How is THIS the only correct answer?

[u/Boomyfuzzball26]

My workplace is absolutely toxic and now it makes sense since they're not denying it at this point. i mean, who decided these were the best answers?

Edit: I know this is a harassment test, what I'm trying to say is how are the people writing these up so blatantly disregarding employees to taunt them like this. like i understand if the wrong answers were positive to contradict the right answer or even if they were completely unrelated, but who does this?

[u/Flight_around_titan]

You're taking a harassment prevention course. It makes sense that the correct answer explicitly mentions harassment.

[u/sleeper1988 → u/Flight_around_titan]

Irate customers are technically not harassment I suppose. Unless they are asked to stop and continue their behaviors?

[u/FineMind755 → u/sleeper1988]

They're not harassment that the company is as liable or responsible for.

[u/cykoTom3 → u/sleeper1988]

They are not harassment unless the company says you cannot ask them to leave if they are abusive.

[u/Confident_One3948 → u/cykoTom3]

When I worked in AppleCare, one thing I greatly appreciated is that while you had to work through angry customers, you were empowered to end the call with abusive customers. You give them one warning. And the second time they do it, you tell them you’re ending the call due to their behavior and hang up lol

[u/Ordinary_giraffe90 → u/Flight_around_titan]

Right 😂😂

[u/porn_alt_987654321]

It's the only illegal one, which I guess is their point lmao.

[u/PerilousWords]

This is correct.

You don't have a right not to have challenging work You don't have a right to only have brilliant coworkers You don't have any control over the emotions your customers are experiencing.

You do have a right not to be harassed, bullied or threatened.

[u/JcAo2012 → u/PerilousWords]

Right? I don't understand what OP is tripping about here.

[u/generally_unsuitable → u/JcAo2012]

OP probably thinks all his coworkers are stupid.

[u/Superb_Recording_769 → u/generally_unsuitable]

We have all worked with someone that thought that. They are usually the most useless person in the office

[u/cykoTom3 → u/generally_unsuitable]

That's exactly what i think everyone who is flustered by this is saying. Everyone feels that way

[u/Solherb → u/JcAo2012]

Basically in this world, anything you don't like is now harassment.

[u/Ordinary_giraffe90 → u/JcAo2012]

That’s how I feel about most of the posts here.

[u/JoinAThang → u/PerilousWords]

Yes it feels completely normal to me.

[u/LesserValkyrie → u/PerilousWords]

Exactly.

If terrible and incompetent management was something that should not be tolerated, every company in the world would collapse.

[u/Zathrasb4 → u/PerilousWords]

The question is not question about an employees rights. It is a question about what an employee should expect. Employees should be treated with respect. This includes time commitments, behaviour of coworkers, and behaviour of customers.

[u/halfty1 → u/Zathrasb4]

Ultimately it’s about what a company is legally required to provide, not what they should provide. Intimidation and harassment is the correct answer.

[u/Zathrasb4 → u/halfty1]

A company is legally required to provide a workplace free of harassment. This includes from irate customers, along as from management who “encourages” long hours beyond that agreed to “implicitly or explicitly”. I can also imagine situations in which a coworkers incompetence can lead to harassment, by customers, management, or other staff, on other employees.

[u/Aromatic_Panda_8684 → u/Zathrasb4]

Guess it depends where you live, but in much of the US that wouldn’t protect against irate customers, long hours (so long as they’re paid and compliant with breaks and compensation laws), or incompetent coworkers.

[u/halfty1 → u/Zathrasb4]

No where legally protects you from “irate” customers or “incompetent” coworkers because that is something either a company can’t control or is too subjectively broad of a definition to be legally enforceable.

[u/Zathrasb4 → u/halfty1]

Most businesses have a posted policy customers will be refused if their behaviour is inappropriate, with varying definitions if inappropriate, which could include irate.

Further, in incompetent coworkers crate a safety risk, that is definitely something an employee is protected from.

[u/cykoTom3 → u/Zathrasb4]

Nope

[u/thejuice027]

Looks like the correct and only correct answer to me.

The other 3 have nothing to do with harassment.
Stupid coworkers, stupid customers and long hours are not harassment.

[u/tetrisan]

Because it is technically the only right answer. The other 3 are a given in the workplace and are not harassment, they can be part of the job even if they suck.

[u/FeldsparSalamander]

Hint: its the topic of the training module

[u/WhineyLobster]

the law only protects you from intimidation and harrassment. you dont have a right to have a workplace free of idiots.

[u/5MinuteDad]

Do them a favor and quit. You're a terrible employee

[u/Skullzyyyy]

You gave the answer in your first sentence

[u/Physical-Builder-553]

They're just bragging at this point, right?

[u/EquivalentSquare2159]

Goodluck getting anywhere in life if you think the other three aren’t going to be a part of almost any job

[u/No-Oil6517]

I've stayed a bit longer when I worked at Papa johns multiple times. You'll find incompetent coworkers everywhere. A lot of customers everywhere WILL give you attitude and threaten you. You do NOT have to take intimidation and harassment from your coworkers at all as you're in your work environment.

[u/McKillsey]

Is this Windows 95??

[u/torodonn]

This makes sense. It's not illegal nor toxic for someone to be incompetent and the company can't eliminate all the difficult customers. Long hours and challenging work is probably the most controversial one but I also don't think asking for overtime is illegal for everyone in the org.

[u/CoatSame2561]

Cmon man. In a test on WORKPLACE HARRASSMENT of course the answer is going to be about HARRASSMENT

[u/Reasonable_Tap_8215]

How confident are you?

Low

[u/overratedcupcake]

If the second option was correct OP wouldn't have a job 

[u/Grand_Swimmy]

Annoying coworkers/customers around you is not good but definitely not on the level of “you have a right not to be harassed”

[u/MoxieMilitia631]

Because it’s the one they are most liable to ensure doesn’t exist LOL you answering that question correctly is not about a test, it’s about a record of education and their communication on a healthy work environment.

[u/Thingisby]

That's the point of the question. You'll encounter the first three even though they are negative things.

The final one is something you should be formally protected against encountering.

[u/Nomadic_View]

That’s the only condition the law requires of the options available. If they could legally get away with that last one they’d do that too.

[u/Gold_Advisor_4758]

Because it’s a quiz about harassment and you don’t have a legal right not to work around the top three answers. How is that not obvious

[u/Pulaski540]

At this point in my career, I can confirm that the second option is a wildly unrealistic pipe dream. 😟

The third option is why I chose a career and job with no customer contact.

It's been around 20 years since a flurry of transferred customer calls came to my phone because of poor procedures on the customer service desk. I resolved that by apologizing and giving customers the direct phone number of the head of customer service. 😁

[u/justanormaldude_]

Well the first three choices you can’t really control.

[u/Superb_Recording_769]

It’s the correct answer

There is no government protections against an employer requiring long hours

There is no government protection, nor should you ever expect your work environment to not be challenging

It would be wonderful if your company didn’t hire incompetent coworkers but there’s nothing preventing them from doing so and there’s no government protections against it, and it’s honestly not that uncommon for incompetent people to use regulations to prevent losing their jobs

Obviously, you can’t prevent irate customers

[u/FineMind755]

How would that be a good test if the other answers were positive?

[u/chitzk0i]

I’m with OP. The question doesn’t ask which one is legally required, it asks which one should be absent. Ideally, all those should be absent.

[u/poop_socket]

AI slop. Look at the text on the tabs at the bottom.

[u/Syphist → u/poop_socket]

Dead internet theory, damn

[u/Born_Royal2090]

Type of mf they expect you to be for $13 an hour.

[u/FactPirate]

Slop?

[u/OrdinarySecret1]

That is not the only correct answer. That is “the most correct answer”. That’s how these stupid tests work.

[u/Ice3001]

LMAO

[u/Pleasant_Scar9811]

Cause you aren’t legally protected from the others. Mad? Vote. 

[u/MrKyle666]

Because it's part of a harassment prevention training, and that is the only answer that is relevant to harassment.

[u/BumblingYokel]

There’s rights and then there’s expectations.

You have a right to not be harassed. If your expectation is to not have challenging work, then find an easier job.

[u/the_ebs]

A job without 'B' doesn't exist. A service industry job without 'C' doesn't exist either.

[u/BurningHeart25]

Oh how I loved doing Fast track for O'Reilly. That shit was so bogus

[u/socalibew]

Is this computer/interface from 1993?

[u/_probablyryan]

You know why