Jump to content

I'm currently out of the office and will have....


Recommended Posts

I usually say I have limited access, so no-one can assume automatically I'll service their enquiries.

That way, if I'm keeping an eye open, I can pick / choose / divert as I see fit.

I rarely totally ignore work for an entire week unless I'm somewhere that physically prevents comms.

But I'm not gonna tell everyone at work that.

I am at home and will have limited access because vodafone's coverage is sh*t and my blackberry only connects in random 5 minute windows.


(also limited access might mean "I'm checking every couple of hours in breaks between meetings but might not be able to respond immediately. Or I'm on and off planes so won't get them all the time)



Maj. Major Major Major:

Sergeant, from now on, I don't want anyone to come in and see me while I'm in my office. Is that clear?


First Sgt. Towser:

Yes, sir. What do I say to people who want to come in and see you while you're in your office?


Maj. Major Major Major:

Tell them I'm in and ask them to wait.


First Sgt. Towser:

For how long?


Maj. Major Major Major:

Until I've left.


First Sgt. Towser:

And then what do I do with them?


Maj. Major Major Major:

I don't care.


First Sgt. Towser:

May I send people in to see you after you've left?


Maj. Major Major Major:

Yes.


First Sgt. Towser:

You won't be here then, will you?


Maj. Major Major Major:

No.


First Sgt. Towser:

I see, sir. Will that be all?


Maj. Major Major Major:

Also, Sergeant, I don't want you coming in while I'm in my office asking me if there's

anything you can do for me. Is that clear?


First Sgt. Towser: Yes, sir.

When should I come in your office and ask if there's anything I can do for you?


Maj. Major Major Major:

When I'm not there.


First Sgt. Towser:

What do I do then?


Maj. Major Major Major:

Whatever has to be done.


First Sgt. Towser:

Yes, sir.




DulwichFox

Some people at work have been using a facility which, when you e-mail them a notice comes up telling you when they are free. I purposely do not want to use it because I don't want people to know when I'm free so that they can pester me and then I won't be free. Being 'free' means this is the only time I've got to actually get on and do some actual work......

MrBen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> .....limited access to emails.

>

> Is something I see every day on auto replies. And

> it's bollocks. Unless your sailing to St Kilda or

> hiking round the remote alps everyone now has a

> smartphone,tablet,laptop. You're reading your

> email!

>

> Why not just be honest and say you're on holiday

> and don't want to be interrupted? Or not say it at

> all?

>

> We're stil adapting to the new world it seems....


I'm of the opinion that if you can afford to employ someone to say they have 'limited access to emails blah etc' whilst sailing round St. Kinda or hiking in the Alps then you're employing too many staff. The work still needs to be done and no-one is indispensable.


Edited for grammar :p

Not what I meant Lady D. Of course people can have time off to do those things, it was the fact that things can't be done without them being there (or the implication of that by them having "limited" access to emails. No-one is that important that decisions cannot be taken by others in their absence. Presuming that something needs to happen whilst they are off.


Holidays? 5 minutes for lunch would be nice. Having too little staff is just as bad as having too many.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I went to France recently and in the city I visited there were large billboards on the main streets urging people to stop their dogs from messing on the streets and in a little park a sign said something to the effect that this park was built for your enjoyment not as a dumping ground for dog mess. There were also big signs about not fly tipping. I wonder if councils are too worried about offending dog owners by making a fuss about this major problem. I was a dog owner for many years, got free bags from the council and there were even bins around then.
    • I was also woken by this. It happened in two bursts, which felt even more anti social.
    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...