threat by your general pattern of behaviour.
Frankly, I would prefer to put you down like a sick dog with a Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum myself, but I understand from my legal training that would be slightly illegal in any jurisdiction.
Your lunchtime or whatever-the-hell break is when you’re supposed to be yourself. You do that, or your leave.
You deliberately and purposefully stretch things out in your teaching to the children so as to gain maximum possible revenue.
Your ‘company’ provides English-language tuition to very young children as a crammer (AmE: tuition school). But you also prolong the tuition on purpose in order to milk their over-anxious parents sold on the insane idea that kids could learn to speak English ‘natively’ (they mean ‘to speak like a native’) whilst growing up in a non-English-speaking territory like Hong Kong.
Your principal operating doctrine is that you’re a crammer. A crammer is to provide non-permanent remedial directed teaching to meet a specified need (e.g. examinations). You do that, or you leave.
Your three or four expat education or programme or whatever-the-hell directors have been living in my town only after the 1997 handover.
Unless you’ve been here before or are a belonger by birth or connection, you know jack shite about the Chinese and their children.
Were YOU here when THIS was here?
Then tell me what you know about Hong Kong, please.
In fact, you know bollocks about the Chinese
unless you were here when THIS was here.
* * *
In fact, I’ve a mind just to sue those peasants just for fun and to see if my lawyerings skills are still up to scratch. Harr-harr.
Oh, yeah, for our non-English-speaking cousins, all this is what it means by the English phrase ‘having it in for’ somebody.
© The Naked Listener’s Weblog, 2012. Updated 11 March 2012.
Images: Mobile phone via Schoolnet.lk | Facepalm via c4c | Faucet by the author | Arrogant face via Terra Ferma Media | Girlie chitchat via Glossy Icon | Uncle Sam Shut Up via Psychology Today | Old Hong Kong Flag (public domain) via Wikipedia.