Quote of the Day
I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country.
Nathan Hale
Medal of Honor Winner Dakota Meyer's Lawsuit
Against BAE Systems:
An Unpopular Opinion
Life isn't fair, and I've had more than my fair share of dealing with unjust prior employers. Let me give just one simple example to make my point. I initially moved to Maryland from the Chicago suburbs to take a federal subcontracting gig at National Archives; this involved database work behind an application enabling military veterans to request copies of their service records. The package included a limited hotel stay in the area, which gave me time to secure a local apartment; they agreed to pick up two-thirds of relocation expenses using their mover. They were also supposed to pay for a roundtrip back for me to move out. Long story short, they didn't like the estimate from the mover and unilaterally imposed a cap of $2K they would reimburse me. They refused to advance this amount to the mover and told me to save my receipts.No airline flight (too expensive at that point). In any event, when I finally presented my expense form and receipts, they refused to reimburse me, claiming I had not met the deadline specified in the employee handout. To this day, I have not received a single penny for my relocation costs; if you think that lawyers would handle a breach of contract with a few thousand dollars at stake in the Maryland area, you're living in an alternate universe. What they did is unethical and illegal, but the only thing you can do is chalk it up to life's little lessons and move on with your life.
I could flame former employers and clients, but I'm not going to do that in this blog, I recall reading somewhere that most people who are terminated are not fired for performance reasons but for office politics. Usually in the private sector, professionals are hired on an at will basis, and managers are advised against doing or saying anything that would give a former employee grounds for a lawsuit, It puts the burden of proof on the employee. Generally speaking, a former employer will simply confirm employment details; it is usually in their best interests for a former employee to move on with his or her life, gainfully employed elsewhere.
So now let's consider the case which has become a hot news item, particularly on Fox News where I've heard about the story (in very general times) at least a handful of times. Dakota Meyer, a 23-year-old former Marine Corps corporal, was awarded the Medal of Honor by President Obama last September for efforts in saving the lives of 16 fellow soldiers in Afghanistan two years ago. One often repeated fact is that Meyer put off the congratulatory phone call from Obama until he was on lunch break from his then current construction job in Kentucky, because of concerns about taking personal calls during business hours.
The general gist of the story is that Meyer, who has since left the military, was working for a DoD vendor Ausgar Technologies and then left them to eventually take a position with BAE Systems subsidiary OASYS Technology; Meyer was with them 3 months before he resigned (under presumably adverse circumstances). Meyer worked for another decorated Marine veteran and sales manager Bobby McCreight. OASYS manufactures some innovative military technology, and Meyer took strong exception in an email to McCreight about efforts to market the technology, which he felt was superior to the equipment that he and his fellow soldiers had available, to a "backstabbing" Pakistan.
Let me point out at this time, if I'm a salesman for a company, it's my job to maximize sales of my company's goods and services, including to international customers. There are certain areas of the government which have to approve foreign sales of sensitive technologies, so even if OASYS was interested in selling technology to Pakistan, it still had to get the sales order approved by Washington. My understanding is that OASYS DOES sell its products to the US government. Meyer in his rant was, at best, misguided; I have no doubt that OASYS would be more than willing to land a huge order from DoD and ramp up production capacity. Foreign aid to Pakistan is but a drop in the bucket for over $3.5T in federal spending; Meyer's issue should be with the Obama Administration, not with the Pakistanis.
Meyer attempted to go back to Ausgar Technologies, which rejected his application, noting feedback from McCreight, suggesting that Meyer hadn't delivered on his assigned tasks and had had a little too much to drink during certain business social events. Meyer is suing for defamation.
Taking into account what I mentioned about general work practices in at will employment, the first thing that grabbed my attention was the fact that Meyer learned of allegations of statements made by McCreight in writing from Ausgar. I found on the web an interesting, well-written op-ed which discussed the circumstances in more detail. For instance, it seems McCreight had written his feedback in an email to a DoD official, whom shared the information with Ausgar. I do not know the specific context, but it may be Ausgar's offer for Meyer was contingent on DoD approval, and a DoD investigator had contacted BAE and McCreight. It doesn't make sense to me that Ausgar would turn down Meyer if Meyer had left Ausgar on good terms because of one subsequent manager's opinion.
I think Meyer's past military service was meritorious, but past performance is not necessarily indicative of future performance. The business world defines performance differently; it requires other skills and abilities. I would think having a Medal of Honor on one's resume would be highly appealing to any military contractor and most private sector employers. But you have to act as part of a team. If Meyer wants to vent about Pakistan, he can do so as a private citizen. But if I'm a sales manager, I'm looking for people whom can help me sell something--not look for excuses not to sell something and leave commissions and bonuses on the table.
I can't speak for McCreight's opinion of Meyer. I will say that as a new employee, I would not go around ranting to my supervisor, attacking my new company's sales efforts. As a manager, I would take it as a red flag, not as being part of a team effort.
My advice to Meyer: drop the lawsuit, and move on with your life. Life's too short. Exercise the same self-discipline and effort in your next job as you did on the battlefield in Afghanistan. One bad job experience doesn't ruin your life; you're 23.
Ron Paul Gives Us a Preview of Obama's Attack on Gingrich
I've made no secret of where I stand on the Romney vs. Gingrich battle. Romney has the business and economics knowledge and experience and the public sector administrative experience Gingrich doesn't have. I have concerns about Gingrich's behavior and judgment, including the ethics charges that resulted in a rare bipartisan rebuke, the fact that he has little support among his former Congressional Republicans (including current Speaker Boehner), his political skills, including his mishandling of the budget showdown with Bill Clinton, and his appalling judgment in post-Congressional career lobbying (which he terms "consulting"), especially over $1M with Freddie Mac through early 2008--even as President Bush and Senator McCain were pushing for GSE reforms in the wake of the accounting scandals. Not to mention the bizarre Greek cruise and Tiffany kerfuffle earlier this year.
What's particularly irksome is the fact that Gingrich has largely inherited the fickle non-Romney vote; I'm particularly concerned about some lopsided polls I'm seeing in South Carolina and Florida. However, if a fellow conservative is arguing against Romney based on his alleged flip-flops involving principle (personally, I think Romney could argue in the case of Massachusetts he was adapting to the realities of running in a very liberal state, and changing one's mind (versus being obstinate in one's point of view) is more of a virtue than vice: I like stories of redemption), it's far worse in the case of Gingrich, whom sees himself as a policy wonk: don't forget Gingrich was willing to deal with health insurance mandates, he committed (in the eyes of most conservatives) the unforgivable sin of appearing with Pelosi in a spot promoting climate change policies, and he reversed himself on the GSE's (AFTER he was no longer lobbying for them). The point is, Gingrich's shifting positions were not an accommodation in running for public office; I think he wanted to remain relevant and to have influence. I see his intellectual odyssey as fickle, indulgent and unfocused, with more general than specific expertise; I thus find his flip-flops much more troublesome than Romney's nuanced perspectives.
Musical Interlude: Nostalgic/Instrumental Christmas
Tchaikovsky, "Dance Of The Sugar Plum Fairy".
