Stupid World

[TheDemonLord]

What point would that be then?

Re-read what I wrote, only this time, take off your ideological glasses.

You might see it, but I won't hold my breath.

[Katman]

Re-read what I wrote, only this time, take off your ideological glasses.

You might see it, but I won't hold my breath.

I get the point that you believe it is only the fault of the manager and not that of the agency. (Even though the manager is clearly a representative of the agency).

I'm still not quite seeing how you can be so sure that it is fact that no pressure was exerted from higher up to pursue individuals with greater vigor.

[TheDemonLord]

I get the point that you believe it is only the fault of the manager and not that of the agency. (Even though the manager is clearly a representative of the agency).

I'm still not quite seeing how you can be so sure that it is fact that no pressure was exerted from higher up to pursue individuals with greater vigor.

D-

Try again.

[Katman]

D-

Try again.

Did you and bogan go to the same School of Nursery Games?

[bogan]

Did you and bogan go to the same School of Nursery Games?

TDL has demonstrated time and time again he is willing to focus on the evidence and discuss it in a rational manner, as am I. So there are certainly worse schools to go to...

[bogan]

That a government agency fucked up and as a direct result of that fuck up one of their clients took their own life.

Where does it mention she took her own life?

The thing about shitty news, is you can often see them trying to paint a misleading but emotive image by what they imply instead of say. Learn to be more thorough in your interpretations of news Katman, misleading and fake news remains a bad thing.

[Grumph]

So you know for a fact that this manager hasn't received any memo, email or instruction from higher up the chain to pursue individuals with greater vigor?

Whilst i'm extremely reluctant to endorse Katman in any way shape or form, having myself worked in the Public Service,I'd suspect that no instruction was necessary.
Most PS contracts specify the grounds on which you will earn any performance bonus....Almost invariably in my experience, reduction of operating costs or recovery of funds paid out in error or fraudulently paid will be part of the background requirements in a job like the supervisor's.
There is in fact very little latitude available at any level.
The investigator may have recommended leniency, I'd doubt the supervisor had any choice.

[Ocean1]

"Oh dear, looks like we got it wrong".

One less bludging beneficiary to worry about though, eh Ocean?

Why drag me into your little fantasy?

Now that you have though: I've read some small parts of the rules surrounding the conditions of entitlement for some benefits, and I reckon they're so complex, interdependent and convoluted that the interpretation of any given case might as well involve the toss of a coin. Machiavelli ain't in it.

[TheDemonLord]

Did you and bogan go to the same School of Nursery Games?

No.

It's really simple - I'm saying that in the article there was no evidence presented that there was instruction from higher up.

You've interpreted that as me saying that there is no evidence anywhere period.

These are 2 very different and distinct claims - which in your ideologically induced stupidity could not tell apart, despite multiple prompts that there was in fact a difference.

There could be a Memo or an Email or as Grumph suggested a KPI that encouraged a hard line. It's entirely possible and well within the bounds of reality. It could be that the Manager is being made a scapegoat to hide a bigger problem.

BUT! until I'm presented with such a piece of evidence as above, I cannot go from a position of 'Based on the evidence, this appears to be as a result of a single crap manager' to a position of 'this is proof of an inherent department wide bias/corruption'. You on the other hand are more than happy to go that position without such a piece of evidence as it aligns with your narrative and world view.

[Katman]

It's really simple - I'm saying that in the article there was no evidence presented that there was instruction from higher up.

You've interpreted that as me saying that there is no evidence anywhere period.

You stated that it was fact that there was no memo, email or instruction from higher up.

Do you even know what your fucking point is?

[TheDemonLord]

You stated that it was fact that there was no memo, email or instruction from higher up.

No, I didn't.

You misinterpreted it as such.

Do you even know what your fucking point is?

Yes, that you are an idiot who is blinded by their own bias.

[Katman]

No, I didn't.

You misinterpreted it as such.

Fuck off and re-read post #9281.

[TheDemonLord]

Fuck off and re-read post #9281.

It looks like you've been taking Sarcasm lessons from Dr. Kristi Winters....

[pritch]

Most PS contracts specify the grounds on which you will earn any performance bonus....Almost invariably in my experience, reduction of operating costs or recovery of funds paid out in error or fraudulently paid will be part of the background requirements in a job like the supervisor's.

That would certainly have been true once. Unless they have been reintroduced in the last three years or so though, I don't think MSD are currently paying bonuses.

[Katman]

It looks like you've been taking Sarcasm lessons from Dr. Kristi Winters....

Ok, so we've established that I suspect there's a real likelihood that this manager had some sort of instruction/incentive from higher up and that you're not bothered to even consider the possibility.

I'm not quite sure why you felt the need to argue over it other than it being a chance for you to wear your 'Ermahgerd, Katman Posted - I Must Find A Way To Disagree With Him' glasses again.