Scheming Work Practices

Let's say my boses names in Mark, my peer is Sam, and mypeer/requirments-provider is Roger.

I got formally written up by Mark when he engineered a stunt with Sam & Roger to force me into having to make a quick estimate that I would not be able to perform.  What they did was not acording to the code of conduct, but since Sam & Roger both gave testimony that contradicted mine, nothing happened.

Mark claims me treats everyone in his group fairly and equally.  But he shares management private information with Sam & Roger, and they use it against me.

I wrote an emiotional response to Mark & HR, and in that I stated that if he continued to treat me nagstively, It would just cause me to work slower.

He set up a test to see if I was doing that overtly.   He told Roger & Sam that this text was being done.  Sam did everything he could to make me not reach that goal.   He constantly asked me to do stuff, then he destroyed the results of all  work.   He asked first, giving so dumb reason, so I said OK.

I got written-up a second time because it took so long to create my assignment.   It came out in the review (which fortunately was mediated) that Sheraz deleted my work.   Mark screamed "WHY DIDN"T YOU TELL ME?"   I said nothing, I could not respond to his yelling.    Mark laughing mocked a demand I made of him in this review that he apologize for making false claims publically about my performance.   The mediator was very mild, byt did point out that I was correct, he thought something took 2 years when it could not have been even a full single year.  MARK fumbled, but did not even appear sorry, he just back-pedaled, giving lesser amounts than 24 months.   Then when it got to the issues of sharing code with Sam, The moderator said:  It should just be a simple matter of SCM.   Then I blurted out:   We have no source code control tools.   We asked for them, and were refused.    I have mentioned how this was a probablem throughout this entire project.   The Moderator then said:   Then that would be extremely difficult.

Mark has been taking days off. He has never done that, except to go see his extended family. I think he is beginning to see the fuitsd of the harvest he was sewn.

I am now "challenged" to create a software tool independent of Sam.   I am glad not to be working with him.  Roger is providing requirements.   Just like befiore with Mark, most of the requirements aren't writtn down, and thus are interpreted differently over time.

This came up when Roger reviewed my design document this week.    He increased a requirement.   That increase would double the work to be done, and the schedule.   He typically gets upset easily.   He gave one strong response - not quite demanding, but insisting that this be done in the current schedule.   I explained clearly why this could not be done. 

He agreed, which is strange.   I think he knows I am going to be let go.    So once again. managment private information has been shared with people that should not have been.

There has been a change upper management, 2 levels above Mark.   The timing is perfect for layoffs.   Now that the strikes are over, if upper-management needs money, there is no place it can come from (because of a failed business merger that cost the company 4% of the bottom-line).   The only thing they can do is reduce head-count.

The new guy has been on-board for a 3 weeks, and I have not recived a single communique from him.   I am pretty sure they brought in this new guy to reduce head count impartially.

Our entire organization has been under attack from Project Managers (PM) for months.   They are supposed to open charge-numbers for us to use for our overhead (we are a pure overhead group).   Mark keeps saying that he is going to  fix it.   The person who used to back him up (who is gone now - 2 levels higher in management) was his ace-in-the-hole.  

Lots of people don't like Mark.   I don't like Mark.    The fact that so PMs are with-holding funds from him is not a coincidence.  It's a boycott.