Live in the present, in the here and now.  The past and the future each has its proper place but now is all we have.  The past is what made us who we are, the good and the bad.  The past informs and educates us to hopefully make better choices now and in the future.  We can also use the past fruitfully to remember and honor loved ones and beloved memories or entertain others with funny anecdotes, as long as we don't spend an excessive amount of time way back there.  But, using the past to rehash old grudges and slights, real or perceived, serves no useful purpose.  We all know someone who continually rehashes an old job where they were treated badly, a painful family experience now long over, or some other old dusty memory, frequently a bad memory.  What is the point of this?  The past can't be changed and often doesn't even matter anymore.  It stops us from enjoying now, which then slips away into yet another missed opportunity to do something fulfilling, improve ourselves, and appreciate life.   

There are those who spend too much time in the future, on their grand plan 20 years from now or the great things they plan to do "after retirement" or "after I get that next promotion."  They are also missing out on the here and now for something that may not even come since life is fleeting and nothing more is promised to any of us.  Yes, we all need to plan for retirement and have goals for the future, but planning the rest of your life is pointless, particularly if you plan far out in time.  The distant future has too many uncontrolled variables.  Health changes, job changes and issues, family crises, and economic changes are just some variables that can dramatically alter your master plan.  And besides, who wants their entire life all planned out?  That's boring and you lose out on a lot of opportunities and moments that come your way but miss because you are fixated in the past or in the future.    

In the business world, your clients don't often care what you did for them last October or your plans for them in five years.  They want to know what you are doing for them now.  Spend more time in the present in all aspects of your life and I think you will be happier and better for it.   http://www.employmentlawman.com/monday-morning-musings.html   





 

It is normal to be angry when you are sued or sue somebody.  However, be professional and polite at all times to your opponent.  As a lawyer, I have had the air conditioning turned off on me in the summer during depositions, been denied parking validation after depositions ("we don't validate parking for people and their lawyers who sue us"), and most recently not provided a room or chairs during a mediation (which occurred in a government building with plenty of offices; the employer got the room, we got the hallway for caucus sessions).  

These are petty, spiteful behaviors. And, none of the tactics work to the other side's advantage either.  These behaviors fan the flames instead and cause bad feelings to worsen, making it even less likely the parties will resolve their own differences as easily, quickly or cheaply.  There is no upside to such nonsense for the purveyors of this.  

Contrast that with an occasion in which the opposing side catered lunch for everybody, including us on the other side, during a mediation.  It was a nice gesture and created a more positive vibe for negotiations (if you do this, make sure the food is good too)! My message is not, "just buy pizza for the opposing party and you get a better deal," but instead to resist the urge to be impolite and petty.  There are enough legitimate issues and bad feelings in litigation without going out of your way to add fuel to the fire, which is exactly what mean-spirited tactics do, boomerang right back in your face. http://www.employmentlawman.com/monday-morning-musings.html 

Some employers conduct anonymous employee surveys from time to time.  I see no problem with this as long as the questions are valid and intentions are pure.  It's nice to visit face-to-face with employees too but sometimes people are able to be more honest if they can be anonymous.  "You're a great person but a terrible manager" would be pretty hard to share directly, no matter how great a person your boss might otherwise be.  

If you conduct anonymous surveys and/or have a suggestion box (also a good idea), for heaven's sake make sure it really is anonymous if that's the promise made.  My wife recently sent in an "anonymous" survey regarding her gym experience.  Afterwards, she received a voicemail apologizing for the shortcomings she identified, with the caveat, "I hope it wasn't me" and a litany of excuses, blaming members instead of staff for certain issues like broken machines and general gym uncleanliness.  The lesson learned here, don't bother with surveys at this gym.  They don't truly care, it's not anonymous as promised, and now the receptionist at the gym won't speak to her.  

None of us likes to be criticized, although it may be for our own good if constructive and meaningful.  It is also natural to be mad at the criticizer at times, even if we know they might just have a point.  Thus, anonymity, coupled with a genuine desire to do better as an employer is the approach.  "Let's guess who gave us these bad comments" is not the correct mindset either.  This is the whole reason employees are afraid to be honest...retaliation.  If you choose to do these surveys, do it the right way, with the right intentions or don't bother wasting everybody's time.  Nobody likes filling them out, whether as employees or as customers.  When they do, they deserve proper respect for their time and honesty.  http://www.employmentlawman.com/monday-morning-musings.html

Particularly in employment-at-will states, employers can do many things that are unfair but not illegal.  Simple bad management is not against the law and is something often seen in organizations.  That great machinist you promoted to supervisor may be a terrible manager because those two sets of skills are different from each other.  The boss's son may receive more favorable treatment than non-relative employees but this does not ordinarily violate the law.  

Some situations which are unfair may also be illegal though, so the two concepts can at times be equivalent.   For example, differences in treatment  based on sex, race, religion, age, color, national origin, and disability are illegal under federal law (and often state law too).  There are other illegal reasons for treatment and termination besides these and also employees who have extra protections, like federal and state civil service employees, union employees, and persons with specific individual contractual protections, to name a few.  

Thus, employment law is more complicated than simply applying general notions of unfairness or common sense to issues. For example, the lay definition  of harassment is different than the legal definition of harassment, something that confuses laypersons quite frequently.  The term "bullying" is often bandied about these days but whether such conduct is illegal or not usually depends on the behaviors, the severity, the frequency and often the motive behind them too.  In short, don't depend on your Uncle Pete's legal advice, unless he is qualified to give it.  http://www.employmentlawman.com/monday-morning-musings.html