this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2024
122 points (96.2% liked)

Not The Onion

12306 readers
1161 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] halykthered@lemmy.ml 50 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Did anyone else have a ton of trouble making sense of the headline? Granted, I'm not exactly sober right now, but that seems confusing.

[–] Dexx1s@lemmy.world 54 points 1 month ago

Made no sense to me neither till I read the article..

The company gives people a card signed by other employees whenever they resign or whatever. Only 3 people signed it so they didn't give it to her. She then sues.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I figured "leaving card" is probably an English term, which is why us yanks didn't get the title.

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I get the leaving card. What about the employment claim?

[–] Tagger@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

She went to the employment court to sue them over her dismissal

[–] skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 month ago

I love that Lemmy is more "old Internet", in that we are devoid of the corpo echo chambers, and we do have these confusions. It helps us all grow and learn. I was very confused as well. No comment on ABV of various bloodstreams.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 38 points 1 month ago

The plaintiff here sounds like a insufferable enough colleague to not want to write a card to, regardless of gender.

[–] andrew_s@piefed.social 33 points 1 month ago

Apparently, she's appealing the ruling - she wants to speak to the employment tribunal's manager. (not really)

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 10 points 1 month ago

Her name is literally karen

[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I’m going to guess that the three people who did sign the card are either spineless doormats or just did it to get the card off their desk as soon as possible.

Either way, I wish her luck with the job hunt. I’ll bet employers can’t wait to hire a paranoid, hypersensitive pain in the ass who sues at the drop of a hat.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I would just sign the card because it's the path of least resistance and makes no difference to me. How much of a doormat I am plays no role. Lol

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It's basic decency to me. You don't have to like someone to be courteous.

Maybe it has different social significance in UK

[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

No it does not. Left plenty of crappy jobs without ceremony

[–] OfficerBribe@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

Based on the article, she might have been hated not just disliked.

She said another employee had asked her: “Are you taking the piss, Karen?” The tribunal heard that this was after Conaghan suggested she had “done all of the hard work” and it was his “turn to do some”.

[–] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk 7 points 1 month ago

The card in the thumbnail is missing a comma after "sorry"