Electrician fired over leaked photos..

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by fastball

This is about the point in time when we'd ask for Fbod's input on this, but I wouldn't want him to get in trouble, either.

In this case, our resident flex line operator might be more helpful.

Calling 80Zedder . . .

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by garfin

Bottom line is that GM has rules about this stuff and this poor guy made a bad decision to not only take the pics, but to not keep them secure as well.
The corporation makes the rules based on the interests of their shareholders... if you are a GM shareholder, how are you gonna react to a situation like this? There is absolutely no possible benefit to you, as a shareholder, to have this visual information out there for public consumption. Sure, you may not be aware of a downside to this, but that doesn't mean there isn't one... and why would any shareholder want to take that unnecessary chance?

If GM should want to bend the rules (that they've made) a bit because this guy has 28 years of faithful service, then that's up to them... but the corporation has no obligation whatsoever to do this...

FWIW, as an owner/proprietor of my own business, I would not pick this particular issue to demonstrate any flexibility whatsoever to my employees. The expectation has to be that these rules are followed exactly as they are intended - because that's what is in the best interests of the corporation. Otherwise the employer must be prepared to deal with anarchy, at some level, which in turn can only hurt the company.

There are many other issues on which demonstrating flexibility and understanding would benefit the interests of both employee and employer. I just don't happen to think that this is one of them.

Oh yeah... and major props to all the young 'uns on this site as well, for keeping this discussion respectful and civil! Way t'go!!

Best regardSS,

Elie

No one likes to think that someone in their organization is dirty. Loyalty to the brand is important to big organizations. As a result, people who violate that loyalty are subject to consequences including termination. While we as enthusiasts appreciate the actions of enthusiasts inside GM, the businesspeople at the top of the ladder do not. We have to respect that GM keeps corporate secrets to keep the competition at bay, and that includes leaks like these photographs. It's a shame that someone with so much respect for GM lost their position as a result, but corporate loyalty means that the employee must respect corporate secrets, even if they aren't all that important.

[Captain Awesome]

In my opinion taking pictures of company secrets falls under the realm of "Intellectual Property Theft". This guy did basically the same thing as stealing parts and giving them to someone or stealing tools from the workshop and using them at home. He'd probably get fired for that too.

We live in a day where people think that digital copying doesn't hurt anyone and it's not really the same thing as stealing because nothing is physically missing. Just go ahead and look around the internet where everyone just copies music and trades it or people copy software from work for their home computers. Heck... log onto YouTube and you can fild literally Millions of video clips that people put together of their antics and they set them to music that they don't have a sync license for. "Everyone does it" doesn't make it right. It's still illegal! But so many people do it and get away with it that everyone pretty much assumes it's legal. This guy did it with the pictures and someone noticed and he got fired for it. Maybe others will see that it's illegal and think twice about doing it.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

In my opinion taking pictures of company secrets falls under the realm of "Intellectual Property Theft". This guy did basically the same thing as stealing parts and giving them to someone or stealing tools from the workshop and using them at home. He'd probably get fired for that too.

We live in a day where people think that digital copying doesn't hurt anyone and it's not really the same thing as stealing because nothing is physically missing. Just go ahead and look around the internet where everyone just copies music and trades it or people copy software from work for their home computers. Heck... log onto YouTube and you can fild literally Millions of video clips that people put together of their antics and they set them to music that they don't have a sync license for. "Everyone does it" doesn't make it right. It's still illegal! But so many people do it and get away with it that everyone pretty much assumes it's legal. This guy did it with the pictures and someone noticed and he got fired for it. Maybe others will see that it's illegal and think twice about doing it.

I agree. We've all been so anxious to get new photos, but we need to realize that these photos cost insiders their jobs. Other insiders should be very careful about what they leak. While we share their enthusiasm about GM products, we don't want them to lose their jobs. Their hard work is what gets us our beloved cars in the first place.

You're also right that everyone doing it doesn't make it right either. That's why every album I own has been legally bought for retail price.

[TAG UR IT]

Originally Posted by brantley847

ehhh from one L.E.O. to another, I have to respectfully agree and disagree.

You and I are well aware of the letter of the law and spirit of the law. Sure I see 30 violations daily, as do you, and maybe cite 4 or 5 depending on how blatant the violation is... Same applies to spirit of the law...I know officers who will arrest a man for spanking their child if there are marks on their "rear end"...I have no problem with a child being "spanked" as long as it isnt displayed above the belt or on the face/groin.

I have absolutely no problem with this individual taking pictures for his kids, but he is responsible if they are released. I don't believe he is being punished for the ACTION of taking a picture, but the responsibility he had to GM that no outside organization or person saw those pictures. We know that chances are if he took pictures and they were NEVER released, he may still be working there. Due to the fact that they WERE released, and the amount of time and finacial expectation GM has into this vehicle. Well, I cant blame them...if this was the COBALT or Chevy Volt chances are he may still have his job as well. To sum it up...If you ask me..that is the 'human' evaluation of the totality of the situation and circumstances. Can we not agree GM has put heart and soul into this vehicle?

I do stop those for blatant traffic violations, don't get me wrong. But, that is not all that often. Plus, patrol doesn't have the time to run traffic like traffic does. We are severely understaffed and are constantly taking calls. It's rediculously busy. We do when we can, but...

I agree GM put heart and soul into this vehicle and it was his decision...and he knew the risk. Yes, I can see GM wanting to make an example. Yes, it could be more than a simple picture....it could be millions in research just by looking at the line/robots, etc.

Originally Posted by garfin

Bottom line is that GM has rules about this stuff and this poor guy made a bad decision to not only take the pics, but to not keep them secure as well.
The corporation makes the rules based on the interests of their shareholders... if you are a GM shareholder, how are you gonna react to a situation like this? There is absolutely no possible benefit to you, as a shareholder, to have this visual information out there for public consumption. Sure, you may not be aware of a downside to this, but that doesn't mean there isn't one... and why would any shareholder want to take that unnecessary chance?

If GM should want to bend the rules (that they've made) a bit because this guy has 28 years of faithful service, then that's up to them... but the corporation has no obligation whatsoever to do this...

FWIW, as an owner/proprietor of my own business, I would not pick this particular issue to demonstrate any flexibility whatsoever to my employees. The expectation has to be that these rules are followed exactly as they are intended - because that's what is in the best interests of the corporation. Otherwise the employer must be prepared to deal with anarchy, at some level, which in turn can only hurt the company.

There are many other issues on which demonstrating flexibility and understanding would benefit the interests of both employee and employer. I just don't happen to think that this is one of them.

Oh yeah... and major props to all the young 'uns on this site as well, for keeping this discussion respectful and civil! Way t'go!!

Best regardSS,

Elie

Very well put. Kind of sheds a new light on the situation....shareholders and all. If I put all my money into an organization, I'd expect perfection....and consequenses for the lack thereof.

[brantley847]

Originally Posted by TAG UR IT

I do stop those for blatant traffic violations, don't get me wrong. But, that is not all that often. Plus, patrol doesn't have the time to run traffic like traffic does. We are severely understaffed and are constantly taking calls. It's rediculously busy. We do when we can, but...

ahhh Good times, I feel you on that. I am the only Ofc. for miles in my city right now due to low staffing, budget cuts, and injuries. How is it EVERYONE gets injured at the same time....now 15 miles is fine in a rural area, but just north of Orlando with a U.S. Hgwy, an interstate and two state roads....its good times....

[Sphinx002]

Originally Posted by garfin

Bottom line is that GM has rules about this stuff and this poor guy made a bad decision to not only take the pics, but to not keep them secure as well.
The corporation makes the rules based on the interests of their shareholders... if you are a GM shareholder, how are you gonna react to a situation like this? There is absolutely no possible benefit to you, as a shareholder, to have this visual information out there for public consumption. Sure, you may not be aware of a downside to this, but that doesn't mean there isn't one... and why would any shareholder want to take that unnecessary chance?

If GM should want to bend the rules (that they've made) a bit because this guy has 28 years of faithful service, then that's up to them... but the corporation has no obligation whatsoever to do this...

FWIW, as an owner/proprietor of my own business, I would not pick this particular issue to demonstrate any flexibility whatsoever to my employees. The expectation has to be that these rules are followed exactly as they are intended - because that's what is in the best interests of the corporation. Otherwise the employer must be prepared to deal with anarchy, at some level, which in turn can only hurt the company.

There are many other issues on which demonstrating flexibility and understanding would benefit the interests of both employee and employer. I just don't happen to think that this is one of them.

Oh yeah... and major props to all the young 'uns on this site as well, for keeping this discussion respectful and civil! Way t'go!!

Best regardSS,

Elie

+1

[boxmonkeyracing]

Originally Posted by TAG UR IT

Yes and no. Like what was said above, you need a 'human' side to all things. If it was the case that all people were held accoutable to all of their actions 100% of the time w/out any human side playing a role in things.....well....you could probably be written (depending on how far you are going) at least one to ten tickets on the way to work/school.

Seriously, it takes that human interdiction to play a pretty good role in life. Rules are rules. But, we, as officers, are allowed the discression to write tickets and make traffic stops or not. I could write 30 a day w/ all the traffic infractions I see....hell....probably more! But, most of those traffic infractions don't put peoples lives in jeapordy and don't cause traffic problems, etc. Ok...I'm going a bit off here. But, hopefully you get my point. Not always is it necessary to write a ticket (fire someone) to get a point across.

28 years of being a faithful employee of GM. 28 years.... and to be so excited about something that you took pix to show your son....your own family. I understand where GM is coming from. But, they better at least take care of the guy. Something.... I know.... But that IMO is a little over the top.

You know my line of work involves secrets. Tons and Tons of them. I most of the time can't even tell you where I'm at or where I'm going and what I'm doing when I deploy. Heck depending on the air frame I'm working on at the time, I can't even tell you some of the stuff that it can do and how it does it. Doesn't matter how long I've been in or how dedicated I am. If I made one phone call took one picture of something I'm not suppose to then I'm SOL. I know the rules. I know what will happen if I break them.

I view GM in the same sense. they have rules and trade secrets. granted peoples lives aren't at stake if some of those secrets are revealed. But in a way they are. If you reveal something then you lose your job, and that looks really bad when applying for another job. 28 years is a long time dedicated to one company. Which means he knows that what he did was wrong no matter what the purpose was for. He deserved to lose his job. maybe someone just starting out and that didn't know any better, but even then punishment should have been severe. that's just my opinion.

[No_Quarter]

It sucks he lost his job, but he did break the rules.

[Moose]

No sympathy here.

He made his own decision and now he can pay the consequence.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by Moose

No sympathy here.

He made his own decision and now he can pay the consequence.

+1

[Jay]

Originally Posted by stovt001

Slightly off topic, but I just wanted to comment how nice it is to see such a high class, high quality debate here. Honestly, such moderation, courtesy, and thoughtfulness is very rare on the internet (see LLN comment boards) and further demonstrates what makes this site so great. I think both sides are making great points, and I am weighing both opinions. Thanks for the thought provoking ideas.

You hit it bang on stovt.... this is why this site rocks!!!

In adding to that point though and somewhat in response to Dragon.... we all bring a certain viewpoint to the table.

Some people looked at this situation from a rules and violation point of view, some from a general outlook and I looked at the situation from a human resources point of view.... which is what my degree is in.

Which is the view from which i gave my opinion based on. So its nice to see how different people have different decision making processes. And whoever at GM made the decision obviously had a different process that do I because I think it was wrong to fire the guy.

But that just goes to show you the lens i see through things with wont be the same for someone else.

So why do I think GM fu**ed up as a company in this situation. First, an employee that serves for you 28 years isn't just some random employee... they have been loyal for 28 years and do deserve an exception to the rule book... any high end manager should know this. There are ways to set an example to other employees to not copy such behavior with extremity without firing someone. Suspend the guy for 4 months without pay.... this is pretty harsh. You don't need to announce it to rest of the company... believe me the word will make it around as to what happened.

Second, with so much attention on the car and where the pictures came from.... why would you make such a brash move that could be perceived not well by some (which it now has)... with so much riding on the line with sales of this car.... some people in the world really do get turned off to the point they don't care how good the product is.. if they don't like the company they wont buy from them (its like me with walmart)... although this amount maybe small.... the attention it brings is often negative.... so why not steer clear from it.

They could have done something smaller (ex. suspend)... that would have made news and made it clear to other employees not to do such a thing and the guy would come back after suspension and have learned his lesson.

Third, imo... although Im sure the HR department in specific probably didn't make the decision in this case due to the importance of it.... it was most likely as a person higher up in GM..... they made the HR department imo look bad in they eyes of at least a lot of HR working employees themselves.... like me. In addition, it affects company branding..... your image as a company to be a attractive employer. So if the guy who was around for 28 years got the shaft.... what about the one that has been around 5.... this kind of mindset starts to kick in..... although i agree not with one incident it wont.... but its a slippery slope once you get on it....

So, like I said before.....and this is with nothing against GM in general.... i love GM.... but I think in this situation they made a decision error.. and a bad one at that.

ps. please excuse grammar errors in this post. thanks

[Mr. Wyndham]

You seem to be making a lot of points referencing seniority...and because of that, this guy should be exempt from the punishment outlined in the agreement he signed.

Why, though? After 28 years... you would think he knows the "rulebook" front to back? Imo, that's even more a reason to fire him. And about that guy 5 years in...he'd be fired, too -- just like it says in the agreement.

My perspective stems from my utter hatred of 'bending the rules'. I see it happen too often, and too often have I been shafted by it, i.e. the next guy who does this but only has 2 years under his belt -- that seniority thing doesn't help him any...

But I want to touch upon something...does anyone here really think GM maliciously fired this guy? Glared, and spat at him as he walked out the door? C'mon...I'll even use one of your points, a guy of 28 years! You think they wanted to fire him...or did they have to, regrettably?

Right now, you're seeing a harsh company who obviously isn't easy to work for...Or are you seeing a stupid guy, who made a stupid mistake that ended up costing him his job -- not by the companies wishes (I'm sure they never expected such an established employee violate such a standard protocol). I still don't think this situation reflects on GM at all. It relects totally on the would-be photographer.

[GothamCamaro]

I feel for the guy as a human being, not having a job and was supporting a family. I certainly don't think GM did anything wrong by firing him, it was the rule and being 28 years of service, he knew this.

I'm sure he's kicking himself for showing his son, he may have even told his son... "don't show anyone or put it on the internet... or I'll get fired." As much as I loved seeing the photo, a year from now I won't care about it but he'll still not be working for GM. Not worth the risk.

It's easy for me to say but had I been the guy, I would have shown my son the photo then deleted it immediately. My son would get the perks of a secret photo and the evidence is gone.

GM did what they had to do. AND I still feel for his family for that mistake in judgement.