more bits and pieces

Well I don't have to hate Howard today becos' the Beazer and (insert appropriate description here) Tuckey have provided the grist for the mill. Tuckey, if you want to make a cheap political shot, as is your calling, don't be offended when you get it back, as is Beazley's calling.

Oh oh, 7.30 report on, just gotta go and change channels in case you know who...done!

The PM said he was "disappointed" at the three who crossed the floor on the offshore processing division, but his visage betrayed a baser emotion. Watch this space. Mind you, as many commentators have pointed out, Labor boots you for such treachery. Talk about regulatory constraints...

The Business Review Weekly (not available online) contains a story that I haven't seen elsewhere, about political interference in ensuring that Mark Vaile's preferred supplier, Wheat Australia, got the Iraq supply deal after the Iraqis blackballed the Australian Wheat Board. There were seven other applicants but apparently Wheat Australia got the job on a late bid. All dates are mentioned. Media diversity, anyone?

Ah shit, this gets tedious. I know you agree.

In various situations today I've had conversations about generational change. My mentoree this morning made the observation that there are so many more support mechanisms for new job entrants that enable them to become effective so much quicker. Induction courses, ongoing training and of course mentoring programs themselves. The same theme was reflected this arvo when a job applicant mentioned that they always seek a mentor when joining a new organisation.

Afterward, a couple of us doing the interviewing reflected that when we started, a public bawling out was routine: no such thing as being taken aside and either counselled or yelled at. Such public dressings-down really only diminished the boss in the eyes of all the staff who had to witness it, but that was the way it was done. No one ever seemed to think it was odd. Today it would result in some extended grievance procedure, but the fundamental thing is that it's counterproductive, so why do it? I think we recognise now that such behaviour is usually a sign of insecurity and it gets treated appropriately.

So maybe we have made some progress over the years. Put it down to the sixties? Well maybe, maybe not. There are always at least two views on any particular issue and while the sixties may have expanded many people's views of what might be possible, over the longer term I can't imagine that it changed the overall balance of X's and Y's, righties and lefties, hardasses and softcocks.