Advertisement - Click to support our sponsors.
Honolulu Lite
IN the old days, when an office worker went off the rails and attacked co-workers, it was called "going postal," a completely unfair description because the episodes usually happened at lightning speed and "lightning speed" is not something the U.S. Postal Service is known for. Anger at desks
latest rageThere was a time when the Post Office did seem to have more than its share of disgruntled heavily armed employees who became stressed out by endless monotonous, mundane work. But thanks to the booming economy, there are all kinds of new jobs that offer endless monotonous, mundane work so that the Post Office no longer has a monopoly on workplace violence.
This is no joking matter, especially in Hawaii, where we witnessed an office homicidal rampage just two years ago.
Today, such incidents are called "desk rage," as if the act of sitting behind a desk triggers some brain-chemical reaction that causes one to lose it. The problem is that by giving violent incidents a cute name like "desk rage" and "road rage," you tend to focus on roads and desks instead of the true underlying problem: a lot of people are just really ticked off about their lives and it only takes the slightest annoyance to set them off.
Desk rage is something of a growth industry. So it's not surprising that entrepreneurs are moving in to capitalize on it.
Two Tennessee psychologists have come up with a 20-minute, multiple-choice test designed to weed out job candidates who are prone to desk rage. I was surprised to find that the first question is not: Having to take a 20-minute, multiple-choice test to determine if you are a psychopath makes you want to A) kill someone; B) kill everyone; C) kill the interviewer; D) live in harmony with everyone in the world.
Here's an actual question from the test:
"The old saying, 'an eye for an eye,' means that if someone hurts you, then you should hurt that person back ... Which of the following is the biggest problem with the 'eye for an eye' plan? A) It tells people to 'turn the other cheek'; B) It offers no way to settle a conflict in a friendly manner; C) It can only be used at certain times of the year; D) People have to wait until they are attacked before they can strike."
See the problem? No one is dumb enough to answer "D," which clearly implies you favor preemptive strikes over just getting along. The people they are trying to identify are crazy, not stupid.
The test's developers believe it would have have singled out a software tester who opened fire at a Massachusetts computer firm in December, killing seven co-workers. But say you gave the test to some employees and one of them showed signs of extreme anger, paranoia and contempt for authority. What are you going to do? Fire the guy? Hope they pass out the Kevlar vests before that pink slip is sent out?
The tests are mainly used to screen prospective employees, which means the person with a serious mental problem won't be hired -- by the company giving the test. He will be hired by SOMEONE ELSE. That, of course, will lead to hairy lawsuits. If one company knows someone is a psycho and doesn't tell another company that hires the person, is the testing company liable?
The test costs employers $5 per test taker, so the incentive for the test developers isn't wholly altruistic. In fact, they'll probably get filthy rich off these tests. But that doesn't make me angry or anything. Really.
Charles Memminger, winner of
National Society of Newspaper Columnists
awards in 1994 and 1992, writes "Honolulu Lite"
Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
Write to him at the Honolulu Star-Bulletin,
P.O. Box 3080, Honolulu, 96802
or send E-mail to cmemminger@starbulletin.com.
The Honolulu Lite online archive is at:
https://archives.starbulletin.com/lite