Holmag.INC

As these chronicles continue, the pattern becomes undeniable. Each quote below isn’t just a fleeting moment of professional friction; it is a brick in the wall that eventually blocked the path to a healthy corporate future.

We continue this exposure not to dwell on the past, but to document the “why.” Why the pivot was necessary. Why the leap into entrepreneurship was the only way to preserve professional integrity. We are moving from the weight of these experiences into the power of sharing them.

The journey continues here.

9. The Credential Gatekeeper

The Quote

“They think just because they got a master’s degree, they can come and take over like they know it all.”

The Setup

This quote originated from a colleague holding the same title and level as the individual being targeted. Despite the “targeted professional” never bringing up their academic background or flaunting their credentials, the colleague became obsessed with bringing the topic up. The “Baddie” would frequently bring up the Master’s degree in front of other colleagues—specifically those unrelated to design—to create a narrative of arrogance and “taking over.”

They would often make these remarks while the professional in question was physically in the room, attempting to bait a reaction. In reality, the degree was earned for personal academic goals and predated the individual being rehired by the company. The degree had nothing to do with their current role, yet it was treated as a threat to the office status quo.

The Immediate Impact

Emotional: A mixture of bewilderment and exhaustion. It is incredibly draining to be forced into a defensive position regarding an achievement you haven’t even mentioned. The professional felt a deep sense of injustice—being labeled as “know-it-all” simply for existing with an education that the colleague perceived as a threat.

Professional: The constant gossip created a fractured environment. It forced the professional to eventually confront the colleague politely to clarify that the degree was a personal academic pursuit, not a corporate power play. Having to “de-escalate” your own success just to keep the peace is a hallmark of a toxic peer dynamic.

The Chronic Damage

This situation highlights a specific type of corporate rot: the penalization of excellence. When a peer views your growth as their loss, the environment becomes one of crab-mentality rather than collaboration. It taught the professional that in some corporate spaces, you are expected to shrink yourself to fit the comfort level of those around you. This realization fueled the desire to build an entrepreneurial space where high standards and advanced education are celebrated, not used as grounds for character assassination.

10. The Resilience Trap

The Quote

“You are very resilient and brave.”

The Setup

During a departmental meeting focused on a major project, a superior went around the room to acknowledge key contributors. For every other team member, the praise was strictly professional—citing their excellence, technical skills, and work ethic.

However, when the superior reached the “targeted professional,” the tone shifted. Instead of mentioning their contributions or project impact, they simply called them “resilient and brave.” This was a thinly veiled reference to the fact that the professional had recently transferred into this new department after reporting a coworker for information withholding onto a different department. The “tumultuous” transfer was common knowledge among leadership, and instead they chose to highlight the struggle rather than the work.

The Immediate Impact

Emotional: A profound sense of being belittled and a “slap in the face.” While “brave” sounds like a compliment on the surface, in this context, it felt like being branded by the very trauma the company failed to prevent. It was a public reminder that to the superior, this person was a “survivor of a mess,” not a talented professional.

Professional: This was a form of professional erasure. By not acknowledging work-related achievements in a room full of peers, they signaled that the individual’s value was tied to their ability to endure corporate failure rather than their ability to produce high-quality output. It effectively “othered” the professional, keeping the focus on past conflict instead of current contributions.

The Chronic Damage

This experience illustrates how toxic leadership uses “praise” to dismiss accountability. By calling someone “resilient,” the organization avoids saying, “We are sorry we let you get harassed.” It places the burden of “strength” on the victim.

For the professional, this was a turning point. They realized that no matter how much they contributed, the “corporate machine” would always see them through the lens of the trouble they “caused” by speaking up. It proved that in that environment, you could never out-work a reputation for being “brave” enough to demand respect. This realization is often the final push needed to leave and build a space where work—not endurance—is the metric of success.

11. The Power Look & The Peer Collusion

The Action (Instead of a quote)

[A deliberate, slow head-to-toe look of disdain, followed by a pointed look toward the supervisor to “check-in” on their shared disapproval.]

The Setup

This interaction took place during a company Halloween party. The “targeted professional” was tasked with taking photos of team members in front of a festive mural. While managing the flow of the event, it became the turn of a specific colleague—one who habitually ignored the professional’s greetings.

When the professional politely directed this colleague to step in front of the mural for her photo, the colleague responded with a “nasty” head-to-toe look, signaling total disrespect. She then immediately looked over at the professional’s direct supervisor—who was standing nearby—with a knowing glance, confirming their shared alliance in the ongoing gossip and marginalization of the professional.

The Immediate Impact

Emotional: A sharp sense of public disrespect and the cold confirmation of social exclusion. It is a unique kind of gaslighting when you are performing a helpful task (taking photos) and are met with visceral, silent hostility. The look toward the supervisor was the “smoking gun”—it proved that the supervisor wasn’t just aware of the bullying, but was likely a participant in it.

Professional: This interaction destroyed any remaining illusion of a “safe” or “team-oriented” environment. When a peer feels comfortable enough to openly disrespect a colleague in front of a supervisor—and the supervisor offers a silent “nod” of approval through their own body language—the professional hierarchy has officially become a weapon of social warfare.

The Chronic Damage

This “look” was the final piece of evidence that the toxicity was systemic. It highlighted a culture where “mean girl” dynamics were not only tolerated but modeled by leadership. It taught the professional that no amount of politeness or “doing the work” (like greeting people or volunteering for events) could overcome a coordinated effort to “other” them.

This moment of silent, public shaming solidified the need for a complete exit. It reinforced that staying in that environment meant accepting a role as a permanent outsider. In entrepreneurship, there is no room for “clique” culture; this experience became the fuel to build a business where maturity and mutual respect are non-negotiable.

12. The Premature Executioner

The Quote

“Oh my God, I’m so sorry. It was my mistake. I gave you the wrong information.”

The Setup

The “targeted professional” was thrusted into using a complex software program with zero prior experience and minimal onboarding. Despite the steep learning curve and the fact that every new project presented entirely different, non-linear challenges, leadership expected perfection immediately.

When an in-house project hit a snag, the peer collaborator didn’t offer support. Instead, she went on a “gossip tour,” telling anyone who would listen that the professional was incompetent and “didn’t know what they were doing.” However, during a subsequent private call, the peer realized the error was hers. She had provided the wrong data from the start. She offered a frantic, private apology, but the public narrative of “incompetence” had already been cemented in the office.

The Immediate Impact

Emotional: A mix of vindication and deep resentment. While the apology proved the professional wasn’t at fault, the “sorry” felt hollow because it was delivered behind closed doors. The energy required to maintain composure while knowing a peer was actively dragging your name through the mud is exhausting.

Professional: This interaction exposed a “shoot first, ask questions later” mentality. It showed that in this environment, peers would rather blame a colleague to protect their own ego than collaborate to find the root of a problem. The professional realized that even when they were 100% right, the damage to their “brand” within the company was already done by someone else’s loud, wrong mouth.

The Chronic Damage

This was the final lesson in corporate character assassination. It proved that you can be a fast learner, a hard worker, and a successful problem solver, but you are still at the mercy of people who prioritize gossip over accuracy. It reinforced the need to exit: why stay in a place where your “friends” and colleagues only admit their mistakes after they’ve already tried to bury you? This moment solidified the decision to stop seeking validation from people who aren’t even qualified to check your work.

13. The Architect of Sabotage

The Quote

“They just don’t understand the work; they’re doing ‘okay’ for now, but look at this mess.”

The Setup

The “targeted professional” was transferred to a department, which was framed as a “promotion” with a modest raise, but actually was a calculated effort to isolate them. To secure this transfer, HR required the professional to sign a two-year contract with a “clawback” clause, stating that if they resigned before the term ended, they would have to reimburse the company for all costs associated with the transfer.

Under the thumb of a new direct Baddie, the professional was subjected to a campaign of public disparagement. During high-stakes meetings where team projects were displayed, this baddie would present others’ work with meticulous care. However, she would intentionally sabotage the professional’s work—physically draping or hanging work in a “frumpy,” disheveled manner—to visually support her narrative that the professional “didn’t know what they were doing.” She frequently complained to other departments that the professional was a “problem” who couldn’t grasp the basics, despite their proven track record.

The Immediate Impact

Emotional: A crushing sense of being trapped and hunted. Realizing that you have been moved into a “hell” department specifically to break your spirit is traumatizing. The physical sabotage of the work was a particularly cruel form of gaslighting, turning the professional’s own output into a weapon against their reputation.

Professional: This was a high-level corporate “set-up.” The supervisor’s goal was to create a paper trail of incompetence to justify future termination or to force the professional to quit and face the financial penalty of the contract. It was a hostile environment designed to make the professional question their own value every single day.

The Chronic Damage

This experience exposed the darkest side of corporate HR: the use of financial “handcuffs” to keep a whistleblower under the control of an abusive manager. It taught the professional that some systems are so fundamentally broken that they will spend thousands of dollars to silence a person rather than fix the culture. This was the ultimate catalyst—the moment the professional realized that as long as they were “owned” by a contract, they would never be safe.

🕊️ Conclusion: The Great Cleansing

Documenting these thirteen “Chronicles of Corporate Baddies” has been a journey of eleven months in the making. For nearly a year, these quotes and actions lived in the dark, weighing down the spirit of the professionals who endured them.

But today, we turn the page.

For a lot of former corporate workers, the transition from these stories into entrepreneurship, isn’t just a career move; it is a spiritual and professional cleanse. By exposing these behaviors, we strip them of their power. We acknowledge that:

  • The Sabotage was a reflection of their fear, not your failure.
  • The Labels were masks for their lack of accountability.
  • The “Lanes” they tried to keep you in were far too narrow for your vision.

As we move forward into our new journeys, we carry the lessons—the knowledge of what not to do, how not to lead, and how not to treat a human being. We leave behind the “frumpy” displays and the silenced greetings. We are no longer defined by the contracts that held us back, but by the courage it took to walk away and build something better.

The drama ends here. The legacy of excellence begins now.

HOLMAG.INC