A PERSONAL TALE OF UNWINNABLE REALITIES

January 30, 2013 4:11 PM

Revenue Canada worker fired for his online customer service game

Gallant’s online game, I Get This Call Every Day, allows the player to listen to a conversation between an unprepared, annoying caller and a government-style call centre employee. At least one of the game graphics refers to “Last Tax Return.’’ The player gets to make choices as to how the call-centre worker responds but in many of the scenarios, the employee gets fired." via thestar

posted by grippycat (68 comments total)

Wait, uhhh, why exactly was he fired? The article says he was fired after the Star ran a story about his game...but he didn't say he got fired because of the game, just that he got fired. Did anybody at the Star bother to confirm any of this with Revenue Canada? I'm not saying it ain't true, but it's kind of irksome when journalists leap to conclusions like this.

That said it looks like kind of a fun game, in a weirdly masochistic way.
posted by Doleful Creature at 4:25 PM on January 30

So it appears that poking fun at your job is grounds for dismissal, but losing the personal information of hundreds of thousands of people causes no discernible action. This does not bode well.

What is this in reference to?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:28 PM on January 30

I have a suspicion that this is working out exactly as intended.
posted by GuyZero at 4:28 PM on January 30 [11 favorites]

The Star ran the first story about the game yesterday and he was fired between then and now. I think we can safely conclude he was fired because of the game and not just randomly, coincidentally fired the same day that the story came out for unrelated reasons.
posted by jacquilynne at 4:30 PM on January 30 [9 favorites]

BP: http://www.scmagazine.com/canada-revenue-agency-suffers-more-embarrassement-over-unauthorized-access/article/176714/
posted by GuyZero at 4:30 PM on January 30 [3 favorites]

Thanks, GuyZero.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:34 PM on January 30

Yeah, and in the original article, they were already looking for excuses to fire him, so it's damn clear that this was why.
posted by Malor at 4:34 PM on January 30

When I was a co-op student in the early nineties, I did a stint working for the government of Canada in Ottawa. It wasn't Revenue Canada and was actually generally a pleasant experience but I had a co-worker who'd worked at CRA.

He told me that they basically treat their workers like shit, but that every five years or so, there's a big push to be all people-oriented and humane. This lasts for a little while and then everything goes back to its disfunctional baseline until eventually somebody realizes that Things Need to Change and the cycle begins anew. The anecdote he told me was of the time a co-worker was injured in a car accident on the way to work, managed to get in anyway that day only two hours late and was docked for the missing hours.

So anyway, this story seems to jibe with what I've learned.
posted by suetanvil at 4:37 PM on January 30 [2 favorites]

The statement from the Minister's office in that first article makes it a very safe conclusion that this was the reason for his termination.

"The Minister considers this type of conduct offensive and completely unacceptable. The Minister has asked the Commissioner (of Revenue, Andrew Treusch) to investigate and take any and all necessary corrective action. The Minister has asked the CRA to investigate urgently to ensure no confidential taxpayer information was compromised."

Unless he was also, say, selling orphan corneas out his trunk in the parking lot during his lunch break, that's bureaucrat for "people who make reporters ask us embarrassing questions don't work here anymore."
posted by figurant at 4:43 PM on January 30 [3 favorites]

The anecdote he told me was of the time a co-worker was injured in a car accident on the way to work, managed to get in anyway that day only two hours late and was docked for the missing hours.


Cry me river from your final salary pension made entirely of gold.
posted by Damienmce at 4:43 PM on January 30

"Yeah, and in the original article, they were already looking for excuses to fire him, so it's damn clear that this was why."

'Cept GuyZero's link is to older breaches of information and was published in 2010. This guy was a part-time phone answerer. Not likely to be he same guy.
posted by grippycat at 4:44 PM on January 30

Why are people surprised he got fired over this? It seems like if you show that you hate your job in an extremely public and premeditated manner, that surely your employer can find some grounds to fire. It isn't as if this guy is a whistle-blower or something.
posted by maryr at 4:48 PM on January 30 [6 favorites]

I don't think anyone is surprised. Least of all the guy himself, who acknowledged even before he was fired that he might well be fired.
posted by jacquilynne at 4:51 PM on January 30 [1 favorite]

His twitter feed is interesting to hear his reaction to the sudden attention. I'm amused by his complaints that people write articles about him without playing the game.


"The Minister has asked the CRA to investigate urgently to ensure no confidential taxpayer information was compromised" makes me question whether they at all understand what he made, like did they think he recorded an actual phone conversation while he was working or something?
posted by RobotHero at 4:51 PM on January 30 [2 favorites]

The "confidential information" line is boilerplate bullshit because they assume that an employee that broke any rule broke all the rules.
posted by GuyZero at 4:56 PM on January 30 [5 favorites]

Why are people surprised he got fired over this? It seems like if you show that you hate your job in an extremely public and premeditated manner, that surely your employer can find some grounds to fire.

Do you think that's a good thing?
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 4:57 PM on January 30 [9 favorites]

Why do I get the feeling that NOONE has acually bought the game? Just a hunch...
posted by Yowser at 4:58 PM on January 30

Why are people surprised he got fired over this? It seems like if you show that you hate your job in an extremely public and premeditated manner, that surely your employer can find some grounds to fire.

Do you think that's a good thing?

Its a very logical thing. If the laws are different where you currently reside, please tell me, as I have some Facebook statuses to make.
posted by Charlemagne In Sweatpants at 4:58 PM on January 30 [3 favorites]

Exactly, RobotHero. It's just weird, is all. The whole episode feels weird to me. I mean yeah, 99.9% chance this was the reason he was fired but that last article didn't even bother to fact-check with the CRA. At all. Not even like a "the CRA was unavailable for comment" or "the CRA stated they don't discuss employee terminations". Just seems like poor journalism to me.

I also want to say that yes even though it's not surprising that he got fired I do think it's pretty lame. Also, I'm not familiar with Canadian labor laws, but can they (especially government employers) really just fire people for no reason? Here in Utah they can do that, but I was under the impression that Canada was more labor friendly and there would have to be an actual reason (such as breach of confidential taxpayer information).

they assume that an employee that broke any rule broke all the rules.

But the thing is, did he break any rules at all? Writing a game that is inspired by your work, what rule did that violate?
posted by Doleful Creature at 4:59 PM on January 30

And if he had a Mac version I would buy the game.
posted by Doleful Creature at 5:02 PM on January 30

Do you think that's a good thing?

It's borderline for me, but very defensible. I would think that the same thing would happen if he was a corporate employee. Why? Because it could be construed to suggest that the employee in question, and indeed all the customer service reps, have contempt for the callers. It's definitely not a professional thing to do in the customer service field.
posted by Edgewise at 5:02 PM on January 30 [2 favorites]

GuyZero and Blazecock, not sure if this is the same story, but it is a recent (this month) advisory: Federal Department loses data on 583,000 Canadians

There was also the fact that Revenue Canada employees in Quebec had mafia ties.
posted by KokuRyu at 5:05 PM on January 30 [1 favorite]

It's borderline for me, but very defensible. I would think that the same thing would happen if he was a corporate employee. Why? Because it could be construed to suggest that the employee in question, and indeed all the customer service reps, have contempt for the callers. It's definitely not a professional thing to do in the customer service field.

Let us note that the title of the first article was, in fact, "Tax department employee creates online game to vent his frustration with taxpayers".
posted by kafziel at 5:06 PM on January 30

But the thing is, did he break any rules at all? Writing a game that is inspired by your work, what rule did that violate?

In BC anyway you can be fired for comments that damage the reputation and business interests of the employer.

Of course, it's all up to the interpretation of the law, but it would seem that Revenue Canada has a strong case.
posted by KokuRyu at 5:07 PM on January 30

Thanks KokuRyu. So I guess a government agency would be considered a business in Canada? It's the government angle that sticks in my craw a little bit. Maybe I'm completely mistaken but I thought even in the US a government employee can publicly criticize the government they work for.
posted by Doleful Creature at 5:11 PM on January 30

From what I have heard from federal government employees, you sign away a lot of rights when you work for them, so it would not totally surprise me to hear that he was fired entirely legally.
posted by jeather at 5:11 PM on January 30

True story: when I worked for the federal government in Canada, I had to swear on a bible to be loyal to the Queen.
posted by RobotHero at 5:19 PM on January 30 [2 favorites]

Not to the Crown? The Crown and the Queen are different things. But even the Queen doesn't surprise me really - she's the titular head of the government, she's who you swear to.
posted by GuyZero at 5:30 PM on January 30

I work for a technology firm and the unwritten rule is Do Not Live In the Past.
if a coworker waddles over to my cube and starts blabbing about what happened yestrrday, even work related I feel like blowing a whistle or putting on headphones.
Whatever it is that is driving us along this macadam of data hates perspective and hates reflection.
I'm telling you its getting worse. (Or better if you like it). I have examples but im tired from ignoring apostrophes all day and rushing forward. This all used to be cool, computers for a living but I see now its a race without a finish line. Like the other day...
im technically an engineer but what I do is bail water on a big old half drowned barge leased out by cable companies to transport their slaves. Not literally.
The.cable company wants an upgrade. So we all huddle together in a conference room and discuss options. I see there is no option the upgrade will happen even though it will break everything and gash a hole in this boat it doesnt need as it is already sinking. I.have something to say. We rolled this feature three years earlier and it generated something like 800 calls to the call center within the first hour. But that was then this is now. its more important to make THIS mistake NOW then to revisit, to review, to go BACK! The fucking douchebag oligopolistic cable company may or may not fire us for what WILL be a failure. I get it. But if we call this off and try to explain what happened YEARS ago (2) to save them money and truck rolls... well thats not wisdom thats something WORSE. Cant put my finger on it.
Wait what were we talking about?
posted by Colonel Panic at 5:34 PM on January 30 [8 favorites]

It sounds from the article like he was criticizing the callers, not the government in general.

Also, I can't tell from the article, but I am wondering if he did in fact use recordings of real calls. It seems unclear.
posted by windykites at 5:38 PM on January 30

Why are people surprised he got fired over this? It seems like if you show that you hate your job in an extremely public and premeditated manner, that surely your employer can find some grounds to fire. It isn't as if this guy is a whistle-blower or something.

Yeah, I don't have a terrible amount of corporate sympathy in me, but if I was someone's boss, and that employee was clearly miserable at work, creating a game lampooning how miserable he was, and then contacting the newspapers to promote the game centered on how miserable he was at work, termination would be a pretty fair call.

Add to that scenario that the employee mentioned his work by name, displayed antipathy for the customers, and publicly welcomed his departure from his work.... yeah, termination is pretty easy call indeed.

That being said, I'm sure CRA is full of terrible managers and I'm glad this guy has had a good twitter response out of all of this.
posted by midmarch snowman at 5:40 PM on January 30

This all used to be cool, computers for a living but I see now its a race without a finish line.

You need to get fired, hired on in a field you know nothing about at a higher salary, and then fake your way through the next four years hoping no-one notices. As a small shop cross-platform Unix admin who wound up a network security engineer at a Big Important Place, the race got real exciting again, lemme tell ya.
posted by Slap*Happy at 5:42 PM on January 30 [1 favorite]

And upon reading kafziel's link, one question is answered. Never mind.
posted by windykites at 5:44 PM on January 30

I had to swear on a bible to be loyal to the Queen.

I am not sure why, but I read this as 'bibble.'

"And in Genoa, 'tis now the fashion to pin a live frog to the shoulder braid ..."
posted by zippy at 5:48 PM on January 30 [1 favorite]

i puchased this game and played through it multiple times just a couple of weeks ago. it's not surprising to learn his employer had no sense of humor about it, but it's absurd that he'd be fired for it.

if the dev is a mefite or sees this, i'd be happy to kick a couple of bucks into a safety-net fund while he's finding other work.
posted by radiosilents at 5:58 PM on January 30

Generally you can criticize the government no problem but in a respectful manner. Campaigning for the opposition is a classic example that is fine. Making submissions to panels, calling for changes to laws and policies and such as a citizen is fine.

This is not really any of that - it's public slagging of his department, and (from what I understand) his clients, who are random taxpayers. I'm not surprised he got fired.
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:01 PM on January 30

... it could be construed to suggest that the employee in question, and indeed all the customer service reps, have contempt for the callers. It's definitely not a professional thing to do in the customer service field.

Speaking from inside experience, customer service rep hatred toward both customers and employers is more the norm than the exception (possibly justifiably, but that's another thread).

/derail

Playing this game would be the equivalent of taking my work home with me; so I'll pass, thanks.
posted by Greg_Ace at 6:01 PM on January 30

surely your employer can find some grounds to fire

Sounds fair.
posted by DU at 6:03 PM on January 30

I've had to sign an oath to the Queen, Ontario, and Alberta. Of course I crossed my fingers while doing so...
posted by Yowser at 6:05 PM on January 30

I've had to sign an oath to the Queen, Ontario, and Alberta.

What if some part of your job involves both Ontario and Alberta at the same time? Do you have to recuse yourself to prevent a conflict of interest?
posted by kiltedtaco at 6:14 PM on January 30 [1 favorite]

Ach. Now I'm all nervous about admitting earlier in the day on the blue that I'm not looking forward to having to work on a web application that might require integrating with Lotus Notes. I wouldn't want to look like I was complaining about my job too much. Gah. This is creepy to me.

In America corporations are free to fund organizations that openly call for revolution against the government. But in Florida, at least, you can be denied unemployment benefits for being too mouthy about your boss.

Did I mention, I love my job, and my employer is the best place to work in the world?
posted by saulgoodman at 6:34 PM on January 30 [2 favorites]

Complaining about a one technical aspect of a job you have not yet begun and then admitting that it may not so bad is one thing. Creating a video game centered around your hatred of everyone who uses LotusNotes and doing an interview in the Herald to that effect? That gets you fired.
posted by maryr at 7:00 PM on January 30

Hmm. I guess I can see the logic in that. As long as we're still allowed to grumble about our jobs in private. So, for example, we can organize unions. Not that I would do that.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:21 PM on January 30

Depending on where you work, making a game like that could be a 100% reasonable reason to either fire someone or promote them.
posted by empath at 7:35 PM on January 30 [1 favorite]

Yeah, I don't have a terrible amount of corporate sympathy in me, but if I was someone's boss, and that employee was clearly miserable at work, creating a game lampooning how miserable he was, and then contacting the newspapers to promote the game centered on how miserable he was at work, termination would be a pretty fair call.

Add to that scenario that the employee mentioned his work by name, displayed antipathy for the customers, and publicly welcomed his departure from his work.... yeah, termination is pretty easy call indeed.

I agree with all of this. He's obviously better off, anyway.
posted by empath at 7:37 PM on January 30

Hmm. I guess I can see the logic in that. As long as we're still allowed to grumble about our jobs in private. So, for example, we can organize unions. Not that I would do that.

That's the problem - the definition of 'private' is changing.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 7:38 PM on January 30

I don't think the definition of "private" ever applied to newspaper stories.
posted by cribcage at 7:45 PM on January 30 [4 favorites]

Can we fire the Minister of Token PEI Representation National Revenue instead?
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 7:49 PM on January 30

Personally think "being a joyless fuck" is much more reason to fire than "bitching about your job in public" but I may be young or something.
posted by seanmpuckett at 7:58 PM on January 30 [1 favorite]

Personally think "being a joyless fuck" is much more reason to fire than "bitching about your job in public" but I may be young or something.

No, just someone who's never had to work in a call centre, I think. Being a joyless fuck isn't a job requirement, but it's certainly a job consequence.

His 'mistake' was talking to the papers - criticising your employer in public is a stupid thing to do, and will (not unreasonably) get you fired from most jobs.

What I'm curious about is whether he would have been fired on the strength of the game alone, which didn't reveal his employer. It shouldn't be a contractual requirement that you love your job.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 8:07 PM on January 30 [4 favorites]

Maybe he was spending CRA work time doing "development" for his game?
posted by BozoBurgerBonanza at 8:15 PM on January 30

You can be a joyless fuck and hate your job. You just have to be fucking civil about it. (Or at least QUIET).
posted by maryr at 8:20 PM on January 30

Speaking from inside experience, customer service rep hatred toward both customers and employers is more the norm than the exception (possibly justifiably, but that's another thread).

I doubt that this is a surprise to anyone.

The more I think about it, the more I think that he definitely deserved to get fired. Let's imagine that the title of the game is accurate. If that's the case, then people who play the game may actually recognize themselves as some of the stupid and obstreperous callers that he's lampooning! People calling this number for help may be thinking that reps are laughing at them behind their backs. If his employer keeps him in his job, they could be seen endorsing his point of view.

I have no doubt that his criticisms are absolutely correct, but part of the job of a customer service rep is to treat moronic assholes with respect. Sure, there are lines that the callers cannot cross (e.g. screaming obscenities), at which point the rep is free to hang up on them or transfer them to a supervisor. But he's effectively representing his employer, especially when he announces exactly where he worked and what he was doing. And yes, I know his employer was the government. That actually makes it worse, because these aren't just customers; they are tax-paying citizens. And besides, we're all stupid sometimes. It's not some kind of working class justice to make fun of people for their idiocy.

On top of that, he basically made himself unhireable for any kind of similar position. Unless this is the start of a career as a successful game developer, he's really shot himself in the foot with this one.
posted by Edgewise at 9:25 PM on January 30 [2 favorites]

he basically made himself unhireable for any kind of similar position

Yep, kids say "I want to be a call center wage slave when I grow up".
posted by mrbill at 9:32 PM on January 30 [2 favorites]

On top of that, he basically made himself unhireable for any kind of similar position

Honestly, as long as he's professional on the job, I don't think that's the case. He's clearly not cut out to do it for a career, but who is? Call centers have horrific turnover. Someone like him would have been moving on to back office IT work eventually.
posted by empath at 10:10 PM on January 30

Yep, kids say "I want to be a call center wage slave when I grow up".

Clearly, that's the only job he can get right now, or he wouldn't have it, right? So until he breaks into whatever career he hopes to get into, he's going to have a hard time of it. I mean, would you hire him for a retail position? Also, it could even hurt his prospects at a more career-oriented position. It's not helpful to have your unprofessional behavior chronicled in the newspaper, no matter what you want to do for a living.

Honestly, as long as he's professional on the job, I don't think that's the case.

That's kind of the problem, as I see it. I'm not saying he deserves it...I've certainly done my fair share of unprofessional things in crappy jobs. But they weren't reported in the newspaper.
posted by Edgewise at 1:06 AM on January 31

Clearly, that's the only job he can get right now, or he wouldn't have it, right?

What? I don't think one goes to the newspaper and publicly complains about how shitty their job is if they don't have other prospects. I mean look, it's a shitty job. Everybody knows it's a shitty job. If a completely different company weren't going to hire me for complaining publicly that a shitty job was shitty, I wouldn't want to work there anyway. I'm sure he's already got job offers, in fact.
posted by empath at 4:00 AM on January 31

I am sad that I communicated poorly in my previous comment. By "joyless fuck" I'd intended to reference the Minister, not the game designer. I personally have no problem whatsoever with what this guy did. Apologies for poor phrasing and lack of timely course-correction due to sleep.
posted by seanmpuckett at 5:19 AM on January 31

From KokuRyu's Link:

"the employees could not have a serious expectation of privacy when publishing comments on Facebook (even if the comments were made off-site during non-work hours);

it did not matter that the employer did not have a policy or workplace rule prohibiting inappropriate postings on Facebook;"

Shurely this stuff is all about information? Isn't this part of capitalism, having perfect information helps drive rational decision making? They are just providing information to prospective employees, but the employers don't seem to like that.
posted by marienbad at 6:24 AM on January 31 [1 favorite]

Everyone knows it's better to have all workers stay hunched over, seething.
posted by aramaic at 6:30 AM on January 31

It's depressing that someone with this much skill and creativity was working in a call center. On the other hand, he's gotten enough press by doing so that he could easily get a job at a mobile development company, so there's that.
posted by miyabo at 6:33 AM on January 31 [1 favorite]

I used to work for the Government of Canada. When you start there, you sign a statement adhering to a code of ethics. There is also annual workshops to refresh employees. One of the key pillars of Canadian civil service is that we are meant to be objective and non-partisan. (My former colleagues in some communications departments seem to have lost this memo when Fantino had them post press releases critical of opposition parties, but I digress.)

Key to being non-partisan is that your professional life and your personal life are separate. You can criticize the government, as a citizen, but not as a public servant. For this reason, my job affiliation was never listed on my Facebook profile and I never friend any current co-workers (former co-workers are different sometimes). I think that since if this guy referred to himself as a Government of Canada employee (in the first Star article) while distributing/publicizing the game, he broke that code of ethics, which is cause for dismissal.

I also suspect his broke in intentionally, in order to be fired in a high-profile way, so that he could pursue his preferred career path. So, he gamed the system and won. He deserves a brief "congrats" but not any sympathy. Believe it or not, some of use chose public service because we actually want to serve the public.
posted by Kurichina at 7:13 AM on January 31 [4 favorites]

Personally think "being a joyless fuck" is much more reason to fire than "bitching about your job in public" but I may be young or something.
...
I am sad that I communicated poorly in my previous comment. By "joyless fuck" I'd intended to reference the Minister, not the game designer.

Speaking for myself, I understood you the first time. I couldn't disagree more, however. There's a reason that very few jobs list "sense of humor" as a requirement. Most jobs have nothing to do with having a good time and being a fun guy...that's why they pay you.

I'm sure he's already got job offers, in fact.

I suppose it's possible, but you're assuming a tremendous amount and kind of projecting your own mentality onto him. Frankly, your scenario sounds a lot less likely to me due to the timing of it all. And for all your assumptions about this guy being careful and rational, I don't think it would be such a clever move even if he did have another job lined up. Like I said, something like this has a potential to cause you long term damage in terms of employability no matter what your field. Whether or not you agree with it, some prospective employers will have doubts about his reliability after googling this story. As in, if this guy becomes unhappy with the position I give him, will I have to read about it in the paper?
posted by Edgewise at 7:53 AM on January 31

Is it mandated that employees not hate their jobs? Or is it just mandated that employees, if they do hate their jobs, at least pretend to not hate their jobs? What if the employee fulfills all the job requirements but is still grouchy and ranty about the work? Is being fussy about employee moods and the expression of them a desired state of affairs for employers to have?

Anyway, thanks Kurichina for explaining that this action might be motivated by an explicit breach of a code of ethics, which would flip my opinion of the firing 180. If he'd agreed to not talk smack about his job, and then did so, then he fucked up.

On the other hand, if there's no "smack talking" provision in the employment contract, then I find it in the same vein as the various and sundry bloggers who get fired after being outed as bloggers.
posted by seanmpuckett at 8:04 AM on January 31

Or is it just mandated that employees, if they do hate their jobs, at least pretend to not hate their jobs?

Generally yes, though it depends. If you make it very clear that you hate your job, then (a) you stand a decent chance of being terminated at some point, and (b) you should find something more suited to yourself, if at all possible.

What if the employee fulfills all the job requirements but is still grouchy and ranty about the work?

It depends how grouchy and ranty. First, this can have a deleterious effect on morale, especially if you are always complaining about how you hate your job. Second, if they are complaining about your customers in a public way, that's a huge no-no.
posted by Edgewise at 8:23 AM on January 31

Here is footage of the gameplay itself.
posted by rebent at 2:44 PM on January 31

Whether or not you agree with it, some prospective employers will have doubts about his reliability after googling this story. As in, if this guy becomes unhappy with the position I give him, will I have to read about it in the paper?

Yes, and those prospective employers are uptight assholes that I wouldn't want to work for. Most of my bosses have had senses of humor.
posted by empath at 4:48 PM on January 31

Quite honestly, just the thought of dealing with CRA is giving me a mild panic attack. Hate those guys (although the GST folks are very helpful). I once submitted a T4 by mistake (I'm self employed) as well as a statement of earnings, so after I had paid my tax I got a notice of assessment and a tax bill for $20,000. It took my accountant 6 months to get them to fuck off.
posted by KokuRyu at 10:51 PM on January 31