Friday, August 27, 2010

Shipping News

I work for a company that likes to stress saving money whenever possible. Running a tight ship. Watching costs. Improving profit margins by working in a lean fashion. These are all good ideas that ought to be put into practice whenever possible. It just makes sense. Then the doorbell rings this morning, and there is a FedEx Priority Overnight letter laying on the front steps. From my employer's Human Resources Specialist. Informing me that if I do not return to work on Monday, August 30, 2010, I must provide to them a physician's statement authorizing my absence, that I have continually refused to return to work, and that my absence continues to be unauthorized. My alleged unauthorized absence, by the way, is costing the company not a single dime. My reduced hours over the summer months preclude me from using sick days and I have amassed such a paltry number of vacation hours that using them up would amount to less than a full day. The letter does not say what the consequences will be should I not comply. But this is the part that is interesting to me. I have phoned in and spoken to the very HR Specialist who signed the letter every single day that I have not reported for work. I was also under the impression that my current physician's office had faxed or mailed in a report outlining my updated restrictions. The HR Specialist did not inform me that she was missing this vital information in any of our phone conversations. I won't begin to get into the miasmal, paradoxical, and just plain confusing shell game of getting medical treatment through Workers' Compensation that has mystified and frustrated me over the last year. But I am curious as to why a letter was sent to me via this most expensive of methods when all she had to do was call me. Or my doctor. Either she's an idiot or I'm pretty darn special. Unless there's something bigger and darker afoot than I'm willing to ascribe to at this point. All I know is, mailing a standard, business size envelope through the USPS would have been much more cost effective. But not nearly as intimidating.

No comments: