A corporate employee recently turned to the subreddit Indian Workplace to narrate an unexpectedly dramatic saga involving something most offices take for granted — a computer mouse. What began as a small irritation slowly escalated into a full-blown workplace comedy of territorial battles, passive-aggressive remarks, and strategic revenge powered by CPR training.
The employee works in a finance position where spreadsheets dominate the day. Unlike spreadsheet wizards who rely entirely on keyboard_OPCODE shortcuts, he depends heavily on a mouse to move between multiple Excel sheets and merge data across files. For him, a good mouse is not a luxury but a survival tool.
However, on his office floor, peripheral theft appears to be a regular sport. Colleagues frequently discover their mice and sometimes even keyboards disappearing. After repeated complaints overwhelmed management, they responded by tagging each mouse and keyboard according to assigned desks.
But the tagging system didn’t solve everything. The company followed a hybrid working model with hot-desking, meaning employees shared desktop setups on different days of the week. Desks were allocated according to schedules. Unfortunately, many ignored these schedules and occupied whichever desk suited them on a given day.
Unlike others, this employee strictly adhered to the allocation system. On days outside his schedule, he would either request his manager to arrange a temporary seat or borrow one from a coworker. That system generally worked smoothly.
One morning, however, he arrived slightly late and found a senior colleague comfortably seated at his assigned desk, using his mouse. He politely informed the senior that the desk was designated to him that day. The senior dismissed the concern, suggesting he choose any other empty workstation.
But the employee had even placed a printed name card on the desk. Calmly pointing to it, he explained he preferred to sit at his assigned spot. The senior looked irritated, but the employee simply stood there and waited until the man finished saving his work and moved.
Later that day, the senior’s manager casually commented that desks were interchangeable and questioned the fuss. The employee responded lightly, joking that his mouse was superior and his name was attached to the desk, so he felt slightly possessive. The conversation ended with forced smiles.
Days later, his customized mouse — specially issued because his job required heavy spreadsheet navigation — vanished. After scanning the office, he located it on another workstation and quietly reclaimed it. Soon after, the same senior approached him, commenting on how impressive the mouse was. The tone suggested he had borrowed it without permission. The employee advised him to request a similar device from his own manager, just as he had done.
Then came an unexpected twist.
An internal training session on handling medical emergencies was announced. While attendance was optional for most employees, support staff were required to participate. The employee noticed CPR training was included and decided to attend just that segment.
Later, an email revealed he had been mistakenly listed as an official first-aid responder. Due to “strategic placement,” his desk was now permanently assigned to him to ensure accessibility during emergencies.
When the senior learned about this, he joked publicly that the employee must have engineered the permanent allocation out of spite. Internally, the employee found the accusation absurd but calmly replied that he had not anticipated the outcome, though it was amusing to know the desk would be missed.
Soon, coworkers began teasing him about his “untouchable” workstation. Comments circulated suggesting his desk had sacred status. He remained indifferent, content knowing it would be vacant whenever he arrived.
But the saga wasn’t over.
His mouse disappeared yet again. This time, he confronted the same senior, who denied involvement. After locating the device elsewhere, the employee escalated the issue formally with internal support. The team admitted mouse theft was a recurring headache and even suggested he carry the wired mouse home daily. He declined, explaining that losing it outside the office would make him financially liable.
Support staff subtly warned him that filing a complaint would involve security footage review and managerial attention. He insisted on proceeding anyway, stating he had no objection to due process.
The review was scheduled to conclude the following week. In the meantime, coworkers continued joking about his attachment to the mouse, comparing him to cartoon characters. He ignored the commentary.
Eventually, the mouse reappeared on his desk. Determined to prevent future disappearances, he decided to physically secure it more firmly. Internal teams later informed him his complaint would help them enforce stricter rules against equipment theft.
Although his manager was aware of the seating and mouse situation, he remained unaware of the snide remarks. The employee concluded that his frustration stemmed not from jokes but from the broader issue: people ignoring rules create unnecessary inconvenience for those who respect them.
The post amused many readers. One commenter admitted they worked in a completely different field and found it unbelievable that someone would go as far as stealing a mouse, calling the entire saga unexpectedly hilarious.
The employee works in a finance position where spreadsheets dominate the day. Unlike spreadsheet wizards who rely entirely on keyboard_OPCODE shortcuts, he depends heavily on a mouse to move between multiple Excel sheets and merge data across files. For him, a good mouse is not a luxury but a survival tool.
However, on his office floor, peripheral theft appears to be a regular sport. Colleagues frequently discover their mice and sometimes even keyboards disappearing. After repeated complaints overwhelmed management, they responded by tagging each mouse and keyboard according to assigned desks.
But the tagging system didn’t solve everything. The company followed a hybrid working model with hot-desking, meaning employees shared desktop setups on different days of the week. Desks were allocated according to schedules. Unfortunately, many ignored these schedules and occupied whichever desk suited them on a given day.
Unlike others, this employee strictly adhered to the allocation system. On days outside his schedule, he would either request his manager to arrange a temporary seat or borrow one from a coworker. That system generally worked smoothly.
One morning, however, he arrived slightly late and found a senior colleague comfortably seated at his assigned desk, using his mouse. He politely informed the senior that the desk was designated to him that day. The senior dismissed the concern, suggesting he choose any other empty workstation.
But the employee had even placed a printed name card on the desk. Calmly pointing to it, he explained he preferred to sit at his assigned spot. The senior looked irritated, but the employee simply stood there and waited until the man finished saving his work and moved.
Later that day, the senior’s manager casually commented that desks were interchangeable and questioned the fuss. The employee responded lightly, joking that his mouse was superior and his name was attached to the desk, so he felt slightly possessive. The conversation ended with forced smiles.
Days later, his customized mouse — specially issued because his job required heavy spreadsheet navigation — vanished. After scanning the office, he located it on another workstation and quietly reclaimed it. Soon after, the same senior approached him, commenting on how impressive the mouse was. The tone suggested he had borrowed it without permission. The employee advised him to request a similar device from his own manager, just as he had done.
Then came an unexpected twist.
An internal training session on handling medical emergencies was announced. While attendance was optional for most employees, support staff were required to participate. The employee noticed CPR training was included and decided to attend just that segment.
Later, an email revealed he had been mistakenly listed as an official first-aid responder. Due to “strategic placement,” his desk was now permanently assigned to him to ensure accessibility during emergencies.
When the senior learned about this, he joked publicly that the employee must have engineered the permanent allocation out of spite. Internally, the employee found the accusation absurd but calmly replied that he had not anticipated the outcome, though it was amusing to know the desk would be missed.
Soon, coworkers began teasing him about his “untouchable” workstation. Comments circulated suggesting his desk had sacred status. He remained indifferent, content knowing it would be vacant whenever he arrived.
But the saga wasn’t over.
His mouse disappeared yet again. This time, he confronted the same senior, who denied involvement. After locating the device elsewhere, the employee escalated the issue formally with internal support. The team admitted mouse theft was a recurring headache and even suggested he carry the wired mouse home daily. He declined, explaining that losing it outside the office would make him financially liable.
Support staff subtly warned him that filing a complaint would involve security footage review and managerial attention. He insisted on proceeding anyway, stating he had no objection to due process.
The review was scheduled to conclude the following week. In the meantime, coworkers continued joking about his attachment to the mouse, comparing him to cartoon characters. He ignored the commentary.
Eventually, the mouse reappeared on his desk. Determined to prevent future disappearances, he decided to physically secure it more firmly. Internal teams later informed him his complaint would help them enforce stricter rules against equipment theft.
Although his manager was aware of the seating and mouse situation, he remained unaware of the snide remarks. The employee concluded that his frustration stemmed not from jokes but from the broader issue: people ignoring rules create unnecessary inconvenience for those who respect them.
The post amused many readers. One commenter admitted they worked in a completely different field and found it unbelievable that someone would go as far as stealing a mouse, calling the entire saga unexpectedly hilarious.
