Posted on 09/24/2004 7:08:11 PM PDT by kristinn
Just what I was thinking about Clinton. The dims have one set of values for themselves and another for anyone who opposes them.
Bad analogy. The man in question is ONE person who is being punished, not an entire group of people being singled out for punishment.
If ALL Repubicans (or ONLY Republicans) were punished for doing the same thing that Democrats got away with, then there would be an issue of discriminatory treatment.
Toleration of improper use of office equipment by a PRIVATE employer is a matter of discretion.
Improper use of office equipment by a PUBLIC employee is abuse of the public trust. It's waste, abuse and fraud involving public funds. Even a tiny bit is still a violation of law.
Yes, probably most government employees do it a little bit, but they're taking a risk and cannot complain if they get caught and punished.
My point has been that the use of a computer, by the very nature of it's technology, results in zero expenditure of Government funds.
The computer is there, sitting on your desk. It is turned on constantly as the computer geeks in the I.S. Department recommend. The keyboard will end up in the I.S. Department's junk boxes, still 100% functional, long after the computer is updated. The hard drive will never get full.
There is, literally, zero cost when you use a running computer to generate a Word Document.
On further reflection, I believe that you can justify the suspension on the philosophical grounds that it was the political use of non-political Government property.
However, justifying it on a "cost" basis does not hold water because there was, literally, zero cost.
Other examples of "costless" uses of Government property for "private" uses include calling your wife or accepting a call from your wife at 5:10 P.M. on the Government telephone on your Government desk.
If you follow a Government employee around with a clip board for a day, you can come up with dozens of other "costless" or "costless for all practical purposes" uses of Government property for "private purposes" examples:
***Using a portion of a Government desktop to display photos of your children.
***Using a Government Post-It note to write "Pick up milk on the way home".
***Using Government ink in a Government pen to write "Pick up milk on the way home".
***Using a one inch strip of Government Scotch tape to secure said Post-It note to your briefcase so that you remember about the note after work.
Etc., etc., etc.
It was with some sadness that I finally gave up the first keyboard I had when I started at my current job. Some of the keys had rather deep depressions in them, and a couple even had small holes, but I liked that keyboard and it "fit my hand" until one day it just quit working. Still, it outlasted three computers.
Plus time to print out the affidavit, plus paper, plus toner, plus time to ask the secretary to notarize the affidavit, plus the secretary's time.
Plus the fact that it wasn't "personal," personal time is stuff like taking care of children, doctor's appointments, groceries, etc.
If a DU activist working for the government used government resources to attack Bush, I think you'd change your tune.
Sauce and meat.
French set up his statement as a sort of sworn affidavit, and in it he certified to some facts that he could not have known firsthand (i.e. speaking as if he had seen events that he in fact did not witness himself). Not exactly lying, but a little more than the truth as he could have known firsthand.
If it were a "real" legal paper used in some type of proceeding it would have been a fairly serious matter, and early reports of his suspension indicated that it was on the issue of dishonesty in that paper that he was to be disciplined.
In this report though, the DA seems to have backed away from that and has focused on his use of the office computer, printer, and Notary. Of course we all know that fine, dedicated public servants (and attorneys, no less) of good character don't ever do things like that, and I'm just as shocked as all of you to learn that he has done this horrible thing. He should be hanged < /sarcasm >.
The article doesn't mention the party affiliation of the DA who handed down the punishment, so we are left to wonder, I guess.
We don't really have a lot of specific rules at work about personal things we do with either company time or equipment. The company recognizes that we are adults with lives and families and sometimes have things that need to be done while at work. They only ask that such things not be abused or disruptive.
Well, he did get disbarred in AR. Then, he pushed through a law stating that a corporate law firm could consist of non-lawyers, thus, easing his transition with Vernon Jordan. What a gift. No way physicians would be granted that.
I spend hours training supervisors on documentation. If you cannot show that you are being consistent and not setting precedent, you are up a creek.
Tell some slimey lawyer about equal protection, they don't seem to care, they'll give a stab at anything, if they smell money.
The money that we have spent defending bogus complaints from disgruntled employees (oh, I have to come to work everyday, UNFAIR!) could have paid for several yearly salaries. Ergo, the documentation strategy, if you show good faith, and consistency meting out punishments, you have a much greater chance of prevailing. It takes away any doubt that you are retaliating or singling out an individual.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.