Re: Meetings are for what?
- From: Cipher <notavalid@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 14:05:20 -0500
On 2/10/2011 2:02 PM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
In<iiul6a$28e$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, on 02/09/2011
at 01:07 PM, Cipher<notavalid@xxxxxxxxxxx> said:
TechBoss says he'll take over getting the client on board with a new
ORF version as the existing version doesn't support the new
mailserver AND an upgrade is not part of the project scope AND may
cost a few grand AND it's his screw up.
Did you send a reminder with a BCC to&BigBoss If not, why not?
Of course, but see the defaults of "TechBoss is 50% owner" and "deal with it."
Also, when it got handed back to me, it took less than an hour to find a no-cost solution from the same vendor and only another two to start implementing it - for which I no doubt will get my ass kicked because I waited to hear back from TechBoss and "it was an easy solution".
My next employer must meet these requirements:
* Listens to employees on technical matters or just doesn't ask for opinions
* Understands work-life balance does not mean Work is your Life
* Gives pats on the back when earned, and kicks in the ass when necessary
--
The word "urgent" is the moral of the story "The boy who cried wolf". As
a general rule I don't believe it until a manager comes to me almost in
tears. I like to catch them in a cup and drink them later.
-- Matt Holiab, in the Monastery
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Meetings are for what?
- From: Brian Kantor
- Re: Meetings are for what?
- References:
- Meetings are for what?
- From: Cipher
- Re: Meetings are for what?
- From: Seymour J.
- Meetings are for what?
- Prev by Date: Re: Truth in "truth in labelling" laws
- Next by Date: Re: Ok, who is the smart guy that invented XML?
- Previous by thread: Re: Meetings are for what?
- Next by thread: Re: Meetings are for what?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|