> they weren’t going to complain. That is, “until I noticed one of the workers always wore flat shoes that were made from a fabric other than leather, or running shoes, even though both of these things were contrary to the dress code.”
The interns were told that was a medical exemption… after they were mass-fired, but not when they initially inquired about the possibility of relaxed dress code:
> I spoke with my manager about being allowed some leeway under the dress code and was told this was not possible, despite the other person being allowed to do it.
> They could have been lectured on professional behavior instead and I'm sure most of them would have understood.
I don't understand how sending queries/proposals up the chain is unprofessional behaviour. Ignoring the dress code and coming in not following it would be unprofessional behaviour.
They asked informally, they got shut down (rather than answered), they went with a more formal query, they were fired.
That's sounds nothing like "interns are guests" but it sounds a lot like Corporate America's reaction to union noises.
Personally I can't imagine a story like this even occurring in 1986. The whole idea of mass protest over something trivial is a very 21st century concept.
The yahoo repost/clickbait framed it as a protest with no evidence I can see, the original source does not frame it as a protest: http://www.askamanager.org/2016/06/i-was-fired-from-my-inter...
That's nice. What business of it was theirs, that they should be told at all? It smacks of a third-grade classroom, where little Susie is upset because little Janey didn't bring enough comfortable shoes for everybody, so Teacher makes a rule that either you bring enough for everybody or you don't bring any at all.
Of course, in a third-grade classroom, this sort of thing makes some sense, because we don't expect children of such a young age to be fully in command of their emotions. I gather the interns we're talking about are in their early twenties. One would reasonably expect them to have learned something in the decades since they were in third grade themselves, but perhaps that's too much to ask.
People do have a right to privacy. The person with a medical issue may have asked that details not be disclosed to his/her co-workers.
The questionable part of this story might not be that the interns were terminated but that the existence of the medical issue was disclosed to them at all.
Which management obviously didn't care about since they ended up telling the interns about it (apparently as a shaming tool since they specifically mentioned service).
> The person with a medical issue may have asked that the nature of the issue not be disclosed to his/her co-workers.
Which they did not have to at any point, management could just have answered the initial question with "they have a medical exemption".
I also think that the companies reaction may have been a bit extreme. That said, I can sort of understand their thinking.
1) the interns are thinking about their dress more than their assignments. Which shows questionable prioritization.
2) they think their ideas of what is acceptable or unacceptable should even be considered. Which shows a lack of understanding of their place in the pecking order (lowest of the low).
3) related to #1, THIS is one of the first they bring to the attention of management? really? Which shows an inability understand that first you have to build respect and trust before even asking for these sort of changes.
4) the fact that they organized to ask together smacks of making demands (even if not literally stated as such). This was not simply a query/proposal up the chain. At least it doesn't seem so to me.
Why? They saw something they didn’t like and wrote a letter suggesting an alternative. I see that as a very good attitude.
According to the original report they tried to and were shut down:
> I spoke with my manager about being allowed some leeway under the dress code and was told this was not possible, despite the other person being allowed to do it. I soon found out that many of the other interns felt the same way, and the ones who asked their managers about it were told the same thing as me.
They were told it was a medical exemption after having been summarily fired.
> This wasn't a protest, it was an angry mob.
Are you off your rocker? They wrote a fucking proposal they didn't try to put management to the torch.
Many people grow up believing that protesting is the same thing. But at its foundation, it is resisting leadership direction.
Managers are people too- and at some point you have to cut your losses if you lose hope that you will be able to inspire your employees.
The managers know they are asking extra from the staff with dress codes in this day and age. It doesn't happen naturally, so they write policy. They expect to deal with resistance, and sometimes they are seeking out policy resistors for promotions. But a mass uprising is a huge fiasco to deal with.
You are missing the crux of the problem when you say they wrote a letter suggesting an alternative. They drafted a petition against leadership direction and had almost everyone sign it. That is a protest.
It is a serious problem for management and it requires action: capitulate to airhead interns who won't be here next year or cancel the program?
These kids should have known this, but like many young people, they had an opportunity to learn a lesson the hard way.
The article take the thesis of the "youth are worse than before" like Socrates was saying (so old story)
The real part of the story is due to experience, the older you are the more likely you are to be a manager or a boss.
Hence elder generations will always blame new generations for not knowing their place in this system.
And younger person will fall for the trick like their elder, because that what bullying is for: engraving a behavior as a collective norm.