Analyze the Dream Act Essay

Education is a benefit for society. Higher education offers higher economic advantages for both workers and the economy. The United States is the home of about 65,000 undocumented children who graduate high school each year and have lived in the country for more than five years (Dreams Deferred, 2010). These children are intelligent, outstanding class presidents, valedictorians, and honor students who aspire to be successful doctors, engineers, teachers, and lawyers.However, because of legal and financial obstacles confronting them just because they are undocumented students, many are unable to live their American dream and attend a college or university. It is estimated that only about 5 to 10% of undocumented high school graduates go on to college (Dreams Deferred, 2010).
According to the Immigration Policy Center, “Studies of undocumented immigrants who legalized their status through the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 reveal that legal status brings fiscal, economic, and labor-market benefits to individual immigrants, their families, and U.S. society in general” (Dreams Deferred, 2010). The U. S. Department of Labor found that wages of these immigrants who received their legal status under IRCA increased their wages to 15% five years later. If given the opportunity, undocumented students will expand their education, get better jobs, and pay taxes.
The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act is a proposed federal legislation in the U. S. that will enact two major changes in current law.The DREAM Act will 1) “Permit certain immigrant students who have grown up in the U. S. to apply legal status and to eventually obtain permanent status and become eligible for U. S.

citizenship if they go to college or serve in the U. S. military; and 2) Eliminate a federal provision that penalizes states that provide in-state tuition without regard to immigration status. ” (DREAM Act: Summary, 2, 2010)The passage of the DREAM Act is critical to raise the quality of the U.S. workforce through higher education to maintain a strong economy. The DREAM Act will increase the number of undocumented immigrant students who attend college, it will benefit the nation’s economy, and the nation will save the high cost of ignoring these undocumented immigrant students.
The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act is a bipartisan legislation led by senators Richard Durbin, Chuck Hagel, andRichard Lugar, this bill will restore states’ rights to offer in-state tuition to undocumented immigrant students who live in that state in order to make it easier for students to afford a higher level education. The DREAM Act will also provide citizenship to the hardworking immigrant youth who was brought to the U. S. as children and who pursue a higher education or military service, allowing them to contribute to the American society (Basic Facts about In-State Tuition for Undocumented Immigrant Students, 2006).The bill has been introduced several times in the House of Representatives and the Senate, but it has never been brought to a floor vote. In the senate it was brought to debate on October 24, 2007, but failed by a 52-44 vote. The DREAM Act was reintroduced on March 26, 2009 by Richard Durbin and Richard Lugar in the senate and in the House of Representatives by Howard Berman, Lincoln Diaz, and Lucille Roybal-Allard (DREAM Act: Summary, 2010).
To qualify, a DREAM Act beneficiary would have to meet the following requirements: * Proof of having arrived to the U.S. at the age of 15 or younger. * Proof of residence in the U. S. for at least 5 consecutive years since the date of their arrival. * Must be between the age of 12 and 35 at the time of the enactment of the bill.
* Have graduated from an American high school, or obtained a GED. * Display “Good Moral Character” defined as “the absence of significant criminal record or any major charge of drugs” by the National Council of La Raza (The ‘DREAM Act’ and the ‘American Dream Act, 1, 2007). The student must have accomplished one of the following within six year after the permanent residence was granted: * Earn a degree from a 2 or 4 year institution, or have maintained a “good standing” for at least two years at a 2 or 4 year institution while working toward a bachelor’s degree or higher (The ‘DREAM Act’ and the ‘American Dream Act, 2007). * Served in the U. S. Armed Forces for at least 2 years. Without the DREAM Act the U.
S. faces critical financial and emotional costs.After years of hard work and achieving success in high school every student in America expects a reward. 65,000 undocumented students currently living in America expect these rewards as well. They were raised the American way. According to the National Council of La Raza, the American way is to “offer equal opportunities to all and encourage all to make the most of their talents” (The ‘DREAM Act’ and the ‘American Dream Act, 2, 2007). As young children, these students were brought to this nation by their parents; it was beyond their control to stay in their native land.
Brenda Garcia states, her family faced monetary problems while living in Mexico, the only solution to their problem was to come to the United States, she had no say so in this decision and was forced to follow her parents and leave her country (2010). These students have shared all the American values and traditions; they see this country as their home. These students grew up pledging allegiance to the United States of America, and now the United States of America can’t give its loyalists the opportunity for citizenship and a more affordable higher level education.Current law punishes these students for a decision they did not make and for their lack of documentation. America has imposed insuperable obstacles for these students and crushed their hopes of exceeding in their education, as a result “only 5 to 10 percent of undocumented young people who graduate from high school go on to college” (Basic Facts about In-State Tuition for Undocumented Immigrant Students, 2, 2006) either because schools deny them admission, they are charged out-of state tuition which is much more than the in-state tuition rate, they are not eligible for financial aid, and cannot work legally in the United States.The discouragement is too much and most of these hard working, and goal oriented undocumented students with high academic standing don’t get to live their American dream. With the passage of the DREAM Act these student’s dreams could be attainable and as a result more students could attend college, exceed in their education, and contribute to the United States economy.
The DREAM Act will “facilitate access to college for immigrant students in the U.S. by restoring states’ rights to offer in-state tuition to immigrant students residing in their state,” states the National Council of La Raza (The ‘DREAM Act’ and the ‘American Dream Act, 1, 2007). Many states argue that the schools will not have revenue if undocumented students are charged only in-state tuition, but who said in-state tuition meant free tuition? “In-state tuition is not the same as free tuition.It is a discount,” claims the National Immigration Law Center (Basic Facts about In-State Tuition for Undocumented Immigrant Students, 2, 2006) if the discount is provided, more undocumented students will attend an institution of higher level education and the money paid by these students will increase school revenues by far because it will be money that would otherwise not be there, and even then, after all, education pays for itself, claims the National Immigration Law Center (Basic Facts about In-State Tuition for Undocumented Immigrant Students, 3, 2006).The United States’ economic future depends on its current students, documented and undocumented. If given the opportunity, through the DREAM Act, undocumented students will expand their education and raise the schools revenues; they will get better jobs in which they will help out the U.
S. society by curing the ill, sharing their knowledge with young people, designing new buildings for the community, and opening new businesses, etc.The National Immigration Law Center claims that “As baby boomers age, the number of retirees in the U. S. swell (Basic Facts about In-State Tuition for Undocumented Immigrant Students, 2, 2006) and that’s why in the future the U. S. will need new proficient people to take over those jobs.
These young immigrants can be the future professionals the U. S. will need, they are “key to our ability to counteract the serious demographic challenges we face” (Basic Facts about In-State Tuition for Undocumented Immigrant Students, 2, 2006).We as a nation must “raise the caliber of our workforce through higher education to have a chance to maintain a strong economy” (Basic Facts about In-State Tuition for Undocumented Immigrant Students, 2, 2006). Additionally each person who attends college and obtains a professional job means one less expense to the state in terms of social service, as well, an asset in terms of tax payments to the state. The nation cannot burden these motivated and high achieving immigrant youth; after all they will only benefit the nation in the future.Undocumented students who don’t have the opportunity to get the best out of their education are simply wasted talent, a new report from the Immigration Policy Center by Roberto Gonzalez, Wasted Talent and Broken Dreams: The Lost Potential of Undocumented Students, makes it clear that “without means to legalize their status, these children are seldom able to go on to college, cannot work legally in the United States, and therefore cannot put their educations to good use” (Dreams Deferred, 1, 2010).
The United States has invested in the education of these undocumented students since they were in pre-kinder all the way through their high school education. If the United States cuts their education short by not gathering the full potential of these children’s’ education it will face an enormous cost because there will be no benefits for the nation. In the future these tudents will not give back to the nation, and that will be a result of waste talent, wasted money, and lost potential. Why not let these students contribute back to the country that gave them so much? The American way is to be fair and offer equal opportunities to all and encourage everyone to make the best out of their talents, America, now is the time to live up to your American way. Don’t punish these undocumented students for a decision that they did not make.These students are your children, they are Americans, they are friends, classmates, outstanding students, they are family. There is a significant cost in denying these children their college education.
Don’t crush their American Dream. “This wasted talent imposes financial and emotional costs not only on undocumented students themselves, but on the U. S. economy and U. S. society as a whole” (Dreams Deferred, 1, 2010).


Gramm Leach Bliley Modernization Act of 1999

Gramm Leach Bliley Modernization Act of 1999 History of the GLBA The Gramm Leach Bliley Modernization Act of 1999 is a regulation that Congress passed on November 12, 1999, which attempts to update and modernize the financial industry. The main function of the Act was to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act that said banks and other financial institutions were not allowed to offer financial services, like investments and insurance-related services, as part of normal operations. The act is also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act.The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), which is also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, provides limited privacy protections against the sale of your private financial information. Additionally, the GLBA codifies protections against pretexting, the practice of obtaining personal information through false pretenses. (EPIC.
org) Senator William Gramm Senator William Philip Gramm, also known as Phil, is a Representative and Senator from Texas. From 1978 to 1983, he served as a Democratic Congressman. Then from 1983 to 1985, Senator Gramm served as a Republican Congressman.Most recently, from 1985-2002, he served as a Republican Senator. After graduating from the University of Georgia in 1964, he continued at U of G to receive his doctorate in 1967. William Gramm was a professor of economics from 1967-1978. During this period, from 1971-1978, he also founded an economic consulting firm by the name of Gramm & Associates.
In 1981, he co-sponsored the Gramm-Latta Budget which implemented President Ronald Reagan’s economic program, increased military spending, cut other spending, and mandated the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981.Just days after being reelected in 1982, Gramm was thrown off the House Budget Committee for supporting Reagan’s tax cuts. In response, Gramm resigned his House seat on January 5, 1983. He then ran as a Republican for his own spot in a February 12, 1983 special election, and won. He became the first Republican to represent the district since its creation. Glass Steagall Act Due to the horrific losses incurred as a result of 1929’s Black Tuesday and Thursday, the Glass-Steagall act was created originally during the 1930s in order to prevent bank depositors from additional exposure to risk associated with stock market issues.As a result, for many years, banks were not legally allowed to act as brokers.

Since many regulations have been instituted since the 1930s to protect bank depositors, GLBA was created to allow the financial industry to offer more services. Current Events related to GLBA Due to the recent financial crisis and with concerns about the country’s economic status on the rise, GLBA has attracted its share of criticism. In an earlier statement, President Obama was quoted in the Wall Street Journal as saying that the GLBA helped create the 2007 subprime crisis. Nobel prize recipients Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman have also criticized the Act.In fact, Paul Krugman referred to the co-author, former Senator Phil Gramm, as the “Father of the Financial Crisis. ” Although GLBA is receiving the bulk of the outrage, the true “monsters” in this financial crisis have come from the unregulated brokerage industry and investment banks. Recent Proposals Although it seems to have fallen from new legislation, The Volcker Rule  is a proposal  to restrict banks from making certain kinds of speculative investments if they are not strictly on behalf of their customers.
Volcker has argued that such speculative activity played a key role in the current financial crisis.The Volcker Rule was first publicly endorsed by President Obama on January 21, 2010. The proposal specifically prohibits a bank or institution that owns a bank from engaging in proprietary trading that isn’t strictly on behalf of its clients, and from owning or investing in a hedge fund or private equity fund, as well as limiting the liabilities that the largest banks could hold. As of February 23, 2010, Congress began to consider a different bill allowing federal regulators to restrict proprietary trading and hedge fund ownership by banks, but not prohibiting these activities altogether. Paul Volcker was earlier appointed as the chair of President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, which was created on February 6, 2009.Works Cited”Biographical Directory of the United States Congress”. June 30, 2010 http://bioguide. congress. gov/scripts/biodisplay. pl? index=g000365.”Information Regarding the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999″.
U. S. Senate Commitee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. June 30, 2010 http://banking. senate.
gov/conf/.”The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act”. Electronic Privacy Information Center. June 30, 2010 ;lt;http://epic. org/privacy/glba/;gt;.


The Unnatural Act of Leadership, Book Review Essay

Odilia Bergh, Peachtree City Police Department Human Resource Management and Development The Unnatural Act of Management February 26, 2013 I began this book like most books, with great anticipation that it was going to be amazing, why else would a qualified instructor assign it. I assumed that it would be a shining example of the finest managerial principals in existence all compacted into a simple to read text with plenty of graphs and helpful handouts. I was certain that I would be a more effective leader for having read it.
I spent time strategizing how I would write my paper with great enthusiasm. Then, I read the book. In the first few pages I found myself so caught up with the character development that I quickly lost sight of the big picture. I mean how could I be expected to believe that any one person could accurately describe an entire management team with such accuracy. Richard Thompkins’ descriptions and predictions were almost humorous. His intuition into his co-workers was uncanny. From their personal relationships to the weaknesses in one fail swoop. I wanted to meet Richard myself.
As the story developed I later appreciated the lack of filler material as the characters were introduced and it also made for a quick refresher when I was trying to predict who was going to be effected next by Brent’s plans. I quickly became invested in the ninety day project. I could recognize this was a process being explained with the assistance of a story, or a true manager refusing to have an editor alter his vision. Regardless, I decided to step back and focus on the big picture, the actual process of examining an existing managerial team and operations to evaluating its effectiveness through strong managerial principals.

Off we went. Learning about the people you are working with, their qualifications and personality traits is imperative. Understanding how they’re perceived by their peers is critical. Richard Thompkins’ descriptions were no more than his perception regardless how accurate they might have been. The second part of the equation is the one on one interaction with individuals to develop our own opinions and “assumptions”. As I began to understand the characters I couldn’t help but begin to assign them new names, names associated with people I work with even myself at times.
For the sake of this paper I’ll make up names and rank. Moving into the early chapters I found that my Chief aligns himself strongly with many of the theories and practices that Brent spoke of from conducting effective meetings to managing work stress effectively. Unfortunately prior to his arrival our organization struggled to follow some basic principles that are imperative for success. Basics like “Read, Listen, Discuss, Observe, or Think. ” As police officers, “read” stands out as an exceptional oddity. The term “assumptions” was also introduced early in the book and I felt it needed to be developed in more detail.
In retrospect, I believe I struggled with the actual term used as “assumptions” as it has always had a negative connotation to me. Who hasn’t heard the phrase, “When you assume you make and ass out of you and me? ” Regardless, I did recognize that assumptions as introduced are made through communication, making it imperative that effective communication occur to reach valid “assumptions”. As with any ideas or assumptions they can be altered rather quickly by a number of factors that arise. Understanding this and managing them closely will avoid mistakes to having any major or lasting impact.
As employees grow and learn, regardless of rank or title, our assumptions of their abilities might lag or be clouded unless we are constantly communicating. I feel that managing by assumptions can be more effective if you understand who you are dealing with, regardless if you like them personally or not. I also recognize that assumptions can easily be influenced by emotions if it’s not monitored properly. I can recognize my growth as manager significantly in this area. I pride myself on making good assumptions based on factual information available to me.
I value the decision making process more now that I align myself more clearly with upper management than the mind set of line officers. As a first line supervisor I fill in the blanks when the plans and processes have been identified. I recognize the overall need to establish goals and objectives that are clear and measurable but as a first line supervisor I usually find myself making suggestions and providing raw data which is manipulated and interpreted above my position. Chapter six, I read the title and got excited, What is Management and When Are You Managing?
Yes, now we are getting somewhere! I found some truth early on, kind of… Stanley had the position that you learn to be a good manager by managing not by going to school. Before I was promoted years ago I had already obtained my four year degree in Business Management and Organizational Leadership so I felt somewhat prepared. Denial is a nice zip code. Within months of being promoted to Sergeant I was escorted to private meeting room by the two senior officers on my newly appointed team. Truly I don’t remember what they said, but the feeling resonates to this day.
YOU KNOW NOTHING, BE QUIET, LISTEN, LEARN AND THEN MAYBE WE WILL LET YOU LEAD. I felt humbled, they had been respectful but firm and the message was clear…this was going to be much harder than I thought. I agree that it is very unnatural to decide to produce results through others, especially if we’re better qualified to produce them. I had been a “go getter- kick ass and tell my backup to take names” kind of officer. As a supervisor the concept that others were going to produce results for me was foreign, I didn’t even know it existed. Education would have been beneficial at that point but I didn’t learn that in college.
So for that continuing education would have been welcomed, however I may have not been ready to learn the lesson regardless if I had heard it. I loved the management term given in this book. “Management is a mental process of establishing, and then indirectly achieving the right objectives in the right priority sequence and with sufficient resources. ” I have got to admit I felt like that was right on. Over the years I have worked on some level of this definition, but found that at times my priorities were off, or my resources were insufficient or simply the sequence was just not right.
I have absolutely no problem in making a decision, with haste. Now I can’t guarantee that it will be a correct decision but as the years pass and the management process becomes more clear my assumptions become more accurate. Of course we should all be tweaking assumptions constantly. Recently our organization has been revamping tons of policies, to streamline and make things more efficient. One policy stands out when I think if this management term. As a patrol division we now have a written policy that says that no team can drop below the minimum staffing requirement of six officers.
As a patrol supervisor my current team only has seven officers assigned with one deployed over seas. Immediately the problem should be apparent. Each officer is required to flex four hours each pay period, attend training, mange overtime, and ensure vacation time is not carried over. I constantly hear other sergeants complaining that they are below staffing and that they can not operate their teams effectively. They constantly deny leave and training requests which only discourages the officers and causes dissent.
I strive not to bring any attention to my team’s situation because if you provide a problem to another manager they are going to solve it, but probably not to your liking. I simply flex my team out in the early hours of the morning when there’s minimal, to no call load, and they’re tired anyway. I communicate with the traffic unit supervisor to supplement traffic officers to allow my officers time to attend training. Rarely does a traffic officer have to pick up a call but it allows me not to violate the policy intentionally.
I understand that resources are limited and I know my commanders are aware of the problem so reiterating it to them seems counter productive and unnecessary because I feel that we have sufficient resources. I was pleased to read the general rule that said, “the better the manager, the fewer resources required to be sufficient. ” Amen. I believe my organization has shifted the mindset to that of one that measures a good manager/supervisor by the results that are being produced indirectly through our managerial resources.
Being encouraged to show ownership while expected to shoulder the responsibility is a welcomed change. I agree that a good manager can manage anything. The next section spoke of determining the difference between stubbornness and persistence; I have to admit I began to sweat. Make no mistake I know that I can be stubborn and quite persistent and no one likes to look in the mirror in the morning. But as I read on I breathed a bit of a sigh. I quickly felt safe, knowing that when I make set an objective that I can’t obtain I will not let it ruin me, and I will bow out, gracefully if possible.
I attribute this to an older brother that beat me at EVERYTHING my whole life. As for persistence, I think the word I use is “heart”. If a person has “heart” they can overcome almost any other deficiencies, from talent to skill and almost common sense (almost). I think of a wonderful officer I had the privilege of supervising right out of the academy. I seem to get the “tough ones” but being that I thrive when challenged, and lavish in chaos, I was pressed to perform. This officer arrived and with a thick accent and introduced himself.
Apparently English was his third language, being from Thailand he struggled with the most basic cultural rituals we enjoy. Even Google was a foreign term. Each night we all worked to help him with everything from his radio traffic to his very poor sense of directions. He would fail, miss the mark, slip, forget, get lost, get made fun of, but he never gave up. He arrived early each night and left late every morning. He smiled, thanked those who helped him graciously, smiled at those who hurt him, smiled at those who he could help and had more heart than any other officer I had ever worked with.
He constantly asked questions, never fell into despair and with his determination made everyone respect him. His fortitude was impressive. He says I was his mentor and I taught him so much but I can’t take credit for making him successful because to be honest he taught me every bit as much. He made my need to learn patience rewarding. Under other circumstances I would have resented someone that needed so much assistance to simply function as a first responder. He showed me it was worth the time and effort to give people all you can to help lift them up.
He made that lesson for me digestible, even enjoyable. I am proud of the officer he is today, so proud I’m writing about him years later while working on a ten page college paper on management. So as the book progresses Brent is starting to show his managers that he can make good assumptions. He values and encourages communications. He strives to include and share his thought process with his staff. Now this is certainly a new concept at my organization. Initially when my Chief would begin to explain his thought process I would grimace thinking that when he finished he was going to yell, “There ya happy! But he never did instead, he looked at me and would ask what I thought. I remember having to condition myself to be prepared to actually participate in the process instead of simply walking away wondering what in God’s good name is rolling around in that little mans beady little mind. I thought that very thing quite frequently under my old Chief. I on the other hand had been chastised for explaining myself too much and giving too much information to my officers. Apparently just telling them to do something was suppose to be sufficient since they were being compensated so heavily financially.
I felt that if your subordinates and supervisors for that matter, knew your frame of mind and your thought process they could better manage their “assumptions” (hope you’re proud of me for using the term properly). In turn they could predict your decisions more quickly and learn to make better ones themselves as a result. Span of control was a relevant topic that I found mid way through. Recently our organization was restructured, removing three captains from the top of our command structure. As a first line supervisor I was not effected drastically however my supervisor has shifted completely away from his prior position.
With no lieutenants on the patrol shift I find myself with more p of control, unfortunately I feel my support is all but gone. I report to someone I rarely see and no longer have immediate feedback. I recognize the change was necessary and I am striving to find a balance. As for Brent by this point he’s gotten the managers in his corner, he‘s taking calculated risks, or should I say managing effectively by assumptions. His leadership has been almost too perfect in my opinion. No big blunders he never misspoke and was always right. After supervising for twelve years I’m going to call the flag.
I recognize that my Chief is a good manager because he says that everyone makes mistakes and all you have to do is sit down and watch for a while and you’ll see one. Maximizing Your Leverage with Direct Producers seemed like a lofty way to say, get your people to work for you. The title was a little pretentious but the chapter was actually one of my favorites. As first line supervisors I’ve grown to simply accept that many direct producers (patrol officers) will never develop a good understanding of management so I work towards building the relationship between them and myself to bridge the gap.
I have always excelled and developing loyal relationships based on mutual trust. Unfortunately when trust, the foundation for me is missing, the relationship is essentially doomed. It will be superficial and dysfunctional. For this reason I hold honesty, trust, and moral fortitude in the highest regards as I develop relationships with my co-workers. I feel these three ingredients are our water, oxygen and food we need to survive. Regardless if subordinates understand why your asking them to perform a task, they will perform it for no other reason than you have demonstrated your dedicated to their survival.
I have learned over the years that I am not responsible for their happiness that is their responsibility. There was a very interesting couple of paragraphs that outlined the differences between supervisors and managers and he hit the nail on the head when he discussed the first line producers view of the two. It is like the twilight zone. I know that my officers see the sergeants as part of the command staff, however, command staff see sergeants more aligned with the officers. This does pose a difficult position for sergeants who are continuously left out of the communication loop.
I always say if you want me to manage your rumors you have to feed me some valid information. Without that, I’m forced to manage rumors by more misinformation. At least I can mange my own rumors better than those of others. As a first line manager I have finally figured out that my primary duty is to make my officers feel important. I think that could have summed up that chapter. Considering I have a few pages left I’ll expound a bit since I feel this is where my forte lies. Again, twelve years ago I was clueless; I thought if I could show the guys how great I was they would want to follow me.
Instead I learned that if I show them how great they are they will follow me. The biggest compliment I got was when an officer said, in shift change, that he would run into a brick wall if I asked him to. He added that he figured the wall would fall because why else would I order him to go. I was flattered that he would blindly follow my order, however he also indicated that he respected how I make assumptions (I used it again, gotta be worth 10 points). As an inexperienced supervisor I was concerned about each person liking me, the person they were interacting with. I would adjust for each individual subordinate accordingly.
I reflect back and can say that that it was not in the way of a servant leader but more of a teenager who wanted to be liked and accepted. With the years I learned that I was more effective when I was myself. I am a Christian, wife, mother of four, who happens to hold a position at an organization that requires me to guide, teach, and hold myself and others accountable for our actions. That simplified life drastically. I stay enthusiastic about my career, usually. I never ask anyone to do something I’m not prepared to do myself and I accept responsibility when I make mistakes.
I respect those who handle my mistake effectively and use them for what they are, chances to learn. I find disciplining subordinates exciting and challenging. Nothing satisfies me more than to handle a discipline session so effectively that the subordinate still wants to engage me in a personal conversation. The Motivation of Inspiration, deep. I mentioned that our organization went though a drastic structure change recently. I also mentioned that I don’t have the luxury of a lieutenant working with me. On weekends I am alone and during the peak hours of 4:30pm to 7:30pm I have no assistance.
The lieutenants developed their own hours and selected 7:00am-3:00pm and 7:00pm to 3:00am. However with the limited supervisors their schedules are constantly changing. Upon returning from a 6 weeks recovery from a foot operation I attempted to meet with my lieutenant on several occasions. I wanted to get an official update on how my team had done along with an update on what was going on with the organization. I had been away from work and had developed some doubts about my current career path. After a few days my lieutenant learned that I was meeting with someone above his rank.
He came to me and I confirmed that he had not made me a priority. Frustrated and betrayed he told me that making me “happy was not his job”. I corrected him and assured him he was not responsible for my happiness but was responsible for my career development. I asked him what he felt his priorities were and he wiggled his finger towards the sky in a circle and said, “this”. Not clear on his term I asked him to define it. He again said, this, the organization. I asked him to define who he felt made up the organization. He got even more frustrated and raised his voice.
I asked him to lower his voice and improve his argument. He said he didn’t know what I wanted from him, adding that I was a sergeant he knew could handle anything. I explained it like this to him. My job is to check and fill my guys’ gas tanks as needed each shift. His job, was to fill mine, and I was running on fumes. I conceded that I was a hybrid and could go farther than others but eventually would need fuel. Now, that doesn’t mean that anything is wrong with my vehicle it just needs to be maintained. I think he understood and we both agreed to keep working on communicating with each other.
I also believe that people will rise to our expectations of them, another key element in motivating others. I have seen officers that struggle with other supervisors arrive on my shift defeated, ready to continue their struggles. I like to immediately empower them with some responsibilities. Certainly something they can succeed at, and then shower them with praise. The cycle then continues, elevating their tasks and responsibilities exponentially until they believe in the person I have told them I see. I had an officer who struggled with making decisions and his self esteem was shattered with all the discipline he’d received.
Being a very emotional person, he took discipline from his prior supervisor as a personal attack. I immediately gave him the responsibility to inspect vehicles when he arrived on my shift. At first he called with question after question. I encouraged him to complete all his inspections and upon completion we would address any questions he had. Inevitably in meeting with the other seven officers on his team many of his questions were resolved and he arrived with few questions and the completed inspections. I praised his resourcefulness and assigned him the task for the upcoming month.
He was excited to have a leadership role and began to act accordingly. With time he grew to be confident his decision making abilities and learned to accept discipline sessions from me as learning opportunities. Now this leads me into the marginal employee. They are out there and what a pain! I have learned much when dealing with this mess. For years I had a marginal employee working under me. She was not only marginal but she was high maintenance. Now to correct that statement, she was capable of working hard if she was “happy”. So what did the under educated but highly experienced supervisor that I was do, that’s right I kept her “happy”.
I managed her emotionally to motivate her professionally. Sounds easy enough huh? Unfortunately maintaining her happiness was utterly draining and was a daily time consuming venture. But I felt that proving that I could get impressive results out of a marginal employee would validate my ability to supervise. Boy was I dead wrong. I remember Brent giving the lesson in the book that brought it all back. Put those problems right back on them he explained, remove that unnecessary stress from yourself. I was moved away from that officer and she tanked with the next supervisor.
Of course she blamed him but I knew better. In the last month the teams were again moved around and after two years she would be reassigned to me. Believing that I could save her from her impending termination, if she could not turn it around, she began our first conversation with how happy she was to be working with me again, blaming her last supervisors for all her problems. She then admitted that she was upset with me because I had not accepted her Facebook request. I took that very moment to make the path ahead very clear to her. I told her in no uncertain terms that I would not be managing her happiness.
I would however be holding her accountable for her actions. I also told her that my Facebook was not a topic for discussion. She chose to become insulted instead of enlightened. Within three weeks of being reassigned to my shift she resigned after sixteen years. I know I was not the reason, but I also feel she lost the comfort she was envisioning on my team. I must say that although personally I liked this person, as I supervisor I was ecstatic she chose to leave the organization. Conveniently a few chapters later I came across a section to deal with problem employees.
I felt enamored with the comment that marginal employees are the greatest waste of time, money and opportunities within an organization. I have learned that first hand. Being that I have reached ten pages and don’t want to be too much of an overachiever I want to focus the criticizing of others and termination of employees. I was very surprised when I read that Barbara was scared to fire Chuck. Barbara’s character development didn’t foreshadow that insecurity. Regardless Brent knew exactly what to say and was able to convince Barbara to handle a situation immediately after their pep talk.
Now I can go on and on about several other topics that arose in the latter pages (especially Stress Transfer) but I’m going to close with this, I enjoyed the lessons shared in this book. However I wouldn’t recommend anyone read this book unless they are borrowing it from me. My book has received full scrutiny and I have highlighted all the pertinent lessons, motivational quotes, managerial theories and terms so there is no need to read all the filler. By the way, I truly think that Brent wears Superman underwear everyday.