Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 2016 at 21:17 | comment | added | Tim | I could, and I will. The whole dispute is pretty tenuous, so rather than wasting time and effort it makes sense ( to me) to get everything in the open together rather than just discussing the matter with one party. | |
| Nov 15, 2016 at 20:27 | comment | added | user30031 | Could you clarify what benefit would be achieved by having all parties present as opposed to private meetings? | |
| Nov 14, 2016 at 7:34 | comment | added | Tim | @barbecue - thanks for your feedback. Seems my comment has magically disappeared. Glad you saw it prior to that! Sounds more like a court case than a meeting. If that's the case, I'd request a meeting with all parties anyway. Fortuitously, retirement has saved me from nonsense like HR can sometimes be. | |
| Nov 13, 2016 at 21:08 | comment | added | barbecue | I didn't downvote, but the first paragraph doesn't seem to be particularly helpful advice, because the OP can't control who attends the meeting, as it's being called by HR. Refusing to attend a meeting unless certain conditions are met is not likely to help one's case. | |
| Nov 13, 2016 at 8:09 | review | First posts | |||
| Nov 13, 2016 at 10:17 | |||||
| Nov 13, 2016 at 8:08 | history | answered | Tim | CC BY-SA 3.0 |