Right?! Especially if it was an off-the-cuff agreement. But if I had a few minutes to think it over, I would buy that anyone serious enough to get verifiable competitive offers using a third party would be serious enough to come back for those better offers if the current employer doesn't bite. (This is assuming you can't arrange new employment without the temp agency's involvement for whatever contractual reason. Not sure how they typically work.)
catbum
joined 1 year ago
Have you heard any specific reasons for the mail hoarder's actions at your current workplace, or is it still a fresh case? I'm guessing it was nefarious, since the mail outbox was closer and seemingly more obvious than the secret stashing cabinet. Just wanted to be a dingus to intended mail recipients? I'd also be curious if it was all mail they handled or just select pieces. So many burning questions!!
I am a contractor so I don't work in a standard office setting right now. I miss the heck out of juicy office gossip, at least about those who deserve such sordid stories! (Karen in accounting is actually really nice, Carl.)
With the rest of the house being normal-to-very clean, it's almost like the parents were never able to make her clean her room because she was a territorial "devil" child, and they just let it slide for years and years.
Maybe what started as s genuine attempt at hangout ended up with her finally recognizing how embarrassing the situation was, leading to her cooling off during later chats?
Either that or it was all an elaborate ruse to get the wild child a free room cleaning and the parents were somehow in on it and everyone except you in this story is actually nuts!
Quite the spectrum of possibility, really. But honestly, I have a feeling your help might have helped her grow up and out of her family's (or her own) neglect. It was a kind thing you did, regardless of the weird-ass circumstances!
Just an FYI, although they aren't physical products like this Roku, many apps and digital services have added the very same binding arbitration clauses recently.
The McDonald's app for one. I ended up deleting the app after it tried to force me into binding arbitration and I didn't want to go through to opt-out process for marginally cheaper, shitty food, so I just deleted the app altogether and haven't eaten there since November.
Watch out for it if you drive for doordash or ubereats as well. I opted out of both, although they claimed you couldn't opt out in an new contract when you didn't before (a bunch of BS, if the current contract you are about to sign says it supercedes all others, you can't make the lack of an opt-out on a previous contract hold up).
On-going services might make sense for these shitty enough clauses, but to be strong armed into it for physical product you bought free and clear ... Disgusting.
It's like all these companies are locking themselves down to minimize legal exposure because they know that their services and products are getting more awful or something.
Okay, this is fascinating ... And makes me wonder how often this--what I will call "academic honorable discharge"--really occurs across institutions, well-known or not.
I haven't delved into your sources yet, so this is my somewhat educated guess ... Environmentally, this type of social breakdown makes sense with the lack of proper oversight, seasoned leadership, and organization appropriate to the study population. But did the low sodium diet itself serve any factor in the violence that occured in this botched study? Like, did kids being dietarily withheld a critical electrolyte affect the speed and intensity with which cracks in the camp structure split open?
Not trying to be too lighthearted here, but my guess in short: The kids went extra bonkers because of altered body and brain chemistry, with a lack of sodium (assuming the diet was initiated on Day 1) being a key aggressor in... making teen aggression more aggressive?