Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
hmmm i don't see how that's common sense being stomped out.
or were you referring to you stomping it out because you didn't have a valid ID?
while I understand your arguments, I take umbrage to you equatiing it to "common sense." An expired identification is an expired identification period. If a rule says valid identification only, then that's their house rule. That is common sense.
|
Wow. Was that a backhanded insult or what? Fantastic. Kudos, Cyn.
So, I'm only me for the time allotted on my driver's license...then I'm not me? The card's validity determines whether I really am guthmund or some schlub off the street? Certainly to the issuing authority, but to everyone else? It would be different if an officer of the law caught me as the validity of my license is tied directly with the state's permission to let me drive legally, but she wasn't checking my car registration, was she?
It doesn't matter either way because the purpose of the identification was for the picture only and used only to determine that the name and picture on the identification matched the name on the check and the face in front of them. The manager made that quite plain to the cashier once I explained my position. He also made it quite clear that the teller made a judgement call and a different teller on a different day might have made all the difference in the world. At the very least, once I started to protest and started to question her understanding of the policy, she should've gone to get her supervisor instead arguing with me for 10 minutes and trying to dismiss by wishing me a good day while turning away.
It seems to me that a bit common sense would've gone a long way. Sure I should've had a current driver's license, but I had a student id card and a campus faculty/staff card both with photographs, an SSN card, along with several credit cards and the paycheck stub still in the envelope addressed to me. All of which established my identity, none of which were on her list and therefore ignored. It seems to me that if she had excercised a little common sense instead of digging in her heels, well, it would've been very different. I can tell you that if the roles were reversed, I probably would've given me the benefit of the doubt because common sense tells me that even though the license is expired recently all the information adds up. I would assume that "me" was really "me" and instead of badgering, arguing and dismissing, I would've found a way to help "me" out by finding someone "in the know."
I understand that rules are rules and people, for the most part, are so afraid of stepping out of the parameters of their job for fear of pissing someone else off they stay almost obsessively within their small sphere of power oblivious to things outside their jurisdiction while deftly deflecting those that might cause trouble. But it seems to me that if you're entire career ethos is to go along just to get along than handing over a troublemaker (like me, right) to an authority figure would be a lot easier than digging in obstinately and trying to argue your own confused point.
Random thoughts..
Idiot was probably the wrong word, but at the time it was a lot more polite than "stubborn asshole," which was what I started out with.
Why is it okay for apathy and ignorance to be overlooked if they're being paid minimum wage? I mean if you're that disgusted with your job where the pay is so insulting, what stops you from finding something better?