#Letstalk (unless it's about our own employees)

[RougeUnderoos]

I haven't been keeping up with the ins and outs of this particular case so can't comment on that, but I am surprised how many people on the internet are surprised and bitter that the cell phone company hasn't solved mental illness in Canada.

It's obviously an advertising/PR opportunity, but who cares? If they donate real dollars to real causes and organizations, why do people bitch about it?

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I can sort of understand what Resurrection is saying in that the optics of this look pretty bad. If she hadn't requested the time off, which was due to her mental illness, do they likely still fire her without cause?

I can only speak to how I do things at the organizations I've worked for, but Bell is a pretty large corporation and I wouldn't be surprised if they had a similar process in place for terminations.

To terminate a non-union, non-probationary employee who has to be paid out severance is a pretty big deal. If a line manager called me and told me that he needed to have a term letter from me in this situation in 1 hour regarding an employee we have never discussed before, I would tell him to go pound sand. A lot of stuff goes into most terminations in these cases: discussions with senior mgmt, discussions with the employee (sometimes), review with legal. If she was probationary, I would give a different opinion, but since she was paid out severance, it doesn't look that way.

Most organizations don't enjoy eating the cost of severance for an employee who no longer works there, rehiring, retraining, etc, all based on the whim of a manager with no investigation.

It's possible this was a "final straw", but even if that was the case there is no way this employee's future employment status wasn't being actively discussed between HR and senior management.

If the line manager did this on his own (which is possible), they might be the next person getting a letter.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

I can only speak to how I do things at the organizations I've worked for, but Bell is a pretty large corporation and I wouldn't be surprised if they had a similar process in place for terminations.

To terminate a non-union, non-probationary employee who has to be paid out severance is a pretty big deal. If a line manager called me and told me that he needed to have a term letter from me in this situation in 1 hour regarding an employee we have never discussed before, I would tell him to go pound sand. A lot of stuff goes into most terminations in these cases: discussions with senior mgmt, discussions with the employee (sometimes), review with legal. If she was probationary, I would give a different opinion, but since she was paid out severance, it doesn't look that way.

Most organizations don't enjoy eating the cost of severance for an employee who no longer works there, rehiring, retraining, etc, all based on the whim of a manager with no investigation.

How "hands-on" would Bell media be for this type of radio station? Of course they would have their policies, but in terms of chain-of-command, I doubt there's really more than her supervisor making any type of decision.

The town has a population of 5000, with 4000 of those having a French mother tongue. A per capita income of 20k. She was already studying at University, probably meaning she was part time. I mean three weeks severance may have been pretty much nothing, and the decision would have come down to her supervisor.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Short answer: outside of a union environment there is no requirement whatsoever for sign-off on the part of the person being terminated.

However, some companies will include a settlement agreement with your severance if it's a decent chunk of change - e.g., here's all the information about your package, in terms of dollars, what support we're providing you (sometimes counseling), how your pension works if you've got one, possibly a buyout of options. Then they get you to sign off on it as acceptable to you and release the company from liability so that they know you aren't going to go get a lawyer and sue them for providing you with a severance package that's less than you were entitled to.

We don't need a sign off from anyone being terminated (union). We do on progressive discipline (or mark down refuse to sign), but not the termination itself.

Could differ between CBAs, but it is awkward to sign your own term.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

At the end of the day, the reason why people think Let's Talk is important, is because mental illness is often looked down upon. It is also entirely possible that Bell is a totally hypocritical corporation and don't practice what they preach.

It is all too common in the corporate world for people to be let go because helping them with their problems is too time consuming. It is also incredibly common for people who use the help available to them, like disability, to be blacklisted by their company as a drain and unproductive.

Is that what happened here? I don't know and honestly i'm not sure I care. I just think it is important that we reinforce how terrible it is for people to not realize that some of these issues are very serious and kicking someone when they're down by firing them when they already struggle with mental health issues is pretty scummy thing to do.

I don't even care that making mental health more available will encourage more slackers and scammers to abuse the system. But until the people stop judging their employees and their coworkers and demonizing legitimate health issues, we are going to continue down this path and it is sad.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Could differ between CBAs, but it is awkward to sign your own term.

Yup, hence my caveat of "outside a union environment" - my understanding is that it depends what's in the CBA, but I don't know much about it so I didn't want to comment.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

How "hands-on" would Bell media be for this type of radio station? Of course they would have their policies, but in terms of chain-of-command, I doubt there's really more than her supervisor making any type of decision.

The town has a population of 5000, with 4000 of those having a French mother tongue. A per capita income of 20k. She was already studying at University, probably meaning she was part time. I mean three weeks severance may have been pretty much nothing, and the decision would have come down to her supervisor.

That site would almost assuredly have an HR rep assigned to it, even if it was remote support from a large city, specifically to provide guidance for situations like this.

While the $ amount might not be much, being given severance (as opposed to nothing) is usually an admission from the company that they recognize that this is a permanent employee, which entitles them to some rights in the workplace. The reason HR gets involved is to try and avoid legal blowback during tenuous situations like this.

[Hack&Lube]

What is the point of "Let's Talk" we received a mysterious package from Bell full of T-Shirts, Pins, Touques, cell phone wipes, cards, badges, and rubber wrist bands all branded "Let's Talk".

It might have cost Bell a fortune. This is ridiculous. You can't solve mental illness by spending a million dollars on corporate swag boxes branded with your logos.

What's the point of this???

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

What is the point of "Let's Talk" we received a mysterious package from Bell full of T-Shirts, Pins, Touques, cell phone wipes, cards, badges, and rubber wrist bands all branded "Let's Talk".

It might have cost Bell a fortune. This is ridiculous. You can't solve mental illness by spending a million dollars on corporate swag boxes branded with your logos.

What's the point of this???

It's to reduce the stigmatism of mental health issues and to have it treated like other illnesses. For example no one in this thread has said it's ridiculous that she needed a two week vacation becaus she was feeling a little sad.

5 years ago I suspect you would have. I think it's been quite successful at destigmitizing it and having it treated like an illness

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

What is the point of "Let's Talk" we received a mysterious package from Bell full of T-Shirts, Pins, Touques, cell phone wipes, cards, badges, and rubber wrist bands all branded "Let's Talk".

It might have cost Bell a fortune. This is ridiculous. You can't solve mental illness by spending a million dollars on corporate swag boxes branded with your logos.

What's the point of this???

Awareness and trying to get rid of the stigma of mental illnesses like depression.

The fact you had to ask that question is the exact reason for the campaign.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Awareness and trying to get rid of the stigma of mental illnesses like depression.

The fact you had to ask that question is the exact reason for the campaign.

Huh? Where did he say that he associated mental illness as being a stigma?

More like it is normal to wonder if Bell's intentions truly are altruistic or if they're doing this for the PR. Furthermore, what they're doing may actually be ineffective or worse counterproductive. Maybe they could have saved the millions they spent on swag and donated it to a non-profit mental health initiative. You know, since treatment centres are getting closed left and right making it harder for all people, but especially the underprivileged, to get proper help.

I'd love to know what Bell is actually doing to help with the treatment of mental illness. Awareness sounds great, but has very little substance.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

What is the point of "Let's Talk" we received a mysterious package from Bell full of T-Shirts, Pins, Touques, cell phone wipes, cards, badges, and rubber wrist bands all branded "Let's Talk".

It might have cost Bell a fortune. This is ridiculous. You can't solve mental illness by spending a million dollars on corporate swag boxes branded with your logos.

What's the point of this???

Hey....save me some of those cell phone wipes...

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Locke

Hey....save me some of those cell phone wipes...

No problem. I'll bring you some with my yearly mental episode (taxes).

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Huh? Where did he say that he associated mental illness as being a stigma?

More like it is normal to wonder if Bell's intentions truly are altruistic or if they're doing this for the PR. Furthermore, what they're doing may actually be ineffective or worse counterproductive. Maybe they could have saved the millions they spent on swag and donated it to a non-profit mental health initiative. You know, since treatment centres are getting closed left and right making it harder for all people, but especially the underprivileged, to get proper help.

I'd love to know what Bell is actually doing to help with the treatment of mental illness. Awareness sounds great, but has very little substance.

Are you serious? He said you can't solve mental illness with a bunch of tshirts and other items.

What an idiotic thing to say.

Bell isn't trying to solve metal illness with their slogan or t shirts or posters.

They're trying to get rid of the stigma of mental illness and letting people know it's ok to "talk" about what they're feeling.

So much ignorance.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

So you're saying tshirts can solve mental illness? Is that why his comment was idiotic?

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by GGG

It's to reduce the stigmatism of mental health issues and to have it treated like other illnesses. For example no one in this thread has said it's ridiculous that she needed a two week vacation becaus she was feeling a little sad.

5 years ago I suspect you would have. I think it's been quite successful at destigmitizing it and having it treated like an illness

The point is that most of the swag doesn't have any information or context. It's just wrist bands, clothing, buttons, etc. with the talk logo and Bell corporate logo. It just looks like Bell putting their logos on things. I don't see how the money spent on this stuff helps with mental illness.

If Bell had instead donated the money to mental health organizations or perhaps sponsored mental health advocates to go to companies and give lectures while simultaneously handing out this product, it might have helped. Instead, Bell just mailed boxes of swag to different companies with their logos emblazoned on stuff. I asked around the office and nobody had any idea what it was, they were just grabbing free t-shirts. I wouldn't have thought twice about it if I didn't see the thread here on CP.

To me, (and without context or background) it doesn't look altruistic. It sounds more like a marketing slogan to get people to purchase more Bell cell phone plans in order to talk more.

*
*Not my hairy arm.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

So you're saying tshirts can solve mental illness? Is that why his comment was idiotic?

I'm saying bell isn't claiming to solve mental illness. They're promoting awareness to get rid of the stigma of mental illness.

Want me to type slower so you can understand?

Bell is doing a great job at it as well. It's amazing what they're doing.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

To me, (and without context or background) it doesn't look altruistic. It sounds more like a marketing slogan to get people to purchase more Bell cell phone plans in order to talk more.

Basically, yeah. But the commercials are pretty good. They have done numerous things to actually raise awareness effectively, it's just the "box 'o stuff" approach that isn't well thought out.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

The point is that most of the swag doesn't have any information or context. It's just wrist bands, clothing, buttons, etc. with the talk logo and Bell corporate logo. It just looks like Bell putting their logos on things. I don't see how the money spent on this stuff helps with mental illness.

If Bell had instead donated the money to mental health organizations or perhaps sponsored mental health advocates to go to companies and give lectures while simultaneously handing out this product, it might have helped. Instead, Bell just mailed boxes of swag to different companies with their logos emblazoned on stuff. I asked around the office and nobody had any idea what it was, they were just grabbing free t-shirts. I wouldn't have thought twice about it if I didn't see the thread here on CP.

To me, (and without context or background) it doesn't look altruistic. It sounds more like a marketing slogan to get people to purchase more Bell cell phone plans in order to talk more.


*Not my hairy arm.

Bell DOES donate to organizations/hospitals and in total have committed over $80 million to the cause.

Instead of posting about something you clearly have no idea about maybe try doing a little research.

Speaking of research, that's another thing Bell does. They donate money to mental health research.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

The point is that most of the swag doesn't have any information or context. It's just wrist bands, clothing, buttons, etc. with the talk logo and Bell corporate logo. It just looks like Bell putting their logos on things. I don't see how the money spent on this stuff helps with mental illness.

If Bell had instead donated the money to mental health organizations or perhaps sponsored mental health advocates to go to companies and give lectures while simultaneously handing out this product, it might have helped. Instead, Bell just mailed boxes of swag to different companies with their logos emblazoned on stuff. I asked around the office and nobody had any idea what it was, they were just grabbing free t-shirts. I wouldn't have thought twice about it if I didn't see the thread here on CP.

To me, (and without context or background) it doesn't look altruistic. It sounds more like a marketing slogan to get people to purchase more Bell cell phone plans in order to talk more.

*
*Not my hairy arm.

No company does things like this for truly altruistic motivation. If they did it would be #LetsTalk.

It doesn't demean the work or results from raising awareness of donating millions to mental health causes. I'm not sure why people need to be negative about this. It's getting thousands of people to open up and talk about something that is highly stigmatized while donating millions. On what planet should we complain about that? Where's the negative part we should be worried about?

Every year we fundraise for the women's shelter and you bet I want my picture in the paper with recognition of what we did. It's that wrong? We put a massive amount of work into raising that money and yes I want customers to associate my business with that action.


Edit: just to clarify, I'm not correcting this at you buy at all the negative Nancy's that want to somehow make this negative because bell wants credit for the campaign