I have worked for companies both young and old and I have noticed that the policies and procedures of the older companies are more restrictive and decidedly cumbersome. I believe this is chiefly due to the fact that a company is forced to adopt new restrictions each time a problem is identified.
The longer a company is in business, the more problems they overcome in this manner. At some point, their procedures and policies become so numerous that few, if any employees know them all and begin acting and reacting to situations in the most neutral way possible to avoid a possible conflict with a policy that might be buried in there somewhere. A stronger or more decisive action that they would like to take is set aside due to a latent fear that company policy is more important than their individual achievements and contributions to the company and thus they would probably loose their position if they make the wrong move.
2007-03-09
16:08:16
·
3 answers
·
asked by
?
4
in
Politics & Government
➔ Government
In Constitutional Law this is called a chilling effect. When a law causes people to forgo otherwise legal activities because a law could be misinterpreted to restrict that activity. It is perfectly legal for a company’s policies to have a chilling effect on a workers workplace activities, but the same is not true where government is concerned.
I see this same trend in the direction of our culture and our body of law. The civil courts have people scared to help people in crisis situation for fear of being sued by the victim. People gathering legally run from the cops for fear of getting arrested without cause.
Is it time to rewrite our constitution, or do you think we can salvage our nation?
2007-03-09
16:11:24 ·
update #1