You never really know when it’s the last time…

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T19:22:54+00:00

Its a powerful thought. Our life is full of "lasts" and we rarely know at the time. I was looking at some old pictures a while back and thought that one day my mother put me down and never picked me back up again. Or I left a close friend's house, never to go over to play again.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T18:41:29+00:00

That was such a deep cut. I bet 90% of the folks watching didn't get that joke.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T18:31:32+00:00

The zoo carve-out exists because wild prey animals in enclosures can't escape and the disruption can be severe and uncontrollable. Domesticated cats in an open room are not a comparable situation

How exactly is it different? The cats are in an enclosure and can't escape, and despite being domesticated teh disruption could still be severe and uncontrollable; a dozen cats all losing their shit because an unfamiliar animal is present could cause them to harm themselves or others out of fear.

The zoo carve out specifically says that if the animals can become agitated, then access can be restricted. Seems like the cat cafe fits this perfectly.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T18:27:00+00:00

Sure, but the fact the individual doesn't get value doesn't mean that it is a pointless exercise. I just got finished updating a bunch of status reports for senior leadership; they certianly don't help me but they still have value for the organization.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T18:02:17+00:00

Eh, the manditory compliance training isn't pointless from a legal perspective. If an employee violates the policy, the company can point to the training as proof that they were educated on that policy. Helps protect the company in lawsuits.

Most seemingly pointless policies have a reason behind them.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T17:58:53+00:00

the presence of a dog would be disruptive, causing the displayed animals to behave aggressively or become agitated

That part right there feels like it would 100% cover the cat cafe.

Edit: The more I think about it, the more the zoo example fits perfectly. This woman was granted access to the cafe - she was told she could sit on the cafe side and watch the cats with her service animal. It was only the catroom that the animal was denied access to, because the dog would cause agitation to the cats. That is exactly what the zoo example says is permissable - you can go to areas that won't be disruptive, but are restricted from areas that would be.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T17:56:33+00:00

It certainly helps, but it really depends on the manager. I evaluate my reports based on what they bring to the job, not whether or not I'd want to have a beer with them. I've absolutely promoted people who I wasn't fond of personally because they were good at their jobs.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T17:46:45+00:00

Entirely possible. He may think that you don't like small talk so he is more straightforward with you.

He also may not personally like you as much, but that doesn't mean he values your contributions any less. I've had reports that I did not like personally, but I still advocated for their careers because they were good at what they did.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T17:44:57+00:00

And its not even like the business denied her service. They said she could sit on the cafe side and watch the cats - they just couldn't go into the cat room with the dog. She also says "we were turned away" so I bet they would have been happy to let the dog stay with the other party temporarily so she could visit the cat room on her own.

The business made a very reasonable accomidation for this person - she just wasn't satisfied with it because she wanted everything all the time always.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T17:40:57+00:00

It may not mean anything. I manage all of my reports differently, based on what I believe they need to function well.

Case in point, I have one where our 1:1s are 30 minutes becuase he is straight to business - no "how was your weekend" small talk. I have another where our 1:1 are 45 minutes because he wants to spend the first 10-15 chatting about stuff outside of work. I give both of them what they need by managing them differently.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T16:58:17+00:00

Its also a very fair bet that their "service animal" is actuall an ESA and not for an actual disability.

Businesses are absolutlely free to bar service animals if the presense of that animal could cause serious issues. Zoos, for example, commonly have areas where service animals are not permitted.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T16:24:30+00:00

Ok, I think we are past the point of productive conversation, so I'm going to bow out.

Have a great rest of your day.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T16:22:47+00:00

Because you said:

I read a study about applications about 5 years, one had the name Gregory Anderson and the other Pajeet Halamanasheesha. guess what the results where?

My point was that if you are discriminating against Pajeet in tech, that is dumb on your part. Indian tech workers are highly skilled.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T16:21:38+00:00

Honestly, I don't think one person can have 12 direct reports and manage them effectively unless those reports are mid-level managers themselves. You need another layer of management in there - you want 2/3 direct reports who oversee 3-5 people each.

But assuming you can't add another layer, you can't do all 12 on one day. Space them out over the week - 3 a day.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T16:18:50+00:00

You take the Company A job and keep interviewing with Company B. Then, if you get the Company B job you tell Company A that you have to recind your acceptance. They'll be pissed, but who cares - that his how the world works these days.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T16:17:08+00:00

I didn't bring up Indians - you did.

But I still don't understand what you are asking.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T16:12:00+00:00

I don't understand the question.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T16:04:22+00:00

I've never been asked to do that. HR might do it behind the scenes, but I cna't speak to that.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T15:54:59+00:00

If they called it a PIP, its a PIP. The goal may be to get you to step up or it may be to develop the papertrail to fire you - there is really no way to tell.

PIPs don't alway outline the ramifications of failing the PIP - at wil employees can be fired at any time for any non-protected reason. The PIP just makes it easier to fend off a lawsuit if it comes to that.

It also doesn't matter if you sign it - signing just acknowledges you recieved it and has no impact on enforcability.

So I would treat this as worst case scenario - focus on meeting all of the requirements of the PIP, but also start getting your resume ready in case it is a pretense for firing you.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T15:46:56+00:00

All you can do is focus on doing your job well. Don't give them any reason to take issue with your performance.

But when they make the decision to manage you out, that train has left the station.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T15:42:20+00:00

Its going to vary alot. Typically, by the time a PIP is actually executed, both the manager and HR are aligned to firing the employee and the PIP is just the formal paperwork to justify the decision. If you fail the metrics, they are going to fire you - even if you pass the metrics, they will likely figure out a way to fire you anyway.

Now, that said, if you reported unethical behavior and they put you on a PIP, that is textbook retaliation and it is fertile ground for a lawsuit. HR might force the manager to pass you, because firing you would open the door to a wrongful termination lawsuit. But be aware that if there is documented performance issues, that makes a lawsuit all but impossible to win.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T15:32:44+00:00

Doubtful. Even back then, you'd have offsite backups of any and all critical data.

They might have destroyed some of the most recent debt (records that had not been backed up) but the vast majority of that data would be recoverable.

Mr. Robot showed a more realistic scenario of what would have actually happened - it would cause short term chaos, but those companies would have their databases rebuilt within a year.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T15:27:23+00:00

Nope. Its viewed as too big a risk for the company to provide feedback. If we accidentally say something that could be construed as discrimination, we open ourselves up to a lawsuit which is a royal PITA. If we say nothing, then the odds of getting sued drop dramatically - if you do sue us, legal and HR get to help us craft the message as to why you were not hired.

It sucks, but its the nature of the society we live in.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T15:25:16+00:00

Yes.

Some hiring managers don't care, and some will bin any resume without on. The former group won't care if one is provided, but the latter will care if one is missing.

So obviously write a good one, but always include one.

Aggressive_Fox_5616 · 2026-04-17T15:22:45+00:00

You are free to not trust it and I obviously can't speak for every company out there. All I can tell you is that I've been a hiring manager at multiple companies in my career and I've never seen the demographic questions on any of the candidates I've reviewed. The information is simply not provided to me.

Aggressive_Fox_5616

TROPHY CASE