ROSENBRETT

A PUBLIC FORUM FOR THE POPULAR VIEWS ON THE BETRAYAL AND SACRIFICE OF ROBERT, AS PERFORMED BY ROSE THE PRINCESS OF DORKNESS, AND AS VALIDATED BY THE COMPANY. THIS NIGHT-CRAWLING ABOMINATION NEEDS TO BE HELD UP TO THE LIGHT.

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Cost-saving coupons not used in this spending spree?

Here are some questions for all concerned:

Let us say, hypothetically speaking of course, a company concerned with maintaining its supposedly pristine image, felt that a small but powerful anonymous group was trying to tarnish and undermine said image - surely not, but possibly due to some unethical judgment calls made by this particular company...We all know this unethical behavior would never happen in today's business world...

Just what do you suppose, still hypothetically thinking, this company would do when/if it felt threatened?
More importantly, how much do you think this company would spend and what actions do you think it would take in trying to eliminate the supposed/imagined threat by the annoying and anonymous?

Possibly, it would spend money to keep various and assorted concerned and powerful anonymous group members from communicating their concerns with other possibly unenlightened employees? (Now, how does the First Amendment fit into all of this?) That is a shame, really, because it would be good for all employed by this particular fictitious company to understand anticipated honesty, justice and equality may not happen in certain situations.

Now, if this hypothetical company spent money in trying to block communicating of truth by above-mentioned small group of annoying, image-tarnishing unknown entities, and possibly spent more money on other secretive actions, what amount would/could possibly be spent? One hundred dollars, one thousand dollars, or even more?
How would any possible actions taken by this company be notated in the record books?

Next, (and surely when a company both verbally and in printed form states sincere, honest employee support this would never happen,) would this hypothetical company resort to asking that certain vulnerable employees try to intervene in its behalf? Knowing the character of certain vulnerable employees, would the fictitious company consider making promises, knowing it would possibly never or has yet to bring into fruition any promises made?

Of course, these questions are presented as food for thought, hypothetically speaking...

Hope they brighten and enlighten your day! :)






0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home