The crime was theft, not littering or jaywalking. Missing the trashcan is only littering if you leave it there, and jaywalking does not deprive or defraud a business owner. Why bother listing other crimes rather than the one committed? He committed petty theft.
I'm in the US and my office specifically lists theft of office supplies as a workplace violation, which can become a fireable offense. If having a reputation as a thief degrades the reputation of the school and its ability to interact with parents, then he has to deal with how the school and teaching board decide to handle his crime.
I think it's far more unhinged to "guarantee" employment or licensing.
I'm in the US and my office specifically lists theft of office supplies as a workplace violation, which can become a fireable offense.
So if you keep a 10-cent pencil from the office without really thinking about it, you deserve to be fired?
That doesn't sound exploitable at all. Totally sane office environment you have there.
Its not about "guaranteeing" employment, its the fact that the issue was so minor in scope and scale that it ends up being comical if action is taken over it. If they could take away your retirement pay over that, I would probably call that a pretense for something else because no sane person would fire a long-time employee over that.
The theft in question is so petty that its laughable. Its so petty that the state didn't bother to press charges. You know what the word "petty" means, right? Its not just a modifying adjective for the word "theft", it has a definition.
You're basically saying he deserves to have his life over for the equivalent of this.
How many pencils can I steal before being fired? How much reputational damage can I cause while remaining employed? You're clearly advocating for guaranteed employment if you say one should never be fired for such things.
Your attitude reminds me of Office Space and how someone can rationalize theft.
It's a fraction of a penny, they won't miss it
A thief should certainly be punished. The severity should be based on impact of the crime among other factors, which go far beyond money value of the stolen item. Social degradation and loss of a high trust society can cause far more economic damage even if it's just a cup of coffee. Cutting in line hurts efficiency despite having no nominal economic value.
For Japanese schools, the reputational damage could cause them to close. If that's the case, why not fire him? I'm not the business, so I can't decide on their behalf, I don't know their business situation. Should a McDonald's fire an employee for flicking a booger into a burger?
Personally, I don't think he should lose his retirement pay, but I'm not aware of Japanese social and business dynamics nor am I arrogant enough to say whether that was the right choice for them.
I'll say it again: Should a McDonald's fire an employee for flicking a booger into a burger? Maybe in India, they could get away with it. Maybe in America, they would have to fire that employee. Different consequences for different societies.
You cannot say there isn't a difference between taking a pencil, and say, taking a stapler, and taking a stapler vs taking printer toner.
Its not about rationalizing theft, its about understanding humanity doesn't live in a vacuum. The reason the word "petty" exists is because people have determined there is a varying importance level of things.
Like you said, severity of punishment should be based on several factors, including how significant in scope the crime actually was.
For Japanese schools, the reputational damage could cause them to close. If that's the case, why not fire him? I'm not the business, so I can't decide on their behalf, I don't know their business situation.
Schools are not businesses, and if they're funded and controlled by the state its a lot less of a concern. The reputational damage might be a fair point, but honestly, its hard to take seriously. I don't think I've ever seen a scandal from Japan this petty. When I hear about firings and police involvement involving a school official, I would expect things like this more than fucking cups of coffee.
Cutting in line hurts efficiency despite having no nominal economic value.
Cutting in line is wrong because its unfair to the others in the line who were waiting legitimately. Efficiency hardly plays a role because it would be the same number of people in the line once he enters, regardless if that person entered the line at the back, or at the point where he cut.
I'll say it again: Should a McDonald's fire an employee for flicking a booger into a burger? Maybe in India, they could get away with it. Maybe in America, they would have to fire that employee. Different consequences for different societies.
Interesting question. I'd say maybe or probably yes (in both cases, but that depends on the facts). Just because he could get away with it in India doesn't mean it shouldn't be punished, though they have so many problems to deal with that its something more minor to them at the end of the day comparatively speaking.
In that case though, its different from the current situation. For one thing, its literally contaminating food, harming customers (potentially seriously if the worker is sick or something), showing spite for the customers, and its directly related to your job, as well as showing a complete disregard for the profession. Depends on the circumstances, firing might be warranted but I'd have to know more.
Personally, I don't think he should lose his retirement pay, but I'm not aware of Japanese social and business dynamics nor am I arrogant enough to say whether that was the right choice for them.
You can say that, but, for example, did you feel the same way when they fired (well, forced resignation) the Tokyo Olympics chief because of some Jap feminists whining over his """sexist""" jokes?
We shouldn't even be talking about them to begin with if this was the case.
You're right that they are a different society, but I still have my opinion regardless.
The crime was theft, not littering or jaywalking. Missing the trashcan is only littering if you leave it there, and jaywalking does not deprive or defraud a business owner. Why bother listing other crimes rather than the one committed? He committed petty theft.
I'm in the US and my office specifically lists theft of office supplies as a workplace violation, which can become a fireable offense. If having a reputation as a thief degrades the reputation of the school and its ability to interact with parents, then he has to deal with how the school and teaching board decide to handle his crime.
I think it's far more unhinged to "guarantee" employment or licensing.
So if you keep a 10-cent pencil from the office without really thinking about it, you deserve to be fired?
That doesn't sound exploitable at all. Totally sane office environment you have there.
Its not about "guaranteeing" employment, its the fact that the issue was so minor in scope and scale that it ends up being comical if action is taken over it. If they could take away your retirement pay over that, I would probably call that a pretense for something else because no sane person would fire a long-time employee over that.
The theft in question is so petty that its laughable. Its so petty that the state didn't bother to press charges. You know what the word "petty" means, right? Its not just a modifying adjective for the word "theft", it has a definition.
You're basically saying he deserves to have his life over for the equivalent of this.
How many pencils can I steal before being fired? How much reputational damage can I cause while remaining employed? You're clearly advocating for guaranteed employment if you say one should never be fired for such things.
Your attitude reminds me of Office Space and how someone can rationalize theft.
A thief should certainly be punished. The severity should be based on impact of the crime among other factors, which go far beyond money value of the stolen item. Social degradation and loss of a high trust society can cause far more economic damage even if it's just a cup of coffee. Cutting in line hurts efficiency despite having no nominal economic value.
For Japanese schools, the reputational damage could cause them to close. If that's the case, why not fire him? I'm not the business, so I can't decide on their behalf, I don't know their business situation. Should a McDonald's fire an employee for flicking a booger into a burger?
Personally, I don't think he should lose his retirement pay, but I'm not aware of Japanese social and business dynamics nor am I arrogant enough to say whether that was the right choice for them.
I'll say it again: Should a McDonald's fire an employee for flicking a booger into a burger? Maybe in India, they could get away with it. Maybe in America, they would have to fire that employee. Different consequences for different societies.
I never used the word "never".
You cannot say there isn't a difference between taking a pencil, and say, taking a stapler, and taking a stapler vs taking printer toner.
Its not about rationalizing theft, its about understanding humanity doesn't live in a vacuum. The reason the word "petty" exists is because people have determined there is a varying importance level of things.
Like you said, severity of punishment should be based on several factors, including how significant in scope the crime actually was.
Schools are not businesses, and if they're funded and controlled by the state its a lot less of a concern. The reputational damage might be a fair point, but honestly, its hard to take seriously. I don't think I've ever seen a scandal from Japan this petty. When I hear about firings and police involvement involving a school official, I would expect things like this more than fucking cups of coffee.
Cutting in line is wrong because its unfair to the others in the line who were waiting legitimately. Efficiency hardly plays a role because it would be the same number of people in the line once he enters, regardless if that person entered the line at the back, or at the point where he cut.
Interesting question. I'd say maybe or probably yes (in both cases, but that depends on the facts). Just because he could get away with it in India doesn't mean it shouldn't be punished, though they have so many problems to deal with that its something more minor to them at the end of the day comparatively speaking.
In that case though, its different from the current situation. For one thing, its literally contaminating food, harming customers (potentially seriously if the worker is sick or something), showing spite for the customers, and its directly related to your job, as well as showing a complete disregard for the profession. Depends on the circumstances, firing might be warranted but I'd have to know more.
You can say that, but, for example, did you feel the same way when they fired (well, forced resignation) the Tokyo Olympics chief because of some Jap feminists whining over his """sexist""" jokes?
We shouldn't even be talking about them to begin with if this was the case.
You're right that they are a different society, but I still have my opinion regardless.