|
Post by Just curious on Aug 27, 2007 18:50:48 GMT -5
I overheard a worker make the statement, "some that are out should be in and some that are in should be out." Can any workers or exworkers explain this to me?
|
|
|
Post by Brad Lewis on Aug 27, 2007 19:02:22 GMT -5
I can relate my experience. I think it was Randy Russell that commented to me that Howard Mooney or Harold Bennet wanted to get rid of several workers but they couldn't. I know the overseers use companions and fields to weed out workers. If they don't like a worker, they will put them in a tough field or with a nasty companion. I remember Harold Bennet when he first took his place as overseer he said at Boring convention (speaking on platform) that another overseer cautioned him against using his place now to get back at people. And I do know that many wanted Wayne Harris to go back in the work. Wayne knows "some" stuff though that causes him not to. That's about all I can remember first-hand about that. Brad
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2007 6:45:37 GMT -5
Probably one of the ugliest kinds of 'weeding out workers' is when it is done for political climbing reasons. Especially at times of power shifting when well established overseers either step down or pass on, the jockeying for position is enormous (but subtile) amongst aspirants. For instance, when I left mid-west Canada for Sweden the senior brother worker at the time was at the end of his line -- and unfortunately there were 4 'runner ups' -- all quite capable and well respected men. Within a few years all but 1 had vanished from the scene. Guess who?
|
|
|
Post by no specifics on Aug 28, 2007 12:31:33 GMT -5
Probably one of the ugliest kinds of 'weeding out workers' is when it is done for political climbing reasons. Especially at times of power shifting when well established overseers either step down or pass on, the jockeying for position is enormous (but subtile) amongst aspirants. For instance, when I left mid-west Canada for Sweden the senior brother worker at the time was at the end of his line -- and unfortunately there were 4 'runner ups' -- all quite capable and well respected men. Within a few years all but 1 had vanished from the scene. Guess who? What do you mean by political reasons? In any organization, there is always "jockeying for position" when a management position opens up. Quite often, "politics" is the excuse used by those who didn't get the job. Quite often, those who did not get the job (or those who had a favorite that did not get picked) blame politics. It's an easy excuse.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2007 1:52:14 GMT -5
Probably one of the ugliest kinds of 'weeding out workers' is when it is done for political climbing reasons. Especially at times of power shifting when well established overseers either step down or pass on, the jockeying for position is enormous (but subtile) amongst aspirants. For instance, when I left mid-west Canada for Sweden the senior brother worker at the time was at the end of his line -- and unfortunately there were 4 'runner ups' -- all quite capable and well respected men. Within a few years all but 1 had vanished from the scene. Guess who? What do you mean by political reasons? In any organization, there is always "jockeying for position" when a management position opens up. Quite often, "politics" is the excuse used by those who didn't get the job. Quite often, those who did not get the job (or those who had a favorite that did not get picked) blame politics. It's an easy excuse. I agree -- playing politics is important in advancement in most hiearchies, and it isn't unusual. I have never suggested that 2x2ism has any monopoly on pushing others down, with the purpose of advancement.
|
|
|
Post by guest11 on Aug 29, 2007 19:59:01 GMT -5
When I read this post, "out or in" I think of my girlfriend. She is so wrapped up in this group that I feel we are being pulled apart. She has even said this same statement to me and has the most sorrowful look in her eyes. So, I don't feel that it just pertains to the higher up (workers) it is something that she has heard in the meetings or bible talks. I do know that when she tells me she can't be with me any more because "I am not in the fold" I will be contacting the higher up. Gosh, I love this girl but I will not follow a man-made religion!
|
|
|
Post by i know what u mean on Aug 29, 2007 20:06:15 GMT -5
I have been hearing this statement quite often myself. I left meetings about 1 yr ago, but have not told the friends. My wife still attends meeting and when she says this I just know someone has been asking about my not coming to meeting. I even volunteer for the weekend shift at the plant to avoid going to meeting. My theory is stay true to yourself and avoid all, especially the workers.
|
|
|
Post by 2x2 son on Aug 30, 2007 16:37:52 GMT -5
Yall who dislike the truth your sick you kno its the right thing pary long and hard that you lose those feeling and you ex-workers ......i dont even kno what to say to you....
|
|
|
Post by JA on Aug 30, 2007 16:54:11 GMT -5
Yall who dislike the truth your sick you kno its the right thing pary long and hard that you lose those feeling and you ex-workers ......i dont even kno what to say to you.... ja, like and we don't know whut to say to you, neether.
|
|