Well thank you for confirming my own suspicions that strong women are ALWAYS underestimated. Especially by the media. And that “early staffers” may just not have been at the level where they’re prepared to tackle today’s challenges as grown women have already been doing for or decades. It’s pretty normal.
Yes the millennial crowd gets the short shrift a lot of the time. Yes the Jones Generation, like Boomers, can be perceived as a bit bossy by the youngs but damn, it’s right there in the complaint-“boss”-y. What would they be saying if she just didn’t give a shit?
But it was the quoted comments that did it for me-‘she was prepared!’ ‘She makes us tell her why!’ She wasn’t abusive, wasn’t seen as asking them to do anything she wouldn’t. But as usual, the media do what they do and mislead everyone in the process.
““It’s stressful to brief her, because she’s read all the materials, has annotated it and is prepared to talk through it,” said one former aide.
“You can’t come to the vice president and just ask her to do something,” said another staffer. “You need to have a why.”
Thank you for picking up on this. I know WP was scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to find something negative about VP Harris, but to me it just makes her competent.
I’d be the first to say, someone as focused and as driven as Harris would probably terrify me as a boss - that is why I do not work as an aide to vice presidents, in Harris role things like ‘knowing why I am meeting these people’ isn’t optional.
It’s a good insight into why women, especially black women are so often maligned as having ‘staffing issues’ when all to often they just expect basic competence from their staff.
Any first year associate in a halfway decent law firm understands that half-assedness is not tolerated in a legal environment. VP Harris began her working career in a high-stakes legal environment, where she wielded the awesome power of the state and there would have been little or no margin of error. This is exactly the person I want sitting in the Oval Office making hard decisions. If her staff can't cut it, well, they can find jobs elsewhere.
The nerve of that woman demanding that her staff do the job they're paid to do. I specify woman because the same criticism was directed at Amy Klobuchar. Men are decisive and run a tight ship. Women are demanding shrews.
I once ran the office of a law firm. I expected nothing more from the staff than I did from myself. The lawyers were another story. I expected nothing from them at all, but they expected a lot from me.
That's reasonable. They had a lot at stake. Their reputations, their licences, their livelihood, for which they had spent years studying and schmoozing. If I lost my job, I could get another. If they lost their everything, they had nothing.
Which seems to be the story with almost every lawyer/fly who had the misfortune of entering Trump's sticky lair.
I'm assuming that these whinging staff members are not holdovers from the previous shitshow of an administration. They should have understood what the job was going in, had done at least some research before handing in their resumes that Harris was a no-nonsense boss, that she expected that the work be done correctly, on time, and that you understood the task well enough to be able to justify your choices.
If they couldn't do that, they didn't belong on her staff, and deserved to be questioned the way they were.
Also, it's likely that Harris is checking and questioning their work so they'll do.a better job next time, not out of some inherent malice.
"...something I’ve noticed is that young white employees, even from the most liberal backgrounds, chafe at taking orders from people of color, especially women."
Stephen, you nailed it! As a senior-level manager for more than 30 years, I've experienced dismayed comments (to my face) about working for a Black woman as well as resentful passive aggression. And all involved would swear they were "liberals." Fortunately, I've had good experiences too.
“She stresses me out because she expects me to know my shit that I put together and bring to her” is quite a take. I mean, I sometimes get stressed before I give a presentation (over)thinking about questions that might be asked, but I *am* fairly prepared to answer those questions, because it’s my work. It’s also science so there is the possibility of “that guy” all the time, but usually someone is there to back me up if a question veers too far off course.
So what I’m reading is that Harris was told to seal up the leaks, which she did. Years later former employees are whining to the press. Hmmm 🤔 is there any relation between these two events?
Good grief. I was on the board of a PTA council, and there would be one person who would constantly question stuff. Maaaybeee she came off as abrasive, but ya know what? A lot of times she was right to ask those questions. Some people on the board automatically got defensive and would try to shoot her comments down, but I got to the point where I could appreciate that she kept us on our toes and made us a better organization.
So, for the VP of the US (or any of the positions Harris has had) to basically say, "tell me why this is the right thing to do" is really just making the best use of her time.
I always had to back up my work product with analyses and explanations. If one can’t answer that why question in a logical manner why are you working for the VP? Find a job where “have a nice day” is all you need to say.
No matter how idiotic trump is, and no matter how lazy he is, it's just trump being trump, at least as far as the legacy media is concerned. But he's a rich white male, so he can be stupid, lazy, and even criminal, and is treated with respect, which he does not deserve. He also gets the benefit of the doubt, no matter how awful his is.
Harris, on the other hand, has to continually prove herself over and over, and is never given the benefit of the doubt. She gets no respect, and every little thing that she does wrong is magnified to a national "scandal." She's Black and a woman, so is dancing backwards, in high heels, and with a ball and chain, but somehow, she continues to dance gracefully. It's not just driving trump nuts, but the legacy media, cons (I refuse to call them conservatives, as they are anything but), and some white "liberals."
🥱🥱🥱
Well thank you for confirming my own suspicions that strong women are ALWAYS underestimated. Especially by the media. And that “early staffers” may just not have been at the level where they’re prepared to tackle today’s challenges as grown women have already been doing for or decades. It’s pretty normal.
Yes the millennial crowd gets the short shrift a lot of the time. Yes the Jones Generation, like Boomers, can be perceived as a bit bossy by the youngs but damn, it’s right there in the complaint-“boss”-y. What would they be saying if she just didn’t give a shit?
But it was the quoted comments that did it for me-‘she was prepared!’ ‘She makes us tell her why!’ She wasn’t abusive, wasn’t seen as asking them to do anything she wouldn’t. But as usual, the media do what they do and mislead everyone in the process.
““It’s stressful to brief her, because she’s read all the materials, has annotated it and is prepared to talk through it,” said one former aide.
“You can’t come to the vice president and just ask her to do something,” said another staffer. “You need to have a why.”
Thank you for picking up on this. I know WP was scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to find something negative about VP Harris, but to me it just makes her competent.
I’d be the first to say, someone as focused and as driven as Harris would probably terrify me as a boss - that is why I do not work as an aide to vice presidents, in Harris role things like ‘knowing why I am meeting these people’ isn’t optional.
It’s a good insight into why women, especially black women are so often maligned as having ‘staffing issues’ when all to often they just expect basic competence from their staff.
Any first year associate in a halfway decent law firm understands that half-assedness is not tolerated in a legal environment. VP Harris began her working career in a high-stakes legal environment, where she wielded the awesome power of the state and there would have been little or no margin of error. This is exactly the person I want sitting in the Oval Office making hard decisions. If her staff can't cut it, well, they can find jobs elsewhere.
The nerve of that woman demanding that her staff do the job they're paid to do. I specify woman because the same criticism was directed at Amy Klobuchar. Men are decisive and run a tight ship. Women are demanding shrews.
Hitting the nails on the heads as always, Stephen!
I once ran the office of a law firm. I expected nothing more from the staff than I did from myself. The lawyers were another story. I expected nothing from them at all, but they expected a lot from me.
That's reasonable. They had a lot at stake. Their reputations, their licences, their livelihood, for which they had spent years studying and schmoozing. If I lost my job, I could get another. If they lost their everything, they had nothing.
Which seems to be the story with almost every lawyer/fly who had the misfortune of entering Trump's sticky lair.
Ignore the fools; vote blue. 💙
𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 “𝘢𝘴𝘬 𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨” 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵 𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.
Who do they think she is, Henry Blake?
Well, now I'm glad I never watched Veep.
The Martin Sheen part tho... I never watched it. ;)
I'm assuming that these whinging staff members are not holdovers from the previous shitshow of an administration. They should have understood what the job was going in, had done at least some research before handing in their resumes that Harris was a no-nonsense boss, that she expected that the work be done correctly, on time, and that you understood the task well enough to be able to justify your choices.
If they couldn't do that, they didn't belong on her staff, and deserved to be questioned the way they were.
Also, it's likely that Harris is checking and questioning their work so they'll do.a better job next time, not out of some inherent malice.
If you never get questioned on your footnotes, why are you including footnotes?
They're either relevant or they aren't.
"...something I’ve noticed is that young white employees, even from the most liberal backgrounds, chafe at taking orders from people of color, especially women."
Stephen, you nailed it! As a senior-level manager for more than 30 years, I've experienced dismayed comments (to my face) about working for a Black woman as well as resentful passive aggression. And all involved would swear they were "liberals." Fortunately, I've had good experiences too.
“She stresses me out because she expects me to know my shit that I put together and bring to her” is quite a take. I mean, I sometimes get stressed before I give a presentation (over)thinking about questions that might be asked, but I *am* fairly prepared to answer those questions, because it’s my work. It’s also science so there is the possibility of “that guy” all the time, but usually someone is there to back me up if a question veers too far off course.
So what I’m reading is that Harris was told to seal up the leaks, which she did. Years later former employees are whining to the press. Hmmm 🤔 is there any relation between these two events?
I think the former employees quoted in the article are from her time as a prosecutor in California, not as VP.
Good grief. I was on the board of a PTA council, and there would be one person who would constantly question stuff. Maaaybeee she came off as abrasive, but ya know what? A lot of times she was right to ask those questions. Some people on the board automatically got defensive and would try to shoot her comments down, but I got to the point where I could appreciate that she kept us on our toes and made us a better organization.
So, for the VP of the US (or any of the positions Harris has had) to basically say, "tell me why this is the right thing to do" is really just making the best use of her time.
I always had to back up my work product with analyses and explanations. If one can’t answer that why question in a logical manner why are you working for the VP? Find a job where “have a nice day” is all you need to say.
No matter how idiotic trump is, and no matter how lazy he is, it's just trump being trump, at least as far as the legacy media is concerned. But he's a rich white male, so he can be stupid, lazy, and even criminal, and is treated with respect, which he does not deserve. He also gets the benefit of the doubt, no matter how awful his is.
Harris, on the other hand, has to continually prove herself over and over, and is never given the benefit of the doubt. She gets no respect, and every little thing that she does wrong is magnified to a national "scandal." She's Black and a woman, so is dancing backwards, in high heels, and with a ball and chain, but somehow, she continues to dance gracefully. It's not just driving trump nuts, but the legacy media, cons (I refuse to call them conservatives, as they are anything but), and some white "liberals."