|
your note seems accurate, if a little undiplomatic (although your previous diplomacy seems to have been unavailing -- and this typically warrants going to the next step).
And imagine what might have happened to the caretaker if someone had gotten hurt or victimized because of the unsafe lighting -- lighting that he was responsible for. (This is a safety issue.)
Plus, you seem to have gotten the desired (and desirable) results, and there was no harm done that I can see, beyond, perhaps, some momentary discomfort on his part -- discomfort at realizing that he wasn't doing his job -- and that this was potentially a serious problem. (If he does get fired, it will be because of not doing his job, not because of you. And it was his obligation to let the effected people know of his unavailability -- not yours to have to find out about it.)
And what? Because of his (possible) momentary discomfort, you're going to torture yourself?
New word: "proportion".
Plus, you can't let some new perspective overwhelm the validity (as it really existed/exists) of the old. Rather, you must balance them (all). And while I appreciate sensitivity in others, I think that this new perspective of your is overly sensitive -- and overly self-critical.
Do some penance ceremony if you must (I wouldn't) -- but drop the agonizing.
|