Can you believe this shit?

[cigar no baka]

I'm definitely on the shit list for signatures at work. I had a few really funny ones that were in no way inappropriate but I made the shit list. So here's what I sent in, followed by the response that I got. The work environment is so stiff-necked and controlling that it irritates me in little ways, this being one of them.



Is this an appropriate signature I can use? I found it quite uplifting.

Good Irish Thought for the Week
There are 4 things you must never do: lie, steal, cheat or drink.
But if you must lie, lie in the arms of the one you love. If you must steal,
steal away from bad company. If you must cheat, cheat death. And if you must
drink, drink in the moments that take your breath away.
-- Brianne Kelly Darragh


My position is that our e-mail system is meant for business communication,
not to spread on own personal outlook on life. Were it up to me, there
would be no signature messages, but I am realistic enough to know there are
a lot of people out there who want to use them. Of those people who do
though, they are usually short and do have at least an indirect business
relationship (i.e. something referring to a departmental initiative, goal,
etc.).

I do not feel a signature line that is longer than most e-mails, and that
has no direct or indirect relationship to business is appropriate.

[JFellows]

No offense - but what exactly is so unreasonable about that? A company can function as formally as it wants to. If you were required to wear a full suit and tie to work every day, and wanted instead to wear khakis and a polo shirt, a company would be nowhere near out of line in asking you to conform to the dress code. The same applies with correspondences, particularly since email is quickly replacing standard paper letters. If you don't like the policy, then petition it to someone higher up than that guy. Or, just quit. Just my two cents.

[Shelby07]

I agree with Jon on this one. The work place is a place of business. Emails are sent both internally and externally and once sent they become a legal company document. It is quite appropriate for the company to set guidelines.

[ReV]

well hell, i got your back... seems a little rediculous to me... e-mail is e-mail... it's not formal communication... thats not your letter head... and i mean, maybe if you do keep up contact via e-mail with clients, you shouldn't have anything too outragous, by the one you posted up there seems fine. If I'm the type of client that gets insulted by you sending me an e-mail with a informal sig line, i'm the type of client that gets insulted that you sent me an e-mail to begin with instead of a phone call, letter, fax, or personal visit.... Jon makes a point that it IS up to your boss how exactly they want to run the company, but at the same time, that doesn't make your boss less of a jerk for running the company in an anal manner.

[HersheyWalker]

You choose to use an irish proverb that was put on blast by that movie with Will Smith as the date doctor, making it overly cheesy IMO.

I would agree that if the sig is longer than your average email, you are sending out a time wasters to your clients. Time is money and all that stuff...

[Shelby07]

...e-mail is e-mail... it's not formal communication... thats not your letter head... ...

ReV - You are wrong about this. It's not about having somebody's back. An email is, in fact, an official piece of company documentation when it comes from a company provided account. Individual employee emails have been called into evidence in many cases and stand up as official company documentation whether it is formal or informal email. A business email is not the appropriate place to make a personal statement. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that particular signature. What I am saying is that every company has a right to set standards for what goes into their official documentation. Besides that, ethically I feel that when you agree to work for a company you agree to abide by there practices, procedures and policies. If you disagree with them you have the right to try to change them or quit. But while they are in effect an employee is ethically bound to abide by them.

Besides, a manager would rather do just about anything other than spend their time handling these kind of issues. If a manager said something about an email signature, chances are he or she was directed to do so.

Edit: Yes, I was a technical manager for 13 years for a large Telecom company. I do speak from first hand knowledge and experience.

[JFellows]

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that particular signature. What I am saying is that every company has a right to set standards for what goes into their official documentation. Besides that, ethically I feel that when you agree to work for a company you agree to abide by there practices, procedures and policies. If you disagree with them you have the right to try to change them or quit. But while they are in effect an employee is ethically bound to abide by them.

There we go.

[ashauler]

ReV - You are wrong about this. It's not about having somebody's back. An email is, in fact, an official piece of company documentation when it comes from a company provided account. Individual employee emails have been called into evidence in many cases and stand up as official company documentation whether it is formal or informal email. A business email is not the appropriate place to make a personal statement. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that particular signature. What I am saying is that every company has a right to set standards for what goes into their official documentation. Besides that, ethically I feel that when you agree to work for a company you agree to abide by there practices, procedures and policies. If you disagree with them you have the right to try to change them or quit. But while they are in effect an employee is ethically bound to abide by them.

Besides, a manager would rather do just about anything other than spend their time handling these kind of issues. If a manager said something about an email signature, chances are he or she was directed to do so.

Edit: Yes, I was a technical manager for 13 years for a large Telecom company. I do speak from first hand knowledge and experience.

Absolutely, e-mail is legal documentation which is why most companies that use them regularly have retention policies and content restrictions. If you can believe it, my sig-line that I use here was deemed inappropriate as a "political" statement, so I don't use it any longer and stick with the stuffed shirt contact info. Free speech doesn't exist in the work environment.

[Monk]

I used to have stuff like that in my .sig but keep it only for home now. That's just the way the business world has gone sadly. It is a form of letterhead now. Many businesses use their gateway to add legal disclaimers etc. as well: here is what they add to mine:


-------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: This e-mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail message.

NOTE: Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au(x) destinataire(s) mentionné(s) ci-dessus et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle et/ou dispensée de divulgation aux termes des lois applicables. Si vous avez reçu ce message par erreur, ou s'il ne vous est pas destiné, veuillez le mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et effacer ce courriel.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

-W.

[ReV]

ReV - You are wrong about this. It's not about having somebody's back. An email is, in fact, an official piece of company documentation when it comes from a company provided account. Individual employee emails have been called into evidence in many cases and stand up as official company documentation whether it is formal or informal email. A business email is not the appropriate place to make a personal statement. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that particular signature. What I am saying is that every company has a right to set standards for what goes into their official documentation. Besides that, ethically I feel that when you agree to work for a company you agree to abide by there practices, procedures and policies. If you disagree with them you have the right to try to change them or quit. But while they are in effect an employee is ethically bound to abide by them.

Besides, a manager would rather do just about anything other than spend their time handling these kind of issues. If a manager said something about an email signature, chances are he or she was directed to do so.

Edit: Yes, I was a technical manager for 13 years for a large Telecom company. I do speak from first hand knowledge and experience.

I agknoledged that the company does have the right to conduct itself however it please, if they say you can't have a certain sig in your e-mail, you're obligated to comply... this i know, but i still agree with cigar no baka that its taken too far... it not that his company doesn't have the right to do this, they most certainly do... they also have the right to enforce a shirt and tie dress code for a surveying crew. Sure its a company document, but if your company is informal enough to even allow sig's, they shouldn't be so anal about what they allow. My place of work has a standard sig that all e-mail entail and you don't get to personalize anything... thats fine. BUT, if they allowed personalized sigs, and i picked mine and it wasn't anything too absurd or offensive, i'd be pissed if they told me to change it over and over. Obviously i'd change it... i'm not saying he should fight the power shelby, just agreeing with his statement "The work environment is so stiff-necked"...

[cigar no baka]

Let me add that I am not going to challenge this, but it still irks me. And it is spottily enforced, it's not like there is anyone enforcing it. It seems that if you make the radar, buy happenstance as I did, then you get on the shit list. But you should see some of the e-mails I get with sigs that make my head spin. Selective enforcement grinds my nads.

[cigar no baka]

ReV - You are wrong about this. It's not about having somebody's back. An email is, in fact, an official piece of company documentation when it comes from a company provided account. Individual employee emails have been called into evidence in many cases and stand up as official company documentation whether it is formal or informal email. A business email is not the appropriate place to make a personal statement. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that particular signature. What I am saying is that every company has a right to set standards for what goes into their official documentation. Besides that, ethically I feel that when you agree to work for a company you agree to abide by there practices, procedures and policies. If you disagree with them you have the right to try to change them or quit. But while they are in effect an employee is ethically bound to abide by them.

Besides, a manager would rather do just about anything other than spend their time handling these kind of issues. If a manager said something about an email signature, chances are he or she was directed to do so.

Edit: Yes, I was a technical manager for 13 years for a large Telecom company. I do speak from first hand knowledge and experience.

Of couse I agree to abide by their rules, but as a full-blooded American citizen, i reserve the right to rant and bitch and get it off my chest.

[Shelby07]

Of couse I agree to abide by their rules, but as a full-blooded American citizen, i reserve the right to rant and bitch and get it off my chest.

...as well you should.

[ashauler]

Let me add that I am not going to challenge this, but it still irks me. And it is spottily enforced, it's not like there is anyone enforcing it. It seems that if you make the radar, buy happenstance as I did, then you get on the shit list. But you should see some of the e-mails I get with sigs that make my head spin. Selective enforcement grinds my nads.

That indeed would be a ball buster if some could and some couldn't!! And I bet that if sig tags on e-mails is spottily enforced it not the only thing that is and the work environment would definitely suffer.

The company I work for is privately owned so I am very familiar with having two sets of rules....one for the "family" and one for everybody else.

[Kenyth]

Business Email should have a contact info. signature, period.

As far as family of the owner goes, treat them like board members or executives. They are not directly involved in day to day affairs, but they are in positions of power.

Just my 2 cents.