How Stupid Is Your Employer

[Arturo2nd]

Is this a good time to talk about the franchiser who decided to put the screws to their franchisees? It never occurred to these geniuses that the franchisees would still own the exclusive territorial rights so corporate was deprived of its cut of sales and could not replace the shuttered outlets. I saw the handwriting on the wall and got out 2 years before the debacle.

The genius founder had earlier made a marketing guy the CFO. Said CFO decided not to hire tax guys so he could come in under budgert despite the pleadings of the controller. Soon, the company was being audited in all 50 states and by the IRS. We had to hire a lot of tax guys then.

[Torgo]

With one of my former employers, they implemented restrictions on Internet use, so that only "approved" sites were accessible, mostly sites that were needed for work purposes (e.g., the post office web site in case we had to look up a ZIP code.) Among the sites that were blocked: our own company web site!

[Estreeter]

My workplace operates 24/7, until this past Easter it works every day of the year, now don't work Easter weekend and Christmas Day plus Boxing Day.

Every other day plus public holidays are work,
That said, sick days, usual practice and standard here is you're allowed 10 days per year and typically about 3 or 4 don't need a medical certificate. If you take 2 or more days in a row sick then a certificate is needed.

So what does my idiot employer do, considering we work public holidays and weekends ..... if you take a sick day on a weekend or public holiday you need a certificate .... ever made a medical appointment on a Sunday

Had one bloke show up for our first day back on Saturday with a major cold and said he couldn't find a doc that was open that late on a Saturday, this bloke has had a warning or 2 for other things and didn't want to risk his job by taking a sick day on a weekend without a certificate .... how smart is that rule the company came up with

[cginok]

Top this one.

Where I am employed at, we have scanning devices to scan bar codes with. 90% of the scanning is done outside, all of it is done during the day. My employer paid $1,000 a piece, I think it was close to half a billion dollars in total, for scanning devices that do not work in the sunlight. Yes you read that correctly. My employer is unaware that the sun shines during the daytime.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by cginok

Top this one.

Where I am employed at, we have scanning devices to scan bar codes with. 90% of the scanning is done outside, all of it is done during the day. My employer paid $1,000 a piece, I think it was close to half a billion dollars in total, for scanning devices that do not work in the sunlight. Yes you read that correctly. My employer is unaware that the sun shines during the daytime.

The higher ups at both companies were probably golfing buddies...

[cginok]

Originally Posted by diamelsx

The higher ups at both companies were probably golfing buddies...

Actually, the member of upper management that was in charge of the project retired 6 months later, and was hired as a "consultant" by the maker of the scanning devices.

Here's one more: My employer paid $10 billion dollars for machines that, should they have worked the way they were intended, which they are not, it would take 20 years to recoup the cost of purchasing. But, the machines have a designed life span of only 15 years. So, at some point in the future, my employer will still be trying to pay for the cost of machines that will already be on the scrap heap.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by cginok

Actually, the member of upper management that was in charge of the project retired 6 months later, and was hired as a "consultant" by the maker of the scanning devices.

Here's one more: My employer paid $10 billion dollars for machines that, should they have worked the way they were intended, which they are not, it would take 20 years to recoup the cost of purchasing. But, the machines have a designed life span of only 15 years. So, at some point in the future, my employer will still be trying to pay for the cost of machines that will already be on the scrap heap.

See situations like this is why I do not like term limits in politics. The decision maker was already working for the scanning company while holding his position with your company. He makes out like a bandit while your company is left holding a multi-billion dollar bill. Our politicans do this all the time.

[Torgo]

Many years ago I worked in a call center run by a company that runs outsourced call centers for other companies. At the start, I was promised that this was strictly Customer Service, no sales. But after about a year or so, they changed the job description to include Sales; when they implemented sales quotas and disciplinary action for those who failed to meet quotas, I found another job and quit.

Anyway, about the time I started looking for another job, I overheard the center's director comment about how the change to Sales was not well received by the staff, saying that if the agents didn't like it, they could leave. I found out later that when I left, people were leaving faster than they could be replaced, to the point that they had to shut down 1/3 of the center because they couldn't maintain enough staff to man the desks. I also heard that the Director was called up on the carpet by his superiors at corporate HQ, who wanted to know why his center had the highest turnover rate in the company.

The center shut down entirely a few years later; the company no longer exists as of last year. Meanwhile, the job I found when I quit? I'm still there nearly 15 years later.

[tsunamiSD]

Originally Posted by diamelsx

See situations like this is why I do not like term limits in politics. The decision maker was already working for the scanning company while holding his position with your company. He makes out like a bandit while your company is left holding a multi-billion dollar bill. Our politicans do this all the time.

The US federal government has rules about conflicts of interest that would not have let that happen:
Office of Government Ethics - After Leaving Government
***
of course, Trump and his appointees do not seem to think any ethics rules apply to them...

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by tsunamiSD

The US federal government has rules about conflicts of interest that would not have let that happen:
Office of Government Ethics - After Leaving Government
***
of course, Trump and his appointees do not seem to think any ethics rules apply to them...

about those ethics rules. Yes they tell you can take a job and other stuff after you work a government job, but it doesn't say anything about them having a job with those firms before you take the government job and that happens all the time, not just in Trump's Administration.