In other news... (humorous news items)

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

Fire Brns
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:25 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Fire Brns » Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:51 pm UTC

Mighty Jalapeno wrote:And now that they're all in the trench, he can stand on the lip and say "Look, they're all douchebags, but ME... I'm not like them! Vote Newt! Vote Newt!"
My thoughts exactly.
He's going: "I insulted highly unpopular people/ideas/actions, look how cool I am!"

Its the same whenever any politician makes an offhand and deriding comment about any group preying upon stereotypes, bonus points if involves fabricated and uncomfortable sounding political slang like "lamestream" or "astroturf". I think I just gave myself ptsd.

KnightExemplar wrote:
Angua wrote:It's nice to see people's mental health problems taken so seriously.


This reads so much better when I think it's part of the Newt Gingrich subtopic. :D :D
And my ptsd is cured. :D
Pfhorrest wrote:As someone who is not easily offended, I don't really mind anything in this conversation.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:It was the Renaissance. Everyone was Italian.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:13 pm UTC

Hawknc wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
phlip wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Anyway, I think this guy is going to have a hard time proving he was "ill" while he was wrestling with sharks in Australia. But that's just me.

Because "ill" means you have incapacitating physical problems that interfere with your ability to move athletically, and mental problems don't count. Gotcha.


If "wanting a paid nine month vacation" is a mental problem, then dammit, I've got me some issues.

Show me where it says his sick leave was paid?


It doesn't say it, but he's from the UK, yes? Pretty sure paid sick leave is mandated.

My skepticism of his dreadful stress issues is increased by brief googling, which reveals that his wife was also on sick leave for stress at the same time, accompanying him on his vacation. This sounds less like an actual, unavoidable mental illness and more like the same sort of reason everyone else takes vacations.

User avatar
Hawknc
Oompa Loompa of SCIENCE!
Posts: 6986
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Hawknc » Sun Mar 17, 2013 4:00 pm UTC

Up to a point, I think, but it's not indefinite. Obviously neither of us have access to his contract, but even statutory sick pay (which is paid by the employer but they get reimbursed by the government) ends after 28 weeks. At a guess I would say he was not receiving his full wage, at any rate, when he decided to wrestle sharks. Someone more familiar with UK workplace law might be able to clarify.

Fire Brns
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:25 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Fire Brns » Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:06 am UTC

The company would still have a valid reason to fire him even if they weren't paying him at the time. They have a loss of productivity by being a man down and they cannot hire a replacement (unless it's a temp and I don't know too much about employment terms over there) if he could show up at any moment.
Pfhorrest wrote:As someone who is not easily offended, I don't really mind anything in this conversation.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:It was the Renaissance. Everyone was Italian.

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby yurell » Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:17 am UTC

Fire Brns wrote:The company would still have a valid reason to fire him even if they weren't paying him at the time. They have a loss of productivity by being a man down and they cannot hire a replacement (unless it's a temp and I don't know too much about employment terms over there) if he could show up at any moment.


So if you're ill for any protracted period of time, you lose your job? I'm glad I don't live in your world.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby bentheimmigrant » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:34 am UTC

Fire Brns wrote:I don't know too much about employment terms over there


Yes, we noticed.

I don't know why you people find this so hard to imagine. So, he's really stressed, for whatever reason, and let's say he has a mental breakdown of some sort. Should he expected to "get better" before some arbitrary date?
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

User avatar
Ormurinn
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:42 pm UTC
Location: Suth Eoferwicscire

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Ormurinn » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:38 am UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:
Fire Brns wrote:I don't know too much about employment terms over there


Yes, we noticed.

I don't know why you people find this so hard to imagine. So, he's really stressed, for whatever reason, and let's say he has a mental breakdown of some sort. Should he expected to "get better" before some arbitrary date?


He could be expected to, say, undergo therapy or convalesce at home. People rightly get angry at skivers.

If he's stressed enough not to be able to work, he should be stressed enough to require treatment, whether that's therapy or sedatives or whatever.
"Progress" - Technological advances masking societal decay.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Carlington » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:41 am UTC

Some sort of treatment, like, say, removing himself from a stressful environment?
By going somewhere else?
Like, say, oh...Australia?
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby bentheimmigrant » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:57 am UTC

Ormurinn wrote:
bentheimmigrant wrote:
Fire Brns wrote:I don't know too much about employment terms over there


Yes, we noticed.

I don't know why you people find this so hard to imagine. So, he's really stressed, for whatever reason, and let's say he has a mental breakdown of some sort. Should he expected to "get better" before some arbitrary date?


He could be expected to, say, undergo therapy or convalesce at home. People rightly get angry at skivers.

If he's stressed enough not to be able to work, he should be stressed enough to require treatment, whether that's therapy or sedatives or whatever.

But the main points that are being made have been "What? Nine months? That's way too much time!" and "Stress isn't a mental illness!" Without any knowledge of the situation.

Why do you think he's not stressed enough to require treatment. Where did it say he wasn't on medication?
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:32 am UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:
Fire Brns wrote:I don't know too much about employment terms over there


Yes, we noticed.

I don't know why you people find this so hard to imagine. So, he's really stressed, for whatever reason, and let's say he has a mental breakdown of some sort. Should he expected to "get better" before some arbitrary date?


And his wife had a similar "mental breakdown" at the exact same time, requiring the exact same treatment?

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby bentheimmigrant » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:38 am UTC

It didn't say why she was off. For all we know she has a physical illness that added to his stress. Perhaps it is all just people abusing the system. But assuming it is because you think mental illness is make-believe reveals more about yourself than it does them.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

curtis95112
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:23 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby curtis95112 » Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:19 pm UTC

And anyway, he was apparently on holiday on his doctor's recommendation. I'm quite sure that the doctor is way more qualified than any of us to make such judgments. Perhaps it's all fraud and the doctor's in on it, but then that should be proven in court before anything happens. It's quite clear that there is, at least, a breach of proper procedure.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
Роберт wrote:Sure, but at least they hit the intended target that time.

Well, if you shoot enough people, you're bound to get the right one eventually.

Thats the best description of the USA ever.

User avatar
JBJ
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:20 pm UTC
Location: a point or extent in space

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby JBJ » Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:42 pm UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:It didn't say why she was off. For all we know she has a physical illness that added to his stress. Perhaps it is all just people abusing the system. But assuming it is because you think mental illness is make-believe reveals more about yourself than it does them.

They both worked for the same charity; he as a project coordinator and her as a senior youth worker and event planner, and both were on leave at the same time for work related stress. She has been sacked as well.

According to the couple, they had both been putting in 7 day weeks for some time. That could reasonably lead to a buildup of stress and is certainly deserving of some time off. Personally, I think 9 months is a bit excessive, but if that was cleared through the employer then they shouldn't have cared what he was doing on his time off. The employer's reaction leads me to believe that they had no idea when he was planning on coming back and that he was on an open-ended leave. Also, color me just a little skeptical though that it was roughly 7 months into his recuperation before his doctor suggested taking a vacation.
So, you sacked the cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker?
The second cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker I've sacked since the sixth sitting sheet slitter got sick.

User avatar
Jofur
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:50 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Jofur » Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:48 pm UTC

I have concluded from this that US employers are dicks and are behind the times.

It's totally a culture things. That's why the UK people and Aussies can't seem to agree with the Americans. We (in the US) live in a culture where if you are not making them money, you are waste and should be fired. (to some extent.) Where, say, Australia, NZ, and the UK have a totally different mentality at large.
Kind of funny, isn't it? Both sides are saying "well, duh he should have totally taken/not taken such a long holiday."
Everybody is doing it and nobody knows why.

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby yurell » Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:01 pm UTC

Jofur wrote:Kind of funny, isn't it? Both sides are saying "well, duh he should have totally taken/not taken such a long holiday."


I don't think anyone's saying that he should have taken such a long holiday, but that such a long holiday could be reasonable under certain circumstances. Without knowing a great deal more detail, I don't think we're in a position to say he 'should' have done anything.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:01 pm UTC

Jofur wrote:We (in the US) live in a culture where if you are not making them money, you are waste and should be fired.


I don't understand. Isn't that the entire point of hiring people in the first place, that they directly or indirectly lead to more wealth produced than it costs to employ them? For for-profits, for the firm, for non-profits, for society?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:09 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
Jofur wrote:We (in the US) live in a culture where if you are not making them money, you are waste and should be fired.


I don't understand. Isn't that the entire point of hiring people in the first place, that they directly or indirectly lead to more wealth produced than it costs to employ them? For for-profits, for the firm, for non-profits, for society?


The other culture is that it is a company's responsibility to take care of individuals. If you are in a situation where you are large enough to provide jobs, it is your responsibility to keep your employees well and employed.

Correct me if I'm wrong people.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:01 pm UTC

So... You are happy with government being replaced with corporations? Good to know.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby LaserGuy » Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:19 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:
Jofur wrote:We (in the US) live in a culture where if you are not making them money, you are waste and should be fired.


I don't understand. Isn't that the entire point of hiring people in the first place, that they directly or indirectly lead to more wealth produced than it costs to employ them? For for-profits, for the firm, for non-profits, for society?


The other culture is that it is a company's responsibility to take care of individuals. If you are in a situation where you are large enough to provide jobs, it is your responsibility to keep your employees well and employed.

Correct me if I'm wrong people.


I would say that the key difference is that many other countries have an expectation that the sole purpose of corporations is not simply to generate wealth for their shareholders, but rather, that corporations have a broader social responsibility to their consumers, employees, the communities in which they operate, and to the environment. One consequence of such a mindset is an expectation that employers will treat their employees with humanity and compassion, which includes not throwing people out on the street the moment that they become ill.

User avatar
AvatarIII
Posts: 2098
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 12:28 pm UTC
Location: W.Sussex, UK

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby AvatarIII » Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:29 pm UTC

I don't really understand why the guy didn't just retire,

Fire Brns
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:25 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Fire Brns » Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:22 pm UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:
Fire Brns wrote:I don't know too much about employment terms over there


Yes, we noticed.

I don't know why you people find this so hard to imagine. So, he's really stressed, for whatever reason, and let's say he has a mental breakdown of some sort. Should he expected to "get better" before some arbitrary date?

I was saying I don't know temp laws so I don't know how popular temp work is over there. I do know economies in countries don't do as well when it is practically impossible to fire someone.

He could have established with his employers the details of his "sick leave", like "hey I need at least x amount of time and I'll keep you in the loop if I need more" which would have been far less arbitrary than "I'll see you at some indeterminate integer of time in the future".

bentheimmigrant wrote:It didn't say why she was off. For all we know she has a physical illness that added to his stress. Perhaps it is all just people abusing the system. But assuming it is because you think mental illness is make-believe reveals more about yourself than it does them.
No one is saying mental illness is make believe, sure not all illnesses are the same and so stress as a mental illness would receive less attention/treatment than postpartum depression or a psychotic break but no one said stress was a made up illness.

And it is statistically more likely and thus more assumable that the 2 are committing fraud than that they both built up 9+ months of stress.
Pfhorrest wrote:As someone who is not easily offended, I don't really mind anything in this conversation.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:It was the Renaissance. Everyone was Italian.

User avatar
PeteP
What the peck?
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:51 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby PeteP » Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:30 pm UTC

Fire Brns wrote:And it is statistically more likely and thus more assumable that the 2 are committing fraud than that they both built up 9+ months of stress.

Out of interest do these words mean "I have statistics which show that it's more likely" or are they a synonym for "I find it more likely" or for "I think there are probably statistics which support my point".

User avatar
Dason
Posts: 1311
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 7:06 am UTC
Location: ~/

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Dason » Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:36 pm UTC

Fire Brns wrote:And it is statistically more likely and thus more assumable that the 2 are committing fraud than that they both built up 9+ months of stress.


As a statistician it is my belief that you're just using the phrase "statistically more likely" to try to make your argument sound better.
double epsilon = -.0000001;

Fire Brns
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:25 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Fire Brns » Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:07 pm UTC

I only have statistics on mental health that are certifiable for the US and fraud statistics themselves are unreliable because the activity is illegal and so any amount is under-reported.

Around 6 percent of the population lives with serious mental illness. When you average out treatment times for milder stuff like stress they fall into the statistical extremes that make it more and more likely that they are committing fraud.
Pfhorrest wrote:As someone who is not easily offended, I don't really mind anything in this conversation.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:It was the Renaissance. Everyone was Italian.

User avatar
emceng
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: State of Hockey
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby emceng » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:01 pm UTC

My question is at what point does his health become the problem of the employer, and when does that obligation end? How long do you have to work someplace before you're allowed to take 9 months off for stress leave? As a manager, if we had a guy leave due to illness, it's going to cause a huge freaking problem. Losing someone to another company is an enormous headache(one I'm dealing with right now). Losing someone long term due to illness is another, even bigger headache. You are still spending all the money you did before on salary, but have nothing to show for it. You can't hire someone long term, because you can't promise them a job in case the first person comes back.
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. - CS Lewis

User avatar
broken_escalator
They're called stairs
Posts: 3312
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:49 am UTC
Location: _| ̄|○

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby broken_escalator » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:04 pm UTC

While the topic is on mental health here is a small CDC publication about mental illness and how it's being monitored. Not really news, but it's relevant.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby LaserGuy » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:06 pm UTC

emceng wrote:My question is at what point does his health become the problem of the employer, and when does that obligation end? How long do you have to work someplace before you're allowed to take 9 months off for stress leave? As a manager, if we had a guy leave due to illness, it's going to cause a huge freaking problem. Losing someone to another company is an enormous headache(one I'm dealing with right now). Losing someone long term due to illness is another, even bigger headache. You are still spending all the money you did before on salary, but have nothing to show for it. You can't hire someone long term, because you can't promise them a job in case the first person comes back.


Well, considering that stress is often work-related, it seems perfectly reasonable that the employer ought to bear considerable responsibility for stress-related mental health issues. If nothing else, it encourages employers to be proactive about looking after employee welfare and maintaining a good work environment.

User avatar
emceng
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: State of Hockey
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby emceng » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:21 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:
emceng wrote:My question is at what point does his health become the problem of the employer, and when does that obligation end? How long do you have to work someplace before you're allowed to take 9 months off for stress leave? As a manager, if we had a guy leave due to illness, it's going to cause a huge freaking problem. Losing someone to another company is an enormous headache(one I'm dealing with right now). Losing someone long term due to illness is another, even bigger headache. You are still spending all the money you did before on salary, but have nothing to show for it. You can't hire someone long term, because you can't promise them a job in case the first person comes back.


Well, considering that stress is often work-related, it seems perfectly reasonable that the employer ought to bear considerable responsibility for stress-related mental health issues. If nothing else, it encourages employers to be proactive about looking after employee welfare and maintaining a good work environment.



Ok, but where do you draw the line? If I'm stressing about work, and take time off, guess what? My job is not getting done. My employer has to find someone to cover for me, basically doubling their costs. How much time is reasonable? Nearly every job is stressful. And at what point is it reasonable that the employer is no longer responsible? If you don't work for nine months, is it reasonable that your job is causing you stress, instead of other factors in your life?
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. - CS Lewis

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby LaserGuy » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:28 pm UTC

emceng wrote:
LaserGuy wrote:
emceng wrote:My question is at what point does his health become the problem of the employer, and when does that obligation end? How long do you have to work someplace before you're allowed to take 9 months off for stress leave? As a manager, if we had a guy leave due to illness, it's going to cause a huge freaking problem. Losing someone to another company is an enormous headache(one I'm dealing with right now). Losing someone long term due to illness is another, even bigger headache. You are still spending all the money you did before on salary, but have nothing to show for it. You can't hire someone long term, because you can't promise them a job in case the first person comes back.


Well, considering that stress is often work-related, it seems perfectly reasonable that the employer ought to bear considerable responsibility for stress-related mental health issues. If nothing else, it encourages employers to be proactive about looking after employee welfare and maintaining a good work environment.



Ok, but where do you draw the line? If I'm stressing about work, and take time off, guess what? My job is not getting done. My employer has to find someone to cover for me, basically doubling their costs. How much time is reasonable? Nearly every job is stressful. And at what point is it reasonable that the employer is no longer responsible? If you don't work for nine months, is it reasonable that your job is causing you stress, instead of other factors in your life?


Generally, a doctor or psychologist is called upon to make those sorts of determinations.

Fire Brns
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:25 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Fire Brns » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:43 pm UTC

LazerGuy wrote:Generally, a doctor or psychologist is called upon to make those sorts of determinations.
No doctor would prescribe 9 months off of work, "take some time off" is the broadest possible suggestion. If a psychologist saw such a large mental issue he would likely recommend temporary institutionalization rather than travel to a country full of high stress environmentals.


I was trying to find a way to rationalize 9 months and not more which was probably what was going to happen. I'm going to use the "he was logging a lot of 7 day weeks" comment as a jumping off point.

Suppose the first week you work 7 days you get 2 rest days and each following week offers 2+(x-1) rest days. You would have to work approximately 21 weeks straight to deserve 240 days off and that is under the ridiculous presumption that after 6 weeks you are getting more than 7 or moor rest days per work week.
If I scale it back to 4 rest days max per work week and assumed he got no days off in that period he would have had to have worked 42 weeks straight to deserve 9 months off.

Most Americans don't get more that 2 weeks of vacation time to burn off stress, I am surprised anyone who can milk the situation for 36 weeks would become indignant about being fired.
Pfhorrest wrote:As someone who is not easily offended, I don't really mind anything in this conversation.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:It was the Renaissance. Everyone was Italian.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26822
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:49 pm UTC

Fire Brns wrote:I only have statistics on mental health that are certifiable for the US and fraud statistics themselves are unreliable because the activity is illegal and so any amount is under-reported.

Around 6 percent of the population lives with serious mental illness. When you average out treatment times for milder stuff like stress they fall into the statistical extremes that make it more and more likely that they are committing fraud.

You (claim to) have evidence that they are statistical outliers, but then wrestling a shark sets one as more of an outlier than merely needing longer than average to recover from a stress disorder. And yet you're not doubting the accuracy of that part of the story.

And of course, if it's true that the guy was consulting a doctor who suggested a vacation, that's fairly strong counterevidence that he was not, in fact, committing fraud. Do you also have statistics on how often doctors help their patients defraud employers by lying about medical conditions?
Last edited by gmalivuk on Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:50 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby LaserGuy » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:50 pm UTC

Fire Brns wrote:
LazerGuy wrote:Generally, a doctor or psychologist is called upon to make those sorts of determinations.
No doctor would prescribe 9 months off of work, "take some time off" is the broadest possible suggestion. If a psychologist saw such a large mental issue he would likely recommend temporary institutionalization rather than travel to a country full of high stress environmentals.


I was trying to find a way to rationalize 9 months and not more which was probably what was going to happen. I'm going to use the "he was logging a lot of 7 day weeks" comment as a jumping off point.

Suppose the first week you work 7 days you get 2 rest days and each following week offers 2+(x-1) rest days. You would have to work approximately 21 weeks straight to deserve 240 days off and that is under the ridiculous presumption that after 6 weeks you are getting more than 7 or moor rest days per work week.
If I scale it back to 4 rest days max per work week and assumed he got no days off in that period he would have had to have worked 42 weeks straight to deserve 9 months off.

Most Americans don't get more that 2 weeks of vacation time to burn off stress, I am surprised anyone who can milk the situation for 36 weeks would become indignant about being fired.


Vacation time and stress leave are not the same thing. A doctor would probably not proscribe 9 months off work, no. They would proscribe a certain amount of time off, maybe a couple weeks, and then reevaluate the patient again to judge their improvement. Pretty much the same thing that happens when you take off sick leave.

Frankly, the idea that people only get 2 weeks' vacation is kind of criminal anyway, IMHO.

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Azrael » Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:01 pm UTC

emceng wrote:My question is at what point does his health become the problem of the employer, and when does that obligation end? How long do you have to work someplace before you're allowed to take 9 months off for stress leave? As a manager, if we had a guy leave due to illness, it's going to cause a huge freaking problem. Losing someone to another company is an enormous headache(one I'm dealing with right now). Losing someone long term due to illness is another, even bigger headache. You are still spending all the money you did before on salary, but have nothing to show for it. You can't hire someone long term, because you can't promise them a job in case the first person comes back.

First, let's remove sick leave for stress from the discussion, because it's perfectly clear that several people here are unwilling to consider that as anything other than fraud. So let's talk about taking sick leave for ... I don't know, how about cancer? Or being in a coma from a car accident that cannot even remotely be construed as the fault of the individual under discussion.

Let's also be clear that sick leave is not necessarily paid. Just like the 8 weeks maternity leave that the US federal government mandates an employer honors, it can be no more than the promise of a job when one returns.

In the US, there is almost no legal obligation between an employer and an employee who cannot work. Person gets sick and misses work, employer can fire them. For the most part, the rest of the modern industrialized world (and lots of people in the US) think that's pretty much bullshit. But hey. That being said, many employers who offer health insurance (which isn't every one -- again, sorta bullshit) also carry short and long term disability insurance. Sometimes the premium is paid by the employer, sometimes by the employee. A typical benefit from these programs goes something like this:

Employee is ill, as determined by a medical professional and unable to work for an extended period of time. First, they will consume their accrued paid sick time and paid vacation time (again, if such things are actually offered). Then short term disability coverage kicks it. These plans typically offer 50-70% of base salary for 10-26 weeks. After that, the employee either has to return to work, go on long term disability coverage, or is out of a job.

As long term disability coverage is less frequently provided by employers, it's not as easy to summarize. But it will frequently be 33-50% salary for a longer period, often times with a maximum benefit cap. Sometimes it caps at a year, perhaps some even as much as 10. After which, if the disability persists, the person can return to work, or is out of a job. Perhaps they can apply for social security. Perhaps they're just screwed.

It is important to note that the employees salary is paid for by an insurance claim rather than directly out of pocket for the employer. This frees the employer to hire temporary or semi-permanent replacements.

Fire Brns
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:25 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Fire Brns » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:23 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Fire Brns wrote:I only have statistics on mental health that are certifiable for the US and fraud statistics themselves are unreliable because the activity is illegal and so any amount is under-reported.

Around 6 percent of the population lives with serious mental illness. When you average out treatment times for milder stuff like stress they fall into the statistical extremes that make it more and more likely that they are committing fraud.

You (claim to) have evidence that they are statistical outliers, but then wrestling a shark sets one as more of an outlier than merely needing longer than average to recover from a stress disorder. And yet you're not doubting the accuracy of that part of the story.

And of course, if it's true that the guy was consulting a doctor who suggested a vacation, that's fairly strong counterevidence that he was not, in fact, committing fraud. Do you also have statistics on how often doctors help their patients defraud employers by lying about medical conditions?
my statistics are CDC and WHO type mental illness statistics, I already said fraud statistics are not trustworthy enough to quote.

He exceeded recommended treatment time for excessive stress by several months, that is the primary factor that makes him an outlier not his shark wrestling. I was not suggesting the doctor was helping him commit fraud, I was proposing that the doctor suggested a vacation and the man decided to take advantage of employment laws to stay off work until the company called him to come back.


In other news:
Nearby ancient star is almost as old as the Universe

Spoiler:
Excerpt:
HD 140283 had been used previously to constrain the age of the Universe, but uncertainties tied to its estimated distance (at that time) made the age determination somewhat imprecise. The team therefore decided to obtain a new and improved distance for HD 140283 using the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), namely via the trigonometric parallax approach. The distance uncertainty for HD 140283 was significantly reduced by comparison to existing estimates, thus resulting in a more precise age estimate for the star. The team applied the latest evolutionary tracks (basically, computer models that trace a star's luminosity and temperature evolution as a function of time) to HD 140283 and derived an age of 14.46+-0.80 billion years (see figure above). Yet the associated uncertainty could be further mitigated by increasing the sample size of (very) metal-poor stars with precise distances, in concert with the unending task of improving computer models employed to delineate a star's evolutionary track. An average computed from that sample would provide a firm lower-limit for the age of the Universe. The reliability of the age determined is likewise contingent on accurately determining the sample's metal content. However, we may not have to wait long, as Don VandenBerg (UVic) kindly relayed to Universe Today to expect, "an expanded article on HD 140283, and the other [similar] targets for which we have improved parallaxes [distances]."

Basically, new software and the Hubble telescope were used to more accurately predict the age of a nearby star and found it to have formed shortly after the big bang. If you want a laugh scroll down to the comments section and look at all the people complaining that this disproves the big bang.
Pfhorrest wrote:As someone who is not easily offended, I don't really mind anything in this conversation.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:It was the Renaissance. Everyone was Italian.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:55 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:
emceng wrote:My question is at what point does his health become the problem of the employer, and when does that obligation end? How long do you have to work someplace before you're allowed to take 9 months off for stress leave? As a manager, if we had a guy leave due to illness, it's going to cause a huge freaking problem. Losing someone to another company is an enormous headache(one I'm dealing with right now). Losing someone long term due to illness is another, even bigger headache. You are still spending all the money you did before on salary, but have nothing to show for it. You can't hire someone long term, because you can't promise them a job in case the first person comes back.


Well, considering that stress is often work-related, it seems perfectly reasonable that the employer ought to bear considerable responsibility for stress-related mental health issues. If nothing else, it encourages employers to be proactive about looking after employee welfare and maintaining a good work environment.


If your work environment is sufficiently stressful that it's causing multiple people to need nine months of leave, something is severely wrong with that job overall. To the point where...why would you want that job back? That seems extreme, though. I know of a lot of people that are stressed out by work to at least some degree, and sure, sometimes you take a vacation or the like. But it's usually like, a week or two. Nine months for stress seems really unusual. Doubly so if both people are taking it.

I don't doubt that he was feeling stressed at work, or even that a bit of time off might have been a reasonable way to reduce stress...it's the nine months portion that seems extreme.

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Iulus Cofield » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:09 pm UTC

The Great Green Con no. 1: The hard proof that finally shows global warming forecasts that are costing you billions were WRONG all along

The Mail on Sunday today presents irrefutable evidence...


Man shot 28 times by Chicago cops gets 40 years in prison

...
By the end of a traffic stop on Feb. 21, 2005, at 19th and Lawndale, he had 28 bullet wounds in his body. Three of the four responding officers also had been shot, though none had life-threatening wounds.

Police said Morgan became uncooperative while they were trying to handcuff him, grabbed an unregistered Glock 9mm handgun and opened fire, unloading 17 rounds at them.
...


American wine: Not just for peasants, bums, and hillbillies anymore?

"I've had some stunning American wines, and I don't think anyone should think that American wine is necessarily inferior to, say, French or Italian," Jancis Robinson, a leading authority on wine, tells Weekend Edition host Scott Simon


Egypt's Islamists warn giving women some rights could destroy society

The Muslim Brotherhood said the declaration would give "wives full rights to file legal complaints against husbands accusing them of rape or sexual harassment, obliging competent authorities to deal husbands punishments similar to those prescribed for raping or sexually harassing a stranger."

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:16 pm UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:Man shot 28 times by Chicago cops gets 40 years in prison

...
By the end of a traffic stop on Feb. 21, 2005, at 19th and Lawndale, he had 28 bullet wounds in his body. Three of the four responding officers also had been shot, though none had life-threatening wounds.

Police said Morgan became uncooperative while they were trying to handcuff him, grabbed an unregistered Glock 9mm handgun and opened fire, unloading 17 rounds at them.
...


Oddly enough, gunshot wounds are decreasing in lethality a lot thanks to advances in urgent trauma care. That's how you get crazy instances like this, at least in part. I read on Cracked(I know, I know, weak source...but good reading) that somewhere over 90% of people who show up at the hospital with gunshot wounds in the US survive. Now, that doesn't account for those who don't make it to the hospital, of course, but it's an impressive accomplishment for our ER folks.

I wonder how many bullets the cops shot total, though. With 28 hits(and themselves being wounded), it seems probable that a lot of ammo got burned that day. Crazy.

Fire Brns
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:25 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Fire Brns » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:21 pm UTC

"What the experts say" Well the guy in the middle has the last name Whitehouse so they could of just claimed that as their source. :P

Egypt's Islamists warn giving women some rights could destroy society

The Muslim Brotherhood said the declaration would give "wives full rights to file legal complaints against husbands accusing them of rape or sexual harassment, obliging competent authorities to deal husbands punishments similar to those prescribed for raping or sexually harassing a stranger."

"The Muslim Brotherhood warned the declaration would ... require men and women to share duties such as child care and chores."

Welcome to the western world, Egypt. Men taking out the trash.
Pfhorrest wrote:As someone who is not easily offended, I don't really mind anything in this conversation.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:It was the Renaissance. Everyone was Italian.

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby yurell » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:45 pm UTC



I can see how they'd arrive at that (wrong) conclusion, but they're lying when they say:
1977 - THE YEAR WE WERE TOLD TO FEAR TERROR OF...GLOBAL COOLING
In the Seventies, scientists and policymakers were just as concerned about a looming ‘ice age’ as they have been lately about global warming – as the Time magazine cover pictured here illustrates.


No scientific journal predicted an ice age in the '70's; from 1965-1979 there were seven papers published that predicted global cooling (not an ice age), compared to 44 predicting global warming (source). But hey, imagine they Daily Mail outright lying to its readers, I bet that never happened before. :roll:
More information on the media-wide cock-up.

Other than that, I wouldn't believe anything the Daily Mail. Apart from having inept and incompetent science journalists, they are also unethical to the point of downright hypocrisy — for example, they championed the 'MMR vaccine causes autism' bullshit, and are now lamenting at the rising rates of MMR and had the gall to ask why the vaccine rates were falling. It couldn't be because of their huge propaganda campaign at all. It's a disgusting excuse for a tabloid, let alone a newspaper.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

iamspen
Posts: 487
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 2:23 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby iamspen » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:27 pm UTC

Scientists create phasers

Not sure how I should lede this. "Set phasers to kill?" "Mahboob jiggles and excites?" The options are limitless!


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 17 guests