> No doubt, mistakes happen in large bureaucracies but the story is usually slanted as some evil agency trying to destroy certain 'marginalised' sections of society. Whereas the truth is probably nothing like that.
The truth is that as an individual, especially one from a marginalized section of society, you are up against a powerful bureaucracy that has the ability to completely screw up your life, by mistake or not. So we as a society depend on holding these bureaucracies to very high standards.
It is also true that in any large bureaucracy, mistakes inevitably happen from time to time. One would wish for a leadership of said bureaucracy to handle these mistakes with integrity and from a position of confidence. By, for example, contacting this women directly, quietly resolving this issue and then adding this problem to the yearly statistics to prove you run a good ship. Who knows, this woman might have written a blog post singing your praises, after you resolved her problem for her. Certainly the better PR strategy.
If, on the other hand, you resolve to attacking your clients in public, violating their privacy rights in the process, then maybe you're too close to running an evil, rather than a responsible agency.
> Read the linked Centrelinks response and several things are refuted, so why in these comments is there an automatic pile on one side?
Did you read the refutation of the refutation as well ? I found the article presents the different viewpoints quite well. Including that this sort of pressure is able to stir up strong emotions.
No comments yet.
