Dreams etc

Discord account

A Gmail account

Microsoft Teams

WhatsApp

Telegram

Facebook Messenger

A Yahoo account

hour 6: if youu go to the store and buy groceriers you are a piece of shit

Remember: The "'E" in email stands for evidence.

That cuts both ways. Be careful what you put into an email. It never really goes away and can be used against you.

But can also be a powerful tool for workplace fairness.

Case 1: Your supervisor asks you to do something you know is either illegal or against company policy. A verbal request. If things go wrong, you can count on them denying that they ever told you to do that. You go back to your desk, or wherever and you send them an email: "I just want to make sure that I understood correctly that you want me to do xxxxx" Quite often, once they see it in writing, they will change their mind about having you do it. If not, you have documentation.

Me; That's illegal.

Them: (start italics) three slow, long seconds of staring at me blankly (end italics) Uh...

Me: That's an illegal policy to have. The right to discuss wages is a right protected by the National Labor Relations board. I used to be in a union. I know this.

HR: Oh, this is news to me! I have been working HR for 18 years and I never knew that. Haha. Well try not do do it anyway, it makes people upset, haha.

Me: people are entitled to their opinions about what their work is worth. Bye.

I then left, and sent her several texts and emails saying I would like a copy of their company policy to see where this wage discussion policy was kept. She quickly called me back in to her office.

HR: You know what, there is no policy like that in the handbook! I double check. Sorry about the confusion, my apologies.

Me: You still haven't given me the paper saying that we had this discussion. I am going to need some protection against retaliation.

HR: Oh haha yes here you go.

The woman would then storm back into my office screaming at me for putting the discussion in writing and arguing about pushing back the other project or whatever. At which point I would summarize that conversation in email as well. Which would bring her storming back in, rinse and repeat ad nauseum.

Anyway I cannot imagine how badly that job would have gone if I hadn’t put all her wildly unreasonable demands in writing. Bitch still hated me but she could never hang me for “missing deadlines” because I always had in writing that she’d pushed the project back because she wanted something else done first.

1) Figured this out.

I was in total control of the hearing the entire time, the judge was with me for all my arguments all the way, and I got an even better result than I had hoped for.

I was pretty confident that I would win going into the hearing (one of my arguments literally boiled down to, "8 is less than 30"), but I was in front of a judge who can be very unpredictable (and not tenant-friendly). And this was a really critical hearing for my client - they would be in a REALLY bad position if I lost. 

But from the moment it started, I was in total control of the hearing. We had had a different judge last hearing, and the docket was a bit confusing. So I started off being able to helpfully frame the status for the judge and bring her up to speed - always a great way to start (because it puts you in a position of knowledge and control).

From there, I made my argument, and the judge was with me the whole way. Then the landlord's attorney spoke, and she was so out of her league (not to be mean, but...) it wasn't even funny. (She is very nice, but rather desperately needs some more training and supervision.) It was so clear the whole hearing the judge was going to rule in my favor, and she did. 

BUT THEN

The landlord's attorney made a request, citing a recent change in the law. This would, if granted, potentially put my client back in the bad position I was trying to avoid. I should have been prepared for this request, but the landlord's attorney surprised me (she hadn't raised this in her filings).

Normally this would be really bad, but...

As I said, she was citing a recent change in the law. And this particular change has been an Issue for the last couple months. Landlords' attorneys keep suggesting that it should be read in a way that would be a huge advantage for landlords, and the courts (including this judge) have been going along with them. (Mostly in either cases against pro se tenants, or in hearings where the issue is not squarely in front of the judge, they are just speculating at what could happen further down the line in a case, so there hasn't - to my knowledge - been a ruling squarely on the issue.) But I think the way the landlords' attorneys are reading this change is completely incorrect. I've been trying to get people to argue against this interpretation (again, for months) to try to get a good ruling on point, and have just been waiting and hoping for a chance to argue it myself. 

And again, it was perfect, even though it was on the fly. I felt so good and in control the entire time, laying out my argument without a single hitch, like effortlessly skating over the ice. And again, the judge was with me all the way. She was literally sitting there nodding along and taking notes as I hammered it out. She gave the landlord's attorney an opportunity to respond, of course - but it was already done and we all knew it. (Except maybe the landlord's attorney? Based on her response I'm not genuinely unsure if she was even able to understand what I was arguing about, let alone follow my argument. Again, very nice, but seriously needs supervision.) 

It was so good, I had multiple tenants' attorneys who happened to be in the same courtroom text me after to tell me how good it was to watch.

So not only did I win for my client, I convinced (at least this) judge to start reading this change in the law the right way.

The Gay Coloring Book (undated), another gem from Cornell University's Images from the Rare Book and Manuscript Collections on JSTOR.

You'll have to visit the university library to see the inside of the book, though. But fret not, with more than 11,000 additional images in the collection, there's plenty to keep you busy—and they are all free and open for everyone!

if your ostomy bags, incontinence supplies, and sanitary wipes are single-use,

if your joint replacement, bone plate, pins & screws, or spinal hardware is cobalt & chrome,

if your meds come in a plastic container you can’t recycle or reuse for sterility,

you are still innocent. you didn’t choose this particular life. we all must do what we can to survive and that includes using technology and consuming resources. it is only human and we all do it.

Don’t reuse the syringe. Don’t use cloths over alcohol swabs. Choose the battery powered device over the rechargeable if it means you can carry spares. Don’t use the reusable container if you can’t get it open. Don’t choose the reusable option if you can’t keep it clean. Don’t overfill the sharps container. Don’t improvise the tourniquet. Don’t eat the expired food if you can’t afford to be sick. Don’t choose the sustainable option if it doesn’t meet your needs.

Fed is best!!!

If eating the pre-packaged food means you might have energy for other things you want to do later then do that!

If you have to take a frozen dinner to work for your lunch because you can't stand leftover food and so meal prepping doesn't work for you, then take the frozen dinner that you know you will actually eat.

Don't feel bad for eating the same thing multiple times in a row, if that's all you can eat then that's what you should eat!