User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:58:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Papposilenus]
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: Nope. If I'm not allowed to do it and the other person in the department who has been here 13 years is not allows to do it, there's no fucking way I'm going to ask for WFH for a brand new employee. They'd say no, anyway. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: Originally Posted By Papposilenus: Originally Posted By Marie: Originally Posted By ATLDiver: That's the lot of it, she wasn't upfront about needing accommodations and why? The question is, would you have hired her if she did and been accommodating? For as many people bitch we're no longer living in the 50's anymore, these same people refuse to live in reality. There are plenty of ways this could've been handled resulting in keeping a productive employee which is kind of rare today. Sounds to me an easy concession would've been ok leave at 3 to pick up your kids but WFH until 6 (or whenever the assigned work for the day is done.) Since this employee wasn't upfront about her situation maybe not her but your company is going to have to make exceptions to fill that position with a competent employee. More money or more flexibility. Why would I go to bat for her to WFH when I'm not even allowed that on a regular basis? a "it's not fair" mindset is illogical You should go to bat for someone if they make your life/job better at no cost to you. Nope. If I'm not allowed to do it and the other person in the department who has been here 13 years is not allows to do it, there's no fucking way I'm going to ask for WFH for a brand new employee. They'd say no, anyway. cool, illogical, but cool don't be surprised when the eventual new hire is eventually offered a higher pay rate then you or you never fill the position. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:58:49 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: Why would I go to bat for her to WFH when I’m not even allowed that on a regular basis? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: Originally Posted By ATLDiver: That’s the lot of it, she wasn’t upfront about needing accommodations and why? The question is, would you have hired her if she did and been accommodating? For as many people bitch we’re no longer living in the 50’s anymore, these same people refuse to live in reality. There are plenty of ways this could’ve been handled resulting in keeping a productive employee which is kind of rare today. Sounds to me an easy concession would’ve been ok leave at 3 to pick up your kids but WFH until 6 (or whenever the assigned work for the day is done.) Since this employee wasn’t upfront about her situation maybe not her but your company is going to have to make exceptions to fill that position with a competent employee. More money or more flexibility. Why would I go to bat for her to WFH when I’m not even allowed that on a regular basis? Because it would have benefited you and the company to have the job completed. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:00:01 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alex_F: Not only that, but see if you can get more money for doing what you're already doing. I'm sure there are other rigid workplace style jobs who would value someone with your work ethic. Leverage that as a pay raise! I just got a $10K raise a couple of months ago after tie in down the import manager’s position after she quit to move out of state with her partner. I now make $30K a year more than I was making when I was laid off due to the plague four years ago. I am VERY good at what I do. I can do both the transportation side as well as the brokerage side. That is VERY rare and I’m compensated accordingly. I make $95K now. Never thought I’d make this much. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:00:59 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: She was offered part time. That’s the only accommodation possible with the constraints I have to deal with. She didn’t want it. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: Originally Posted By Action45: Would you rather be right, or would you rather be happy? I’m not arguing that employee bares some responsibility here, but it seems like there was zero attempt made to find a flexible solution that benefits all parties involved. Typically when companies can’t fill positions or retain employees it means that it’s not a great place to work. Not my problem though. Refuse to adapt, it seems to be working out really well She was offered part time. That’s the only accommodation possible with the constraints I have to deal with. She didn’t want it. I’d find a new place to work. The world isn’t all black & white, there are solutions in between. It sounds like the owner(s) of your company can’t see that and it’s going to make your life miserable as a manager. I’d offer an employee who does excellent work for 6 hours a day reduced salary + benefits. It’s a much better solution than running your other salaried employees into the ground. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:01:04 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 73RR: That wasn't the issue, she gets paid for 8 hours and even of she finishes in 6 she still is required to fulfil her 8 hours. NOPE. She completed the task. You should have not been so hasty. |
|
|
|
CT, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:01:50 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bronsonburner: Wrong. They offered to keep her on in a part-time status. Dude she didn't want to work there She sounds like a good person and also sharp so she won't have a problem finding full time employment some where else with benefits |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:02:12 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Papposilenus: cool, illogical, but cool don't be surprised when the eventual new hire is eventually offered a higher pay rate then you or you never fill the position. She didn’t have the customs broker license I have. Will never make as much as I do without it. I qualify my company’s corporate brokers license with CBP. I have an audit with CBP in a few weeks. Lot of responsibility. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:02:17 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: I just got a $10K raise a couple of months ago after tie in down the import manager’s position after she quit to move out of state with her partner. I now make $30K a year more than I was making when I was laid off due to the plague four years ago. I am VERY good at what I do. I can do both the transportation side as well as the brokerage side. That is VERY rare and I’m compensated accordingly. I make $95K now. Never thought I’d make this much. Nice! Still... I'd see what's out there for someone who does what you do with your particular work ethic. I'm not bashing you, just saying that your current job is constraining you when you could be doing more for more. Loyalty to employees has gone away. Don't let them take you for a ride because you think they've done you right. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:04:08 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ARMinnesota: NOPE. She completed the task. You should have not been so hasty. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ARMinnesota: Originally Posted By 73RR: That wasn't the issue, she gets paid for 8 hours and even of she finishes in 6 she still is required to fulfil her 8 hours. NOPE. She completed the task. You should have not been so hasty. She did NOT complete her work before leaving. Gave me her unfinished files. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:04:11 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: She didn't have the customs broker license I have. Will never make as much as I do without it. I qualify my company's corporate brokers license with CBP. I have an audit with CBP in a few weeks. Lot of responsibility. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: Originally Posted By Papposilenus: cool, illogical, but cool don't be surprised when the eventual new hire is eventually offered a higher pay rate then you or you never fill the position. She didn't have the customs broker license I have. Will never make as much as I do without it. I qualify my company's corporate brokers license with CBP. I have an audit with CBP in a few weeks. Lot of responsibility. sounds good, but if the owner really needs a butt in that seat, "fair to Marie" won't be part of the package they consider. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:04:25 AM EDT
[Last Edit: guns762]
[#11]
[Deleted]
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:05:43 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ATLDiver: Well, your bosses inflexibility on this is causing you the trouble. From his point of view, he’s getting the work done he wants the way he wants so he’s not incentivized to change. I would politely sit down with him and explain that without paying a lot more money or changing the working dynamics in the office, you’re going to have a hard time filling “butts in seats.” Companies have to adapt, have to be flexible or they cease to exist. Unfortunately, you’re going to take the brunt of this until you get burned out and leave or your bosses have a pain point. I’ve worked for these old relics expecting the world to stay the same as it was “back in the day,” one of the reasons so many have Boomer hatred as these types won’t go and retire out. Better or worse the ‘office’ environment has changed and businesses have to adapt. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ATLDiver: Originally Posted By Marie: Why would I go to bat for her to WFH when I’m not even allowed that on a regular basis? Well, your bosses inflexibility on this is causing you the trouble. From his point of view, he’s getting the work done he wants the way he wants so he’s not incentivized to change. I would politely sit down with him and explain that without paying a lot more money or changing the working dynamics in the office, you’re going to have a hard time filling “butts in seats.” Companies have to adapt, have to be flexible or they cease to exist. Unfortunately, you’re going to take the brunt of this until you get burned out and leave or your bosses have a pain point. I’ve worked for these old relics expecting the world to stay the same as it was “back in the day,” one of the reasons so many have Boomer hatred as these types won’t go and retire out. Better or worse the ‘office’ environment has changed and businesses have to adapt. Based on the threads I've seen about this job, I don't think Marie is the type to push back against supervisors or leadership. I get the very prevalent middle manager vibe of, "shit rolls down hill, I can't wait to push it down further." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:05:44 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Brob324: Both of these things can be true: Employee should have been let go if the terms of her employment were not able to be met on her side. OP is a whiny, barren twat whom quite literally concerns herself with "management" decisions while admittedly not in management and gloatingly posts here about it. No one gives a shit about the melodrama of your customs clearance house and how you really stuck it to someone who chose to have kids while you didn't. Bully for you. Congrats. Life is full of choices. Wasn’t holding a knife to your throat to read the thread. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:06:53 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: Why would I go to bat for her to WFH when I’m not even allowed that on a regular basis? Serious answer: 1. You commented on her good attitude, 2. You commented on her excellent work product, and 3. You and the other guy in the office are, as you have explained in these many reoccurring threads, overworked. If the problem of not finding someone adequate to take the workload off of you and the other person is remedied by allowing 6 hours in office and 2 hours at home for a full 8 hour workday, then you should go to bat for her - and especially so given that you found her attitude to be acceptable and her work product to be excellent. Going to bat for her clearly will benefit you yet you are unwilling to do so for all the antiquated and biased reasons given in your responses to this thread and the others that you've started in the recent past. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:08:46 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Techsan02: Lots to unpack in this thread. She knew the hours and knew there was no WFH. There isn’t really. The woman knew the requirements and immediately ignored them. None of the WFH proponents have a leg to stand on. She knew it wasn’t allowed. Why is entirely irrelevant. Lots of people trolling Marie. Not sure why. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:09:13 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: She didn’t have the customs broker license I have. Will never make as much as I do without it. I qualify my company’s corporate brokers license with CBP. I have an audit with CBP in a few weeks. Lot of responsibility. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: Originally Posted By Papposilenus: cool, illogical, but cool don't be surprised when the eventual new hire is eventually offered a higher pay rate then you or you never fill the position. She didn’t have the customs broker license I have. Will never make as much as I do without it. I qualify my company’s corporate brokers license with CBP. I have an audit with CBP in a few weeks. Lot of responsibility. It sounds like you have a whole lot of experience, qualifications, and leverage. You should have a much easier work life, or much higher salary. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:09:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: guns762]
[#17]
This. Boomer logic at a shitty job, annoyed that someone else didn’t put up with it like they’ve learned to do. I’ve worked with a lot of awesome older women but a few have had this attitude and destroyed the work culture. OP, I guess you won. Congrats. Hope you find a new employee to shit on who will sit there and take it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:09:36 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ranging-by-zipcode: Dude she didn't want to work there She sounds like a good person and also sharp so she won't have a problem finding full time employment some where else with benefits Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ranging-by-zipcode: Originally Posted By Bronsonburner: Wrong. They offered to keep her on in a part-time status. Dude she didn't want to work there She sounds like a good person and also sharp so she won't have a problem finding full time employment some where else with benefits Exactly |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:11:11 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Action45: Would you rather be right, or would you rather be happy? I’m not arguing that employee bares some responsibility here, but it seems like there was zero attempt made to find a flexible solution that benefits all parties involved. Typically when companies can’t fill positions or retain employees it means that it’s not a great place to work. Not my problem though. Refuse to adapt, it seems to be working out really well Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Action45: Originally Posted By Kuraki: Originally Posted By Bronsonburner: It really doesn't matter, and all of you shitting on OP are wrong. The terms of the job were clearly spelled out in the hiring process. Employee took the job knowing she could not fulfill the requirements. Why is this so hard for some to "get"? Worse. Some of them think Marie should have put her self at risk for the employee's sake, both her job and her personal wealth, since holding some employees accountable and allowing others to be exempt from policy can easily turn into an EEOC violation/suit that holds her personally liable along with the company. Would you rather be right, or would you rather be happy? I’m not arguing that employee bares some responsibility here, but it seems like there was zero attempt made to find a flexible solution that benefits all parties involved. Typically when companies can’t fill positions or retain employees it means that it’s not a great place to work. Not my problem though. Refuse to adapt, it seems to be working out really well Look, I'm on the side of being more flexible with policy. I drove the rewriting of a number of my company's policies to give us the ability to be more flexible with people, particularly regarding attendance, once I was in a position to do so. Prior to that, I enforced the policies I didn't agree were in the company's best interests, because I had to. I wish individuals weren't as petty as they are (on both sides employer/employee) because if that were the case, the byzantine morass of labor regulations wouldn't be as constricting as they are either. But she works for a privately owned company. The ownership, but nature of providing the capital to create the company, gets to decide what success is, and what policy is, and has complete authority to be short sighted, over zealous, stuck in their ways, or just plain dumb. It will likely come to bite them in the ass, but they won't care too much as they're likely near the end of their career anyway. Marie and the other employees might suffer from that short sightedness, but lack any real ability to affect it or change the course. I'm betting you're right, and it's not a great place to work for the majority of people who aren't culturally aligned with ownership. I just don't see how Marie had any other reasonable option than exactly what she did, or how being put in such a position is even in part her fault (because she did offer a compromise). I don't know how much leeway she had with comp, but based on how little ownership seems to have given her regarding other terms of employment, I'm guessing it wasn't enough to make a higher paying per hour but benefitless part time offer. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:11:33 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mr_Nasty99: It sounds like you have a whole lot of experience, qualifications, and leverage. You should have a much easier work life, or much higher salary. I’m making $95K now. Much easier work life doesn’t play for this industry. There’s always bullshit. I’m either battling Customs, Agriculture, or FDA, along with stupid customers on a daily basis. I’ve been doing this industry for 31 years. That’s a constant, the bullshit, that is. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:12:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Papposilenus]
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SuperX925: There isn't really. The woman knew the requirements and immediately ignored them. None of the WFH proponents have a leg to stand on. She knew it wasn't allowed. Why is entirely irrelevant. Lots of people trolling Marie. Not sure why. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SuperX925: Originally Posted By Techsan02: Lots to unpack in this thread. She knew the hours and knew there was no WFH. There isn't really. The woman knew the requirements and immediately ignored them. None of the WFH proponents have a leg to stand on. She knew it wasn't allowed. Why is entirely irrelevant. Lots of people trolling Marie. Not sure why. Some people here have unbalanced/abrasive personalities but disagreeing with Marie is not trolling. Were they within their rights to fire the lady? Yes. Was is wise to fire the lady? Probably not. A lady getting 6 "excellent" hours of work done on day two is someone you want to think real hard about getting rid of because "it's not fair" or antiquated (and potentially illegal) business practices. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:12:24 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Papposilenus: Beyond the social issues you're alluding to, Salaried positions used to be for management and above of 1099 type employees. OP described an hourly position and is upset with a new-hire expecting salaried treatment. Salary means- get the work done, then do what you want. Hourly means- butt in seat until pre-agreed time. The new hire fucked up, but OP is the one who will be hurt by this. Agreed. Both Marie and this position should be hourly (or salary non-exempt which is a term that needs to die anyway). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:13:22 AM EDT
[#23]
Problem with all this is eventually you wind up working to support the employees family. First it's school pick ups, then Dr. appointments, then a play or a field trip, it will never end. And then we get to the point where they start burning sick leave on top of that. And since they're a busy with their primary responsibility as a parent they'll never be around to help anyone else pull up some slack for another coworker.
Parenting is hard. It's harder when you have to have a full-time job to meet your financial obligations to the family. Been there, done that, and I'm certainly sympathetic. But it takes money and a job to make a family run properly. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:13:28 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: Why are you acting like this is Marie's fault? She's boxed in by ownerships policies (no matter how dumb they are) on one side, and creating a civil liability for herself and the company on the other. I sincerely doubt she's happy she got to "stick it to a dumb breeder" or whatever, when it means more work for her and she has no influence over shifting policy. The labor market may very well force the ownership to shift policy or die, but that doesn't sound like something a middle manager has any control over, and why middle management is so widely condemned as a shitty place to be. I'm having trouble following your comment on civil liability here. Could you explain what you mean and how this relates to the situation presented by OP? |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:14:00 AM EDT
[#25]
I'm in a mgmt position with approx 12 direct reports.
I have and maintain a "family first" position and allow my employees to leave whenever "needed" for family issues. With that being said....usually those that abuse that privilege weed themselves out pretty quickly as the work is the work and if you're not getting it done you are affecting direct billing and subsequently other commissioned employees. So it kinda all works itself out but takes a minute. peer pressure also helps in these situations. I don't usually have to "say anything" because their peers make it known they aren't pulling their weight. With HR rules changing as they have over the years....its less and less common to just pull someone aside and tell them to straight up or GTFO. as lenient as my technique might sound i can assure many don't want to be on my team....i have no problem letting you leave early for kids baseball....cheer practice or whatever other "reason" you come up with....by the same token....i have extremely low tolerance for people that aren't picking up the phone after hours and putting in work when asked...on demand....i don't care what time of night it is....if you get the call you put in work. freedom comes at a cost. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:14:11 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mattellis2: I know a guy a like that. Perpetually late and out the door early to get the kids. And his wife is a stay at home mom.  Yeah but what, you expect him to let her drive a car or something? Jesus |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:16:22 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Creatyre: She said it in her own words. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Creatyre: Originally Posted By Kuraki: Originally Posted By Fushaw: It's irrelevant. No children, "womenbosses" always love to shit on the mothers when they're the exact cause of this situation. The office manager in this situation sounds like a boomer "I lock up and you show up and go home when I say type". OP just fired someone who on day 2 was producing excellent work albeit with some scheduling issues. And now we're going to hear about how hard it is to find help for this job on a biweekly basis until the next poor soul gets through the interview process. OP's ideal candidate is one who wants to worship work for 8 hours a day because "that's just the way it is" and any other personal responsibilities are far less important than work. Better be paying 500k+/yr for that level of BS. Why are you acting like this is Marie's fault? She's boxed in by ownerships policies (no matter how dumb they are) on one side, and creating a civil liability for herself and the company on the other. I sincerely doubt she's happy she got to "stick it to a dumb breeder" or whatever, when it means more work for her and she has no influence over shifting policy. The labor market may very well force the ownership to shift policy or die, but that doesn't sound like something a middle manager has any control over, and why middle management is so widely condemned as a shitty place to be. She said it in her own words. Ok that's fair, and now I understand more of the vitriol directed towards her. That part is completely irrelevant to the termination for cause but I see how it can create the perception that she termed out of spite simply because it aligned with cause. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:16:38 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Papposilenus: Some people here have unbalanced/abrasive personalities but disagreeing with Marie is no trolling. Were they within their rights to fire the lady? Yes. Was is wise to fire the lady? Probably not. This is the point. They’ll end up hiring someone who does a shittier job 8 hours a day than this chick did in her 6 hours. It’s not seeing the forest for the trees. But hey…they won!!! |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:16:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: SuperHeavy]
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: I’m a GenX woman and I work my ass off. I’m also single and no kids. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: Originally Posted By Palm: Women don’t work overtime. It is a fact of life. I’m a GenX woman and I work my ass off. I’m also single and no kids. Posted on a workday at 9:31am  Edit... a good 2+ hours of constant posting. Super busy. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:16:49 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SmartDrug: Given the birth rate of white people in this country, I have a particularly hard time sympathizing with you here. She had kids, that presents challenges, especially finding and affording childcare. If you don’t help people like her with certain accommodations, the birth rate drops- eventually to levels like we’re seeing today. This country will be completely gone in another generation because of this issue. The shitbags, illegals, welfare abusers, etc. get covered by the taxpayers, meanwhile you’re shitting on someone trying to make their way? Yeah, you’re the actual problem here. I guess if you haven’t procreated yourself, it won’t affect your blood. I got mine, right? ^This OP is probably at the same time bitching about how the nations demographics has changed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:17:59 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ATLDiver: Well, your bosses inflexibility on this is causing you the trouble. From his point of view, he’s getting the work done he wants the way he wants so he’s not incentivized to change. I would politely sit down with him and explain that without paying a lot more money or changing the working dynamics in the office, you’re going to have a hard time filling “butts in seats.” Companies have to adapt, have to be flexible or they cease to exist. Unfortunately, you’re going to take the brunt of this until you get burned out and leave or your bosses have a pain point. I’ve worked for these old relics expecting the world to stay the same as it was “back in the day,” one of the reasons so many have Boomer hatred as these types won’t go and retire out. Better or worse the ‘office’ environment has changed and businesses have to adapt. 
|
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:19:48 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Creatyre: Based on the threads I've seen about this job, I don't think Marie is the type to push back against supervisors or leadership. I get the very prevalent middle manager vibe of, "shit rolls down hill, I can't wait to push it down further." I agree, if one follows any of the 'leadership' training out there it teaches you how to communicate these issues up the chain of command. The key isn't to just bring the problem and drop it at your bosses feet, it's to explain the problem and give possible solutions. Do it in a constructive way as to support them and their goal, that way there's not an automatic "you're questioning my authority" tone. A good leader wants and needs his employees to ask questions, provide alternatives and sometime challenge his/her decisions. In Marie's case it sounds like the owner's/manager's inflexibility is causing overall problems for their core business because they have too much work for the staff they have. This is a far better problem to have than the inverse but for some reason business owners can't get out of their own way on shit like this because they're invested in "my business, my way" mentality. To an extent that's true but what is the objective at the end of the day? What can *I* do to meet that objective? Does my monthly bottom line grow or shrink by being more flexible and letting employees have a hybrid setup? Sounds like the owner(s) is forgetting that key point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:22:13 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By buckshot_jim: She wasn't honest. Good firing. That's where I'm at. Having said that, I do know how tough it can be to balance work with kids. Schools don't give a shit about your job, and jobs don't give a shit about your kids. OP, is the job such that it can't be done from home? Sounds to me like it's the type of work that can be done anywhere a laptop can connect to the internet. If that's the case, perhaps you could have allowed her to work the 6 in the office and then finish her day's work from her home. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:22:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Arsenalx39]
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SmartDrug: lol lol lol Play that scenario out- white Americans who pay taxes and carry the country are no longer having kids because everything is ridiculously expensive and no accommodations are made for them to care for their kids. Meanwhile the tax leeches keep breeding with impunity while still not carrying their weight regarding economic drains on society. Does that seem sustainable? You don’t like them getting time off to get their kid to hockey, Roger. Do you like needing to speak Spanish to order a pizza? How do you like a 50% income tax rate on people earning over $80k? Someone has to pay for it, someone has to raise the positive rate taxpayers, otherwise we’re just riding out the clock before collapse. Yea even if we let everyone out of them go to their kids hockey or off early to pick up their kids up. Say we even out the amount of whites and blacks and every other race. My taxes will never get lowered |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:22:38 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SuperX925: There isn’t really. The woman knew the requirements and immediately ignored them. None of the WFH proponents have a leg to stand on. She knew it wasn’t allowed. Why is entirely irrelevant. Lots of people trolling Marie. Not sure why. GD loves to extoll on the freedom of business owners to run their companies as they see fit- except when it comes to WFH. Some here feel very entitled to it. I'd love to WFH a little. It doesn't fit my job, but I could manage my workload to WFH once a week or every other week. But it's not allowed. Oh well. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:23:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: ExtraHardTaco]
[#36]
Ppl
 Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:23:35 AM EDT
[#37]
Seems she didn’t understand expectations or thought she could maneuver around them. Fair firing.
I don’t know the industry well enough to know how much the wfh revolution will hit it, but man, I do feel sorry for recruiters trying to grab people for full time on-site nowadays. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:23:42 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FlashHole: That's where I'm at. Having said that, I do know how tough it can be to balance work with kids. Schools don't give a shit about your job, and jobs don't give a shit about your kids. OP, is the job such that it can't be done from home? Sounds to me like it's the type of work that can be done anywhere a laptop can connect to the internet. If that's the case, perhaps you could have allowed her to work the 6 in the office and then finish her day's work from her home. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FlashHole: Originally Posted By buckshot_jim: She wasn't honest. Good firing. That's where I'm at. Having said that, I do know how tough it can be to balance work with kids. Schools don't give a shit about your job, and jobs don't give a shit about your kids. OP, is the job such that it can't be done from home? Sounds to me like it's the type of work that can be done anywhere a laptop can connect to the internet. If that's the case, perhaps you could have allowed her to work the 6 in the office and then finish her day's work from her home. Yes it can be done from home. WFH not allowed. Owners don’t like it. And I only have the capability as I have to do weekend shit. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:25:15 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: WFH is not an option. Period. Even the other regular, good employees don’t have it. Employer is pretty old school. It is what it is. If you don’t like it, you can go elsewhere. This gal lied to us. No mention of needing to get the kids from school in any of the two in-person interviews or first phone screen. It sounds like you've answered your own question. You only get the people willing to show up for those terms and conditions, and in this labor market "You must work in person 8-5 period. A special exception is made for one person in your department for special circumstances but don't even ask for the same special exception" gets you... The people you keep posting about. If I were moved to a schedule that didn't meet my family's needs and told to deal with it, my response would be "Well, I was looking for a job when I found this one " |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:25:58 AM EDT
[#40]
I'm amazed (well, not really) with many of the comments posted in this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:25:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: guns762]
[#41]
The employee knew terms of employment up front. I'd fired her in a heart beat. Plus if you work for someone else, you work by their rules. Don't like it, don't apply. I just don't get it when a bunch of you idoits think you can dictate rules or policies to your employer. If you want to set the rules then front the thousands or millions and start your own business and set all the policies you want. OP has Been straight up and open about employment conditions. If owner says you work 8 to 5 and you agree to it. Then do it. Otherwise don't take the job. Owner does not need to give an explanation to anyone as to why they chose those hours. Plenty of people work set hours. But to say this about the OP is bullshit 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:26:29 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ATLDiver: I agree, if one follows any of the 'leadership' training out there it teaches you how to communicate these issues up the chain of command. The key isn't to just bring the problem and drop it at your bosses feet, it's to explain the problem and give possible solutions. Do it in a constructive way as to support them and their goal, that way there's not an automatic "you're questioning my authority" tone. A good leader wants and needs his employees to ask questions, provide alternatives and sometime challenge his/her decisions. In Marie's case it sounds like the owner's/manager's inflexibility is causing overall problems for their core business because they have too much work for the staff they have. This is a far better problem to have than the inverse but for some reason business owners can't get out of their own way on shit like this because they're invested in "my business, my way" mentality. To an extent that's true but what is the objective at the end of the day? What can *I* do to meet that objective? Does my monthly bottom line grow or shrink by being more flexible and letting employees have a hybrid setup? Sounds like the owner(s) is forgetting that key point. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ATLDiver: Originally Posted By Creatyre: Based on the threads I've seen about this job, I don't think Marie is the type to push back against supervisors or leadership. I get the very prevalent middle manager vibe of, "shit rolls down hill, I can't wait to push it down further." I agree, if one follows any of the 'leadership' training out there it teaches you how to communicate these issues up the chain of command. The key isn't to just bring the problem and drop it at your bosses feet, it's to explain the problem and give possible solutions. Do it in a constructive way as to support them and their goal, that way there's not an automatic "you're questioning my authority" tone. A good leader wants and needs his employees to ask questions, provide alternatives and sometime challenge his/her decisions. In Marie's case it sounds like the owner's/manager's inflexibility is causing overall problems for their core business because they have too much work for the staff they have. This is a far better problem to have than the inverse but for some reason business owners can't get out of their own way on shit like this because they're invested in "my business, my way" mentality. To an extent that's true but what is the objective at the end of the day? What can *I* do to meet that objective? Does my monthly bottom line grow or shrink by being more flexible and letting employees have a hybrid setup? Sounds like the owner(s) is forgetting that key point. I pick my battles carefully and when I can win them. WFH, the hours office is open, only owners and office manager having a key - these are NOT things that are going to change. So I don’t bother. They leave me alone to do my work and that is a HUGE thing with me. Last two jobs has extremely toxic bosses that were also micromanagers. I can put up with a lot for being left alone. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:26:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: guns762]
[#43]
My wife finally admitted that she will never work for another woman that doesn't have kids. She's noticed the pattern of controlling and destructive attitudes in the workplace. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:27:35 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SIG_gunner: GD loves to extoll on the freedom of business owners to run their companies as they see fit- except when it comes to WFH. Some here feel very entitled to it. I'd love to WFH a little. It doesn't fit my job, but I could manage my workload to WFH once a week or every other week. But it's not allowed. Oh well. No no, it's 100% the business owners' right to determine if they will have WFH. It's also on them when they have trouble filling positions in this post-Covid world. Being rigid can be good, at times. At other times it can be a detriment. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:29:10 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Marie: It is what is it. I don’t make the rules around here. I read it like this.  |
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:31:14 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JHS: Yeah but what, you expect him to let her drive a car or something? Jesus Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JHS: Originally Posted By mattellis2: I know a guy a like that. Perpetually late and out the door early to get the kids. And his wife is a stay at home mom. Yeah but what, you expect him to let her drive a car or something? Jesus 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:31:37 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mr_Nasty99: My wife finally admitted that she will never work for another woman that doesn't have kids. She's noticed the pattern of controlling and destructive attitudes in the workplace. Does your wife dump work on childless coworkers and expect them to pick up the slack every time when she has to leave early or be gone for something with the kids? Does she make up any time she has leave work to deal with kid stuff? My experience since the early 90s with parents is that they shit on the childless coworkers and do nothing to make up the time they’ve missed. Expecting me to do part of your workload simply because you had kids does not make me look on you favorably. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:31:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: MikeJGA]
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 73RR: That wasn't the issue, she gets paid for 8 hours and even of she finishes in 6 she still is required to fulfil her 8 hours. True, but over the head of the Etitled generations. ETA, good firing. Don't let the trolls get you down, Marie |
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:32:37 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SuperHeavy: Posted on a workday at 9:31am Edit... a good 2+ hours of constant posting. Super busy. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SuperHeavy: Originally Posted By Marie: Originally Posted By Palm: Women don’t work overtime. It is a fact of life. I’m a GenX woman and I work my ass off. I’m also single and no kids. Posted on a workday at 9:31am Edit... a good 2+ hours of constant posting. Super busy. I'm not even working today and I can't dedicate the amount of time to this thread that she is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 11:33:36 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SIG_gunner: GD loves to extoll on the freedom of business owners to run their companies as they see fit- except when it comes to WFH. Some here feel very entitled to it. I'd love to WFH a little. It doesn't fit my job, but I could manage my workload to WFH once a week or every other week. But it's not allowed. Oh well. The owners of this business can do whatever they want. It doesn’t seem to be working out very well when it comes to hiring and retaining good employees. Best of luck |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
