Wednesday, 20 April 2022

Costly panic

I must say I sympathise with Kevin Berling, the Kentucky man who told his boss he didn't want a surprise birthday party because he suffered from anxiety and the party might give him a panic attack. His boss took no notice, the surprise party went ahead, and Mr Berling did indeed have a panic attack, forcing him to leave the party. He was later sacked.

He sued the company for discriminating against his disability, and was awarded $450,000 (£346,000) by the jury - $300,000 for emotional distress and $150,000 for lost wages.

The company claimed he had violated a workplace violence policy and that the other employees were the victims, not Mr Berling. The jury thought otherwise.

Clearly there are firms that still have little understanding of mental disorders and refuse to make any allowance for them. They trivialise the problem and force the employee to "soldier on" regardless. A costly mistake in this case.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who dislike surprise birthday parties (or surprise anything come to that) Why should they be compelled to attend and feign enjoyment, if that isn't how they feel? It just amounts to total insensitivity on the part of those other employees who were determined to hold the party whether he liked it or not.

In my lengthy working life I was never subjected to a surprise birthday party. I'm not sure how I would have reacted. Pleased or mortified - or a mixture of both? I was given a surprise leaving ceremony and present at my final workplace, which left me both chuffed and nonplussed - mostly chuffed.

Luckily I'm not prone to panic attacks, and no budget-busting law suits were called for.

22 comments:

  1. I totally sympathise with that man. He made his wishes clear and they decided to simply do what they liked and are now crying over the fact that they've been forced to face what they did.

    I have the misfortune to be born on January 1st, so at midnight on New Year's Eve I was subjected to a drunken mass singing of Happy Birthday and lots of unwelcome kisses from inebriated strangers, as we were invariably out at some NYE function. Again, people elected to tell the DJ or band during the evening that it was my birthday despite me saying that I did not want anyone to do it. I hated it so much, that I've elected to stay home on NYE for the last 20 years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marie: Sad but understandable that you've stayed at home on NYE for so many years. Why do people insist on doing something that a person has explicitly opted out of? And yes, drunken strangers can behave outrageously - while using their drunkenness as a pathetic excuse.

      Delete
  2. Neither during my fairly long working years nor afterwards, have I had to undergo such an experience and I simply cannot understand how one can go into a panic attack when surprised by colleagues.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ramana: Perhaps your colleagues got the idea that you didn't like such surprises? I guess panic attacks can be triggered by all sorts of things, especially in a work situation where you are obliged to "fit in".

      Delete
  3. What a bizarre story all around. What company in this day and age throws birthday parties? And why in the world spend the money if someone doesn’t want one? It’s also interesting that the so-called violence is never explained.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bijoux: Very bizarre, especially the amazing amount of damages. I assume the other employees really wanted a party for their own amusement, and they weren't going to let him "get in the way".

      Indeed, where on earth does violence come into it? Does declining something now amount to violence? A desperate defence by a cornered company.

      Delete
  4. I've had panic attacks and they are not fun. He even informed his boss and his boss still went ahead with it. I'm glad he won the lawsuit for that one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mary: They're not, they're dreadful experiences. I'm surprised none of the other employees had ever had one, or never known someone who had one. Then they'd realise why he wanted to avoid having one.

      Delete
  5. Well done that man, no one should be subject to a workplace party, his request was completely ignored and the company paid the price. They won't do that again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Polly: They'll certainly be licking their wounds after that huge award. Very bold of him to sue the company. A lot of people would have felt they just had to suck it up.

      Delete
  6. Glad he won his suit. The company sure deserved to lose.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joanne: They did. They lacked any kind of human sensitivity to his particular personality.

      Delete
  7. Blimey - you'll be giving Boris ideas about how to get out of Partygate!!!
    Sx

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ms Scarlet: Yes, he'll claim he wouldn't have attended any parties because they give him panic attacks.

      Delete
  8. I saw the headline but did not read the story in the paper. I am in agreement with you. The problem with Surprise parties is that the surprisee may not be in the best situation. I know of someone who was walking to the restroom when they were waylaid into a surprise party. A wee older or younger, everyone there would have been surprised. OH well, the story speaks for itself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ann: It's a bit like teasing, isn't it? You put someone into an uncomfortable situation and then enjoy their reaction. Being caught on the way to the restroom is especially mortifying.

      Delete
  9. is it because the world has an abundance of extroverts?
    and introverts who truly Mean What They Say are simply not recognized... oh never mind.
    I'm like the person who said... the more I learn of humankind the more I love my dog!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tammy: I think that's true, everyone pays attention to extroverts but introverts are often ignored or not taken seriously. Humankind can be hard to deal with. Sometimes I think I'd rather BE a dog.

      Delete
  10. Well, that's bizarre. Seems like they'd have been happy to save the money if he didn't want a party. But you have to wonder if there was some maliciousness in going forward after the guy expressly said he didn't want one? I had a non-surprise going away party when I left my last job and loved it. But if I had panic attacks triggered by group events? That would not have been cool.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agent: Yes, I wonder if there was malice involved, given they deliberately went ahead with the party despite his objection. In which case, a very expensive act of malice.

      Delete
  11. A person's wishes to not be subjected to a party should be honored I think, whether or not they have a medical disability as he did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joared: I don't understand why they were so determined to override his express objection to the party.

      Delete