Hypothetical question

[nile455]

Yes you should. You are changing the story and above is a good example. You are just made of the the $300. Get over it and keep the boss out of it.

I think you need to read the thread again. I changed nothing.

 

[Mickey's Minion]

There is a big difference between sympathizing and feeling guilty. I can see the boss sympathizing with the secretary, but I don't think he would feel terrible or guilty.

If this was my employee, I would definitely understand the motive behind what she did. I would realize that her intentions were good, the results not so good.

I would say thank you for thinking about the company, but then, as a PP said, have a very serious conversation about the position she put the company in and the potential costs of a purchase like this.

However, I can pretty much guarantee that many of my former colleagues (when I was in the corporate world) would not have appreciated even the thought behind the purchase.

Many of them would not only be irritated, but would have initiated disciplinary action if the secretary even hinted at reimbursement for a broken and unauthorized purchase.

 

[Mickey's Minion]

Excellent, thoughtful and insightful response. A rarity in this thread.

You're right, it wasn't hypothetical. I was hoping to post it like that, but of course it was only a matter of time before revealing that it really happened.

Your 5th point I agree with 100%.

Op,

If this is really about a friend, why are you becoming so defensive every time somebody does not agree with you that the boss should feel guilty about the secretary losing money?

You keep trying to force the issue that the boss should feel sorry for your friend. Nobody agrees with you on this point.

Your original question asks who should be responsible. 99.9% of the responders say that the secretary is solely responsible and that the boss does not shoulder any responsibility, neither monetarily nor emotionally.

I am assuming that you posted this thread to know what most people would do to better support your friend in her folly. I would suggest that you take the responses you have received here seriously so that you can properly support your friend.

Sympathize with her about the lost money, but gently let her know that she should not expect guilt or even being felt sorry for by the boss.

Make her realize she shoulders the entire burden of making this purchase herself.

 

[ksjayhawks]

I think the secretary should not mention it to her boss. There is nothing to be gained in doing so.

She made a poor decision, though she might have thought it was a good one at the time. She took a gamble and bought a machine without his authorization and used friends of a friend to move it. The machine was damaged beyond repair.

She needs to eat the $300, chalk it up to a learning experience, forget about it, and move on.


I have to agree with pps that while $300 for a $4000 machine is a great find, it may not make the best sense moneywise for a business. There is no warranty, no service contract (and one most likely could not be purchased or if it could be it would be super expensive as the service provider would have no records of previous repairs, etc). While it worked well when the secretary tested it on site, it could have been jostled or damaged in transit or it could work for a few days and then need repair. Our copier at school can work great for an hour or so and then--boom--it is out of commision.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I never said the boss is responsible. All I said is that it is a terrible situation for everyone involved. If I'm the boss, I would feel terrible about it. Loyal secretary going out of her way on a Saturday afternoon, spending $300 of her own money for something the office needs, only to have two movers destroy it.

All well and good - but you appear to be trying to lay not only physical and moral, but also financial responsibility on the gentlemen moving this large piece of equipment purchased by the secretary.

The boss has no responsibility, fiscal or otherwise. He wasn't aware in advance of the availability of this fantastic deal; he wasn't given the opportunity to approve or decline it. He may certainly feel bad that his company missed out on the opportunity to get a great deal, but he has no responsibility here whatsoever.
The men moving the equipment have, frankly, no legal or financial responsibility. They may feel bad that something went horribly wrong and that the copier rolled off the back of the truck and is now damaged beyond repair; however they were doing this move as a favor, volunteering their time and 'eating' any related expense (gas, wear and tear on the truck...). The quoted post certainly sounds like blame is being fully ascribed to the movers; had the secretary not purchased the copier, they would not have damaged it.
As somebody else said, no good deed goes unpunished. The secretary was trying to do something good. It didn't work. Everybody feels bad, but only she is out the money - and wasn't THAT the original question? Nobody else involved, however directly or indirectly, is or should be responsible for reimbursing her.

That is your assumption. Please don't change the fact that was already laid out - She is a professional, and knows the machines, tested it completely. Your opinion on her competence level has nothing to do with it.

With all due respect, she's a secretary, not a copier technician. How much internal testing and examination could she have done to ensure that this complex piece of equipment being offered at, what did someone say, a 92% discount would continue to work? It's entirely possible the copier would have worked for a few days, even weeks, then required hundreds or thousands of dollars in repairs.

 

[kaytieeldr]

The question is, which of the three people should eat the money? The secretary, the movers, or the boss?

I would like to point out, THIS is the original, and ONLY question. Later posts attempt to place blame or guilt or both on alternate or multiple parties - primarily, it seems, in an attempt to get someone to reimburse the secretary for the now-unusable copier.

For the record, a hypothetical question is based on a situation that doesn't actually exist. Since this event apparently DID occur, the thread's title isn't accurate.