Promotion to Supervisor

Last Tuesday I was promoted to the position of supervisor at work. Most of my work will still revolve around claims, but I will also be handling some underwriting activities.

I started working in insurance in late 2005. I spent a short time working for an insurance agency (handling hundreds of health insurance claims) and I then moved to an insurance broking/management firm. I joined the latter company as a trainee in 2006 and I have managed to climb my way up to the current position of supervisor in around 3.5 years.

Those Who Never Quit

I have always strongly admired those individuals who never quit. The ability of such people to keep struggling in spite of all the setbacks they encounter is extremely inspiring.

For a fairly long time, I have believed that Western society has a relatively low tolerance for failure. It seems that most people are expected to achieve success quite quickly and without encountering any major problems. Furthermore, the belief that human beings are "born good" in one area or another tends to fuel the expectation that success should come quite easily. This perception - which is unfortunately still fairly widespread - suggests that if you do not manage to "get it right" almost from the start, you should consider turning your attention to some other activity. Whoever has managed to get a glimpse of the countless reality-TV shows whereby several individuals are humiliated and labelled as "incompetent" or "untalented" by a panel of "judges" knows exactly what I am talking about.

Sadly, a society which projects false notions about success and which does not tolerate failure is expected to include many people who give up very easily when they encounter one or more setbacks. You failed your Physics exam? Well, perhaps you are "not so bright" when it comes to Spanish! Your marriage broke down? Well, perhaps you should never enter into any other relationship in the future! You have been diagnosed with a particularly rare medical condition? Well, perhaps you should just accept your "bad luck" and avoid complaining! Does any of this destructive talk sound familiar? Unfortunately, such negative messages are transmitted thousands of times a day in various parts of the world.

Although there are many people who quit relatively easily when faced with a problem, there are others who are determined to stand up over and over again following one or more nasty falls. The rest of this post focuses on some individuals who did not quit when confronted with various difficulties.

Many people have surely heard about Sir Anthony Hopkins and have watched several of his movies including the famous Silence of the Lambs. Fewer individuals, however, seem to be aware of the hardships faced by Mr Hopkins during the early stages of his life. In an interview published by the Mail Online site, he said the following: "I was called Dumbo, like the elephant, as a child because I couldn't understand things at school...My grandfather, my father's father, told my mother, 'Tony's got a big head, pity there's nothing in it, unlike Bobby [cousin] who is brilliant'...The teachers would slap me about the head...I was hauled before the headmaster, who said there was something wrong with me. My teacher twisted my ear till it broke and said, 'You are only fit to grease your father's bread tins,' because I didn't understand arithmetic."

The article went on to say that "For the young Hopkins, feelings of inadequacy continued throughout his teens. 'I felt like the village idiot because I couldn't do anything right. I worked at the Steel Company of Wales when I was 17. My job was to supply tools to the guys working the blast furnaces. I would look at the chits and I'd always choose the wrong thing, and the foreman would say to me, 'What the hell is the matter with you? Can't you do anything right?' He'd say, 'Go and make me a cup of tea.' Then, 'No. Don't even do that because you'll blow us all up.'"

Though Angie Baker did not become as popular as Anthony Hopkins, her story also deserves to be mentioned. As a young woman, Angie wanted to have a baby. As stated in an article published in Grazia magazine (15/03/2010), "I was in my early twenties when I got pregnant the first time" (p. 119). After a few weeks, she lost the baby as a result of a miscarriage. Although saddened by the event, Angie did not give up. She tried again. And again. Each pregnancy, however, kept ending in a miscarriage. The worst thing is that "the doctors kept saying there was nothing medically wrong" with her. After the tenth miscarriage, she underwent a number of tests at St Mary's Hospital in London. She left the hospital with no additional medical information as "again they found nothing". Although many other women might have given up on having a baby following so many miscarriages, Angie was determined to keep on trying. She eventually discovered Dr Hassan Shehata, a doctor who had carried out a lot of research about women who were suffering from recurrent miscarriages. Thanks to the doctor's desire to help such women, he managed to clarify the root of Angie's failed pregnancies. Furthermore, as a result of his treatment, Angie eventually managed to have her own baby. Angie Baker miscarried 18 times before she gave birth to a healthy baby girl.

Another story that deserves to be mentioned is the one of Emily Holden. According to an article that appeared in Glamour (April, 2010), "A horrific car accident...broke every bone in Emily Holden's face, blinded her in one eye and burst a lung" (p. 32). The 21-year-old girl has received a great deal of assistance from the Saving Faces Foundation. She is aware of the fact that she still requires further treatment, but she is very optimistic about her future. Indeed, Emily stated that "When I've recovered, I'll counsel other victims. I'll visit them in hospital to offer advice and guidance." (p. 32).

I am sure that there are many other stories out there of individuals who have never quit in spite of having been beaten down once, twice, three times...I will try to post more about them in future articles. If you are one of those individuals, I would be very glad to hear about your story. :)

The Rise of the Communist Party of Malta

Last Monday, the Times of Malta published an interesting article regarding the Maltese Communist Party. Although this party has been in existence since 1969, it never enjoyed the popular support that could easily be witnessed when talking about the country's two biggest political parties (the Nationalist Party and the Labour Party).

Although the Labour Party in Malta never embraced Marxist-Leninist principles, the Mintoff and Mifsud Bonnici administrations were clearly more leftist than the Sant and Muscat ones. During those times, the most prominent Labour Party representatives stressed the importance of doing things within an ideological context. Hence, if a measure was going to be implemented, it was fairly easy to fathom how such an action was intended to coincide with the party's ideological objectives. The speeches about the benefits of Socialism helped to distinguish the Labour Party from the Nationalist one. As stated above, the Labour Party was never a Communist organisation, but the discourse used by individuals such as Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici sometimes overlapped with that utilised by a number of Communists. By using this strategy, several Maltese people perceived the Labour Party as being sufficiently leftist and did not feel a strong need to move to another party that also talked about the fruits of Socialism.

With the introduction of Alfred Sant's New Labour strategies during the 1990s, there was a fairly evident desire to move away from the anti-capitalist rhetoric that was quite popular during the 1970s and the 1980s in order to embrace a more pro-capitalist stance towards various issues. Almost from the start, this change led to varying degrees of friction within the party. To many people, the key question was: if the Labour Party was planning to desert "the Socialist Cause", what really made it so different from the Nationalist one?

Over the years, the Labour Party developed into an organisation that would talk about social justice and about a number of topics frequently mentioned by leftist parties, but it would hardly ever specify how it seriously intended to remedy countless social ills. Furthermore, even though it was clear that numerous problems were being facilitated by the increasing penetration of capitalist practices in Malta, the bulk of the Labour Party politicians never dared to criticise this economic model. Once capitalism was embraced in the most dogmatic way, politics was reduced to a competition between who could be the best manager of a fundamentally capitalist society.

Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Communist Party of Malta went underground. Although it was never disbanded, it became largely inactive.

When it became clear that the Labour Party had become just another pro-capitalist organisation, several individuals started feeling as though the country lacked a political vehicle that could seriously challenge the capitalist model that formed the basis on which the Maltese economy was built.

Aware of this reality, the Communist Party of Malta started noticing a growing degree of interest in a party that was seriously interested in preserving and/or ensuring free education, health care, stable and decent employment, proper housing, and so on. Unlike the other huge parties, the Communist Party of Malta was not going to pay lip-service to workers' rights and then fail to review the country's appalling minimum wage.

More and more people are losing faith in Malta's two biggest parties. As such individuals feel that neither one of those parties is truly working hard enough to ensure that ALL people residing in Malta have a certain level of welfare, the Communist Party will continue to grow day by day...

Capitalism Generates Prosperity?

When discussing political ideologies, I often hear many people say that "capitalism generates prosperity". It might do so, but any prosperity that is generated through this system is clearly not being distributed fairly. Some political parties might talk about the importance of distributing the prosperity created by capitalism, but history has clearly demonstrated that most people who are only interested in earning millions of dollars for themselves are not really interested in sharing their wealth with other human beings. Furthermore, certain businesses have become so powerful that several governments have become little more than puppets whose strings are pulled in order to ensure that the interests of the business community take top priority. How scary!

The US has often been associated with easy money, luxurious lifestyles, and "democracy". The US might be similar to life in a holiday complex for a relatively small percentage of the population, but there are millions of US citizens who are suffering. The Hunger Report 2010, authored by the Feeding America organisation, "shows that hunger is increasing at an alarming rate in the United States". Listed below are some highly alarming statistics quoted from the same report:

* Feeding America is annually providing food to 37 million Americans, including 14 million children. This is an increase of 46 percent over 2006, when we were feeding 25 million Americans, including 9 million children, each year.
* That means one in eight Americans now rely on Feeding America for food and groceries.
* Feeding America's nationwide network of food banks is feeding 1 million more Americans each week than we did in 2006.
* Thirty-six percent of the households we serve have at least one person working.
* More than one-third of client households report having to choose between food and other basic necessities, such as rent, utilities and medical care.
* The number of children the Feeding America network serves has increased by 50 percent since 2006.

Absolutely shocking! I mean, every country could go through hard times whereby access to certain supplies might be reduced, but the incomprehensible part is this: there are 37 million Americans who are in desperate need of food in the US while individuals such as Kim Kardashian and Hugh Hefner are allowed to retain the resources that could greatly benefit their communities to themselves! Such greed leaves me reeling!

Perhaps I am so bitter towards the lies of capitalism because I also grew up believing that living well depended on getting yourself a good education and working. I have an Honours degree in Psychology together with a string of other qualifications, but the money earned until now has never been sufficient to invest it or to save for an emergency. Living in a credit economy where salaries are kept generally low so that people have to borrow money to buy various items, slavery to debt is practically inevitable. There are individuals in the US who owe thousands of dollars to one or more banks and such money was borrowed to get an education! Why put so much pressure on people? If people are not going to be paid much, there should - at least - be free education, healthcare, housing, transport...

Of course, it is far easier to live in state of denial and to continue thinking that everything is fine while we are almost constantly exposed to "talent" shows and to music videos produced by millionaires. The problem is that once celebrities such as Lady Gaga have finished singing a song, they will just continue raking in more millions of dollars whilst many other millions of people will be trying to make up their minds about whether buying certain medicines might mean the loss of a meal or two...


Image

A Jealous Lover Called Work

Once upon a time, work was regarded as a part of life. Besides work, many people often engaged in various activities, such as reading, writing, participating in group events, and so on.

During the past few years, it seems that work is becoming increasingly similar to a very possessive lover that will not tolerate any other rivals or interference. Indeed, with all the modern communication gadgets such as I-Phones, Blackberries, and laptops that could be utilised in free WiFi zones, it appears that it is becoming very hard for several individuals to be able to draw a line between work and the rest of their life activities. How many times has a family event been interrupted by a work-related SMS or phone call on one's mobile? For more and more people, leaving the office is no longer tantamount to finishing a day's work and to concentrating on other things. You did not manage to answer the 150 unread emails in your inbox? Don't worry! Just go home, log onto the Internet, and continue working from your bedroom! Friends and family can wait another day! Your health? Only weaklings complain about such things!

With the spectre of unemployment and the threat of competition that pervades capitalist societies, many people feel obliged to prove that they are indispensable to the company. Consequently, they tend to bite much more than they can chew. By having one's finger in so many things, the idea appears to be that of giving the impression that should they leave the company, the company's work will grind to a catastrophic halt.

The desire to feel indispensable has also fuelled a phenomenon called presenteeism. Put simply, many individuals remain in the office beyond business hours with the hope that even if they are not on top on things, they are still doing their utmost to achieve the company's objectives. Some also make it a point to show that most of the week-end was spent on work-related projects.

Over a period of time, the people who succumb to the temptation of making work the centre of their lives often realise that even though work might satisfy many of their psychological needs, such satisfaction comes at a heavy price. Spouses and friends often end up neglected, invitations to social events are turned down, and finding time to pursue other educational activities such as learning a new language are postponed to "sometime in the future". Furthermore, when people end up dedicating 12, 14, or 16 hours a day to work, there is little doubt that such strain is going to have a negative impact on one's health. I wonder how many families have broken down because of work-related pressures. How many friendships have wilted as a result of neglect. How many children have grown up with nannies since one or both parents are always at work. How many individuals have lost their lives or developed chronic illnesses as a result of work-related stress.

The question I keep asking myself is: why should one devote so much effort to increasing the wealth of some shareholders at the expense of one's own health, family, friends, personal and social development? Don't people realise that no matter how glorious one's current position might appear to be, a day will come when one will have to retire? And then what? Are the shareholders going to come to visit you in hospital and to hold your hand when you are so sick that you can barely ingest any food? Are the shareholders going to look after your loved ones?

I think that most societies should take a fresh look at the whole notion of work. Why do people work? What objectives should work allow us to achieve - as individuals and as a society? Shouldn't workers be treated with care from the cradle to the grave? Shouldn't work be more about building a better society characterised by healthy individuals rather than swelling the pockets of a relatively small number of people? The investigation continues...


Image

This Blog is Not Dead!

No, this blog is not dead! I have been extremely busy with so many things during the last few months, but I hope to have some more Internet time for myself in order to publish new, thought-provoking posts in the near future. :)))

Great Song!!!