Slashdot Mirror
Getting Rid of Staff With High Access?
HikingStick writes "I've been in the tech field for over 15 years. After more than nine years with the same company, I've been asked to step in and establish an IT department for a regional manufacturing firm. I approached my company early, providing four weeks notice (including a week of pre-scheduled [and pre-approved] vacation time). I have a number of projects to complete, and had planned to document some of the obscure bits of knowledge I've gleaned over the past nine years for the benefit of my peers, so I figured that would give me plenty of time. That was on a Friday. The following Monday, word came down from above that all of my privileged access was to be removed — immediately. So, here I sit, stripped of power with weeks ahead of me. From discussions with my peers in other companies, I know that cutting off high-privilege users is common, but usually in conjunction with a severance offer (to keep their hands off the network during those final weeks, especially if there is any ill-will). Should I argue for restored access, highlight the fact that I am currently a human paperweight, request a severance package, or simply become the most prolific Slashdot poster over the next few weeks? Does your company have a policy/process for dealing with high-privilege users who give notice? What is it, and do you make exceptions?"
It's in the company's interest for you to do nothing. They actually will prefer if you do absolutely nothing because of their own liability. As a regular employee, if you mess something up it's just negligence (oops). On the other hand if the company terminates you and still gives you access, and then you mess something up, they're criminally liable because they should have restricted your access.
For example, I worked on banking software and had god-rights. If I as a regular employee steal all of the customer data and sell it, then I am the criminal. If I have been terminated and do the same, then they are at fault. Now yes, I realize that it's a pedantic difference, but the banks which run the software see a world of difference and will sue the my employer accordingly.
Believe me, it's cheaper to pay me 6 months severance than it is to be sued for my actions.
It really depends on level of access and what they can access. In many cases however they have been escorted out the door with in minutes of giving notice. Typically they get the two weeks notice they gave as paid time (Two weeks is standard).
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
There's just so much to learn on the Internet. You could take foreign language courses, read geeky stuff from MIT OpenCourseware, or follow world affairs more deeply on Google News. If someone got bored with that, they might just some simple job they could do at a distance and draw two salaries at the same time.
I remember when I was 18 and knew everything. Every seasoned interviewer knows that the reference it check is not the immediate past or current employer but 2 or more back. The current employer has an incentive to lie if they are getting rid of a bad employee. To the original poster - do your job as best you can and live with the decision. Try and pass along any undocumented knowledge to good employees that will use it correctly.
Is that by convention or by law? In the US employment is voluntary. You don't HAVE to give any notice at all, but it's considered professional to do so.
The problem with references is that they've been rendered pretty much useless by the threat of lawsuits.
If you're asked for a reference for someone and you trash them (however well deserved), it opens your company up to a lawsuit from the person who you were asked about.
If you're asked for a reference for someone and you sing their praises, the other company can sue your company should the employee do poorly in the new job.
That's why many places have policies about the kind of references their employees are allowed to give. I know of one bank that limits the allowable references to "yes, person x worked here from date y to date z." Beyond that, it is corporate policy to say nothing.
It depends on where you work. For many jobs you will be polygraphed. For some jobs you will go through a lifestyle poly in addition to a counterintelligence/espionage one. Whether the poly works or not is an open question--at the very least it's a psychological tool used to interview people in a stressful situation.
Pretty much all security clearance jobs will run a credit check, background check, etc.
Many jobs will send send investigators to past acquaintances, friends, neighbors, colleges, etc.
The point being, there is a HUGE degree of variation, even to get the same ultimate security clearance. You can immediately get an interim secret clearance just by filling out a form. top secret, etc takes longer and is more rigorous.