If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   Employer's refusal to hire additional help makes part time workers' schedules more erratic, according to a report finally completed by part time researchers   (npr.org) divider line 64
    More: Obvious, refusal, employees  
•       •       •

1217 clicks; posted to Business » on 20 Jul 2013 at 11:49 AM (39 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



64 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-20 09:48:25 AM
Thanks a lot, Obama. Stop being so mean to the job creators by stifling growth to the point of unprecedented corporate profits

/wtf is this guy's problem
 
2013-07-20 11:11:03 AM
Yea, pretty much.  I've yet to have a consistent schedule in the ten years I've been part-time.  Sucks.
 
2013-07-20 11:43:28 AM

Peter von Nostrand: Thanks a lot, Obama. Stop being so mean to the job creators by stifling growth to the point of unprecedented corporate profits

/wtf is this guy's problem


Couldn't have said it better myself.

The stock market is posting records highs, corporate profits are at an all-time high(and wages are at an all-time low), yet there will still be retarded-ass conservatives in here, telling us how all the low wages and erratic, part time schedules are necessary for businesses to survive.
 
jgi
2013-07-20 11:55:11 AM
 
2013-07-20 11:56:13 AM
Help Wanted: Slave with flexible anus and no expectation of normal or consistent hours.
 
2013-07-20 11:58:57 AM

Peter von Nostrand: Thanks a lot, Obama. Stop being so mean to the job creators by stifling growth to the point of unprecedented corporate profits

/wtf is this guy's problem


At my grand opening of my first coffee stand the whole presidential limo calvacade showed up. Obama jumped out, doused the stand with gasoline and lit it on fire with a cigarette (I thought he quit smoking!).  Then he shot my dog, got back in the limo, and drove off.  A somewhat apologetic looking Secret Service agent then approached me and handed me a letter notifying me that I was going to be audited by the IRS.

/thanks Obama.
 
2013-07-20 12:13:06 PM

Nuclear Monk: Peter von Nostrand: Thanks a lot, Obama. Stop being so mean to the job creators by stifling growth to the point of unprecedented corporate profits

/wtf is this guy's problem

At my grand opening of my first coffee stand the whole presidential limo calvacade showed up. Obama jumped out, doused the stand with gasoline and lit it on fire with a cigarette (I thought he quit smoking!).  Then he shot my dog, got back in the limo, and drove off.  A somewhat apologetic looking Secret Service agent then approached me and handed me a letter notifying me that I was going to be audited by the IRS.

/thanks Obama.


Luxury!  Obama showed up with a FBI HRT in full regalia, forced me to drink a gallon on lye and made me sever my own penis with a spoon.  Then they put bees up the ass of my cats and ran up a $9,000 bill to gay sex hotlines.
 
2013-07-20 12:23:35 PM
I don't know why they do this, other than to screw with people. I'd think if I were running a retail or fast food shop, I'd know what times of day are busier than others, when I need people, and be able to build a schedule using the people I have scheduled at regular intervals.

It would make my life a hell of a lot easier, because save for time off requests, I could then just post the thing up on the board every couple of weeks with very few changes from the previous one I'd drawn up. If somebody quits, hire somebody else that can fill the slot.
 
2013-07-20 12:26:04 PM
so what.   its not about the employees in America, its about the Owners.


we're not a Nation anymore, just another Business.
 
2013-07-20 12:27:09 PM

raerae1980: Yea, pretty much.  I've yet to have a consistent schedule in the ten years I've been part-time.  Sucks.



it doesn't suck for the company.  and the company is all that matters in the Land of the Free.
 
2013-07-20 12:27:26 PM

buzzcut73: I don't know why they do this, other than to screw with people.


Have to make sure employee hours don't trigger overtime payment and mandated benefits.
 
2013-07-20 12:27:52 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: Help Wanted: Slave with flexible anus and no expectation of normal or consistent hours.



and willing to work for less than a communist chinese.
 
2013-07-20 12:29:34 PM

jgi: Recommended reading.



Chose yourself to live in a Nation that is no longer a Democratic Republic and a Nation where the richest 2% own you, your government, and 90% of your Nation's total wealth.
 
2013-07-20 12:30:36 PM
Funny thing about part-timers: they're more likely to leave, and leave without notice at that. Which means the holes in your schedule turn into gaping maws until you spend the money it takes to hire another person who may very well do the same thing to you.

And let's not even get into how many people you may have to go through before you get that new body. It is not uncommon at my workplace for them to put like 8 or 9 potential new hires through to a drug test and watch as every single one of them flunks it.
 
2013-07-20 12:32:51 PM

PacManDreaming: Peter von Nostrand: Thanks a lot, Obama. Stop being so mean to the job creators by stifling growth to the point of unprecedented corporate profits

/wtf is this guy's problem

Couldn't have said it better myself.

The stock market is posting records highs, corporate profits are at an all-time high(and wages are at an all-time low), yet there will still be retarded-ass conservatives in here, telling us how all the low wages and erratic, part time schedules are necessary for businesses to survive.



all the new wealth that increased worker productivity and lower wages has produced is being funneled up to the wealthiest 2%.

just like they have designed it.

and they call that Freedom.

and the Sheeple are just beginning to see that something isn't right about America.  it'll take them another 20 years to figure it out.
 
2013-07-20 12:37:58 PM
I'm glad I work a job where employees HAVE to be full time. We can hardly keep up as it is now, I cant imagine how much of a clusterfark things would be if we were all part-time.
 
2013-07-20 12:41:11 PM

jgi: Recommended reading.


I read Tom Peters The Brand You 50 a few years ago, and while it's full of flaws, the basic idea is sound. The days when you went to work for a company, moved up a defined career ladder and left with a gold watch 50 years later are gone. Everything is now about flexibility, and that flexibility is a result of communication technology - companies regularly outsource things like IT now because they can.

And people can moan about neoliberalism, Bush, oligarchs, conservatives, corporations or "the 1%", but you're best to ignore them because this is technology-driven. The genie ain't going back in the bottle. The days when you needed IT guys on site, working on computers because a computer cost $1m is long gone. People care hire people on the other side of the world to write software. If you're going to be Mr "where's my 50 year job and gold watch?", someone else is going to get hired.
 
2013-07-20 12:41:26 PM

DrewCurtisJr: buzzcut73: I don't know why they do this, other than to screw with people.

Have to make sure employee hours don't trigger overtime payment and mandated benefits.


That doesn't make sense. I can build a regular schedule for a bunch of 25 hour employees just as easily as one with a bunch of 40 hour employees, I'll just need more of them. Seriously, how is it harder to do the same thing every week than it would be to figure it out when you randomize everybody's working hours?
 
2013-07-20 12:48:06 PM
Back when I worked retail for a big box store it was as if the scheduling methods were designed by guys at the CIA to drive people insane. It was like they tried to avoid consistent, rational schedules that played best to whatever times individual people could most conveniently work. All scheduling was arbitrarily given through a program controlled by the corporate head office.

Good luck making plans more than a couple weeks out. Seriously, what kind of sadistic crap are they teaching people in business school these days? Those folks deserve to be put up against a wall.
 
2013-07-20 12:50:32 PM

Gosling: Funny thing about part-timers: they're more likely to leave, and leave without notice at that. Which means the holes in your schedule turn into gaping maws until you spend the money it takes to hire another person who may very well do the same thing to you.

And let's not even get into how many people you may have to go through before you get that new body. It is not uncommon at my workplace for them to put like 8 or 9 potential new hires through to a drug test and watch as every single one of them flunks it.


Sounds like you might work at the same place I do. I have four part time slots open, and exactly zero of the ten people I sent for testing passed.
 
2013-07-20 12:55:48 PM
Oh, and my boss, the other two members of management and I have been working 60 hour weeks at a minimum for over a month and it doesn't look to be letting up anytime soon.

/ thank the gods I'm not salaried yet, the overtime pay is nice
 
jgi
2013-07-20 12:57:46 PM

Towermonkey: Sounds like you might work at the same place I do. I have four part time slots open, and exactly zero of the ten people I sent for testing passed.


If these people are failing because they're coming up positive for hard drugs, sure... don't hire them. Failing a drug test for weed? Who cares? You might as well disqualify people for coming up positive for alcohol. Also, if the only people you can get for a specific position test positive for drugs... ha, well, that definitely says something about the position. Time to reevaluate some policies.
 
2013-07-20 01:08:15 PM

jgi: Towermonkey: Sounds like you might work at the same place I do. I have four part time slots open, and exactly zero of the ten people I sent for testing passed.

If these people are failing because they're coming up positive for hard drugs, sure... don't hire them. Failing a drug test for weed? Who cares? You might as well disqualify people for coming up positive for alcohol. Also, if the only people you can get for a specific position test positive for drugs... ha, well, that definitely says something about the position. Time to reevaluate some policies.


Alcohol leaves the system much quicker than weed, meaning they had only been drinking fairly recently. If someone can't not drink before a job interview, I wouldn't hire them.  That rings of trouble.

Weed on the other hand...meh. I don't smoke anymore, but I don't think its a big deal.
 
2013-07-20 01:11:32 PM

buzzcut73: Seriously, how is it harder to do the same thing every week than it would be to figure it out when you randomize everybody's working hours?


People don't do the same thing every week, and when you are dealing with more people you have the potential of more people unable to work certain times and more turnover.
 
2013-07-20 01:36:06 PM

Nemo's Brother: jgi: Towermonkey: Sounds like you might work at the same place I do. I have four part time slots open, and exactly zero of the ten people I sent for testing passed.

If these people are failing because they're coming up positive for hard drugs, sure... don't hire them. Failing a drug test for weed? Who cares? You might as well disqualify people for coming up positive for alcohol. Also, if the only people you can get for a specific position test positive for drugs... ha, well, that definitely says something about the position. Time to reevaluate some policies.

Alcohol leaves the system much quicker than weed, meaning they had only been drinking fairly recently. If someone can't not drink before a job interview, I wouldn't hire them.  That rings of trouble.

Weed on the other hand...meh. I don't smoke anymore, but I don't think its a big deal.


Personally, I do not care if they smoke weed or not. I don't, but that's not a deal breaker for me. Our insurance carrier, now, that's another thing. Its for driving positions. They most definitely care. One girl made it through until her MVR came back, revealing two DUIs in the past 5 years. I was like, really? You didn't think to mention this earlier?
 
2013-07-20 01:40:48 PM
raise your hand if you've heard of the marshall guitar amp company scheduling experiment.

no seriously. post if you've heard of it.
 
2013-07-20 01:45:13 PM

jgi: Time to reevaluate some policies.


yah. this country. on everything.

/joint genome institute you're too big to fail
 
2013-07-20 02:05:39 PM

DrewCurtisJr: buzzcut73: Seriously, how is it harder to do the same thing every week than it would be to figure it out when you randomize everybody's working hours?

People don't do the same thing every week, and when you are dealing with more people you have the potential of more people unable to work certain times and more turnover.


I think in general, most people do have a certain block of hours that they could set aside for work if given the opportunity. Moms would probably be better during school hours, students are good for evenings. Most people's weekly routines don't vary much, and if there is predictability in the system, they tend to plan around things like work. Yeah, you're going to have your person that usually works noon-5 need 2-3 off on some random Wednesday for a doctor's appointment, but those can be worked around.

You still haven't given me an advantage to a completely randomized scheduling system, or why it doesn't cause more headaches for both worker and management (who invariably has to hear about how nobody can plan anything). For part time work, it's asking a lot to expect your employees to be available 24-7.
 
2013-07-20 02:10:46 PM
Part-time isn't supposed to be permanent employment. Eventually people will graduate onto full-time employment when they gain enough experience or through connections.
 
2013-07-20 02:13:26 PM

Funk Brothers: or through connections.


?! my granddaddy owned this plan-ta-tion. now u go pick cotton, ya' hear?
 
2013-07-20 02:17:13 PM
Some businesses have seemingly random schedules in order to detect patterns in, *ahem*, shrinkage.
 
2013-07-20 03:00:55 PM

farkeruk: jgi: Recommended reading.

I read Tom Peters The Brand You 50 a few years ago, and while it's full of flaws, the basic idea is sound. The days when you went to work for a company, moved up a defined career ladder and left with a gold watch 50 years later are gone. Everything is now about flexibility, and that flexibility is a result of communication technology - companies regularly outsource things like IT now because they can.

And people can moan about neoliberalism, Bush, oligarchs, conservatives, corporations or "the 1%", but you're best to ignore them because this is technology-driven. The genie ain't going back in the bottle. The days when you needed IT guys on site, working on computers because a computer cost $1m is long gone. People care hire people on the other side of the world to write software. If you're going to be Mr "where's my 50 year job and gold watch?", someone else is going to get hired.


That is the way the movie business has been run for years.
 
2013-07-20 03:13:36 PM
If this is a growing trend, wonder how long the temp agency business model will expand to a full time role to fulfill contracted part time services.

You'll go to McDs 2 hours, Walmart 1.5, Wendys 3, etc.

Full time professional part timers.
 
2013-07-20 03:22:22 PM

divx88: If this is a growing trend, wonder how long the temp agency business model will expand to a full time role to fulfill contracted part time services.

You'll go to McDs 2 hours, Walmart 1.5, Wendys 3, etc.

Full time professional part timers.


With no benefits.  Anywhere.
 
2013-07-20 03:24:21 PM

red5ish: Some businesses have seemingly random schedules in order to detect patterns in, *ahem*, shrinkage.


I bet they find it, too. Treating people like crap has a funny way of backfiring.
 
2013-07-20 03:50:25 PM
This has been my biggest concern about the part-time employment economy.  It is extremely difficult to make and stick to a career plan when you're "on call" all the farking time.  This business practice is anathema to the general welfare of society and it needs to be addressed legislatively.

FWIW, I recently read that in 2013 Q1, 19.1% of workers were employed part-time.  That's down from about 22 in 2009 but it's a big problem.  It had farking well better not become "the new normal" or we are utterly screwed.
 
2013-07-20 04:11:01 PM

buzzcut73: I think in general, most people do have a certain block of hours that they could set aside for work if given the opportunity. Moms would probably be better during school hours, students are good for evenings. Most people's weekly routines don't vary much, and if there is predictability in the system, they tend to plan around things like work. Yeah, you're going to have your person that usually works noon-5 need 2-3 off on some random Wednesday for a doctor's appointment, but those can be worked around.

You still haven't given me an advantage to a completely randomized scheduling system, or why it doesn't cause more headaches for both worker and management (who invariably has to hear about how nobody can plan anything). For part time work, it's asking a lot to expect your employees to be available 24-7.


That's why I have to wonder about her saying "it's completely unpredictable". That needs defining, because I'm pretty suspicious about it. In general, employers I know hire people on patterns of shift, and a large part of that is that people don't forget.
 
2013-07-20 04:24:14 PM
This is the main reason I got out of retail, even as a full time assistant manager my schedule was never the same thing each week.  I could go from work 30 hours over 6 days one week to 40 hours over 4 the next week with a 14 hour shift thrown in.  Most shifts were 4-5 hours and while there was never any documentation that said I had to be on call if I was called I had to go in or be written up.  Part of the unpredictability of it was that corporate would give as different payroll budget each week, if other stores went over the whole district would have to cut to get under the next (and we'd find out 2-3 days before the end of the week), part timers who couldn't get the day off so they called out instead, etc...
 
2013-07-20 04:35:35 PM

buzzcut73: You still haven't given me an advantage to a completely randomized scheduling system, or why it doesn't cause more headaches for both worker and management (who invariably has to hear about how nobody can plan anything).


For one because most work schedules aren't "completely randomized", they may not be stable and unpredictable at times but they are not completely random.
 
2013-07-20 05:15:12 PM

Towermonkey: Nemo's Brother: jgi: Towermonkey: Sounds like you might work at the same place I do. I have four part time slots open, and exactly zero of the ten people I sent for testing passed.

If these people are failing because they're coming up positive for hard drugs, sure... don't hire them. Failing a drug test for weed? Who cares? You might as well disqualify people for coming up positive for alcohol. Also, if the only people you can get for a specific position test positive for drugs... ha, well, that definitely says something about the position. Time to reevaluate some policies.

Alcohol leaves the system much quicker than weed, meaning they had only been drinking fairly recently. If someone can't not drink before a job interview, I wouldn't hire them.  That rings of trouble.

Weed on the other hand...meh. I don't smoke anymore, but I don't think its a big deal.

Personally, I do not care if they smoke weed or not. I don't, but that's not a deal breaker for me. Our insurance carrier, now, that's another thing. Its for driving positions. They most definitely care. One girl made it through until her MVR came back, revealing two DUIs in the past 5 years. I was like, really? You didn't think to mention this earlier?


Maybe if you paid more money, you'd get a better pool of candidates?
 
2013-07-20 05:26:51 PM

Zeno-25: red5ish: Some businesses have seemingly random schedules in order to detect patterns in, *ahem*, shrinkage.

I bet they find it, too. Treating people like crap has a funny way of backfiring.


I did retail for a few years, mostly because the odd schedules worked out in my favor with my college classes. I had no problem maintaining a second job during school breaks because I pushed back and said, "Nope." if the schedule sucked.

Then one of the managers decided to pull the old "You'll take what we give you and you'll like it." routine.

I was bummed out about it at first, but after some pretty intense meditation on the subject I realized two things:
1) Really don't need to use them as a reference.
2) Bartending classes are $300; it'll pay for itself in a couple of weeks, I reasoned.

So I simply didn't show up to work anymore after that. Got a job with a catering company doing regular 40-hour weekends until I started my IT career.

I hoped I'd only see that in retail but sadly I've needed to do similar in my professional career too. If I could offer any kind of advice it's: network, network, network.

Crap happens but don't roll over and take abuse. And like the crew of the Serenity in Firefly, you'd better be ready with a plan B if (and when) your business partner gets stupid.
 
2013-07-20 05:33:01 PM

misanthropicsob: Towermonkey: Nemo's Brother: jgi: Towermonkey: Sounds like you might work at the same place I do. I have four part time slots open, and exactly zero of the ten people I sent for testing passed.

If these people are failing because they're coming up positive for hard drugs, sure... don't hire them. Failing a drug test for weed? Who cares? You might as well disqualify people for coming up positive for alcohol. Also, if the only people you can get for a specific position test positive for drugs... ha, well, that definitely says something about the position. Time to reevaluate some policies.

Alcohol leaves the system much quicker than weed, meaning they had only been drinking fairly recently. If someone can't not drink before a job interview, I wouldn't hire them.  That rings of trouble.

Weed on the other hand...meh. I don't smoke anymore, but I don't think its a big deal.

Personally, I do not care if they smoke weed or not. I don't, but that's not a deal breaker for me. Our insurance carrier, now, that's another thing. Its for driving positions. They most definitely care. One girl made it through until her MVR came back, revealing two DUIs in the past 5 years. I was like, really? You didn't think to mention this earlier?

Maybe if you paid more money, you'd get a better pool of candidates?


You'd think so but my corporate overlords are pretty firm on the matter.
 
2013-07-20 05:42:49 PM

buzzcut73: I don't know why they do this, other than to screw with people. I'd think if I were running a retail or fast food shop, I'd know what times of day are busier than others, when I need people, and be able to build a schedule using the people I have scheduled at regular intervals.

It would make my life a hell of a lot easier, because save for time off requests, I could then just post the thing up on the board every couple of weeks with very few changes from the previous one I'd drawn up. If somebody quits, hire somebody else that can fill the slot.


Scheduling your part time workers erratically will encourage "churn".  You can churn your way through employees and not have to worry about things like "raises" and "benefits" and "holiday pay" and "maternity leave", because the part timers will quit because of the shiatty scheduling.

It may not be great for the long-term success of a company, but what CEO worries about long-term success? Three years of great quarterly results and they are off to a different job at a different company.  They get raises and bonuses and benefits and holidays and maternity leave, but the peons?  Nope, you get churn.
 
2013-07-20 06:27:50 PM

Brokenseas: buzzcut73: I don't know why they do this, other than to screw with people. I'd think if I were running a retail or fast food shop, I'd know what times of day are busier than others, when I need people, and be able to build a schedule using the people I have scheduled at regular intervals.

It would make my life a hell of a lot easier, because save for time off requests, I could then just post the thing up on the board every couple of weeks with very few changes from the previous one I'd drawn up. If somebody quits, hire somebody else that can fill the slot.

Scheduling your part time workers erratically will encourage "churn".  You can churn your way through employees and not have to worry about things like "raises" and "benefits" and "holiday pay" and "maternity leave", because the part timers will quit because of the shiatty scheduling.

It may not be great for the long-term success of a company, but what CEO worries about long-term success? Three years of great quarterly results and they are off to a different job at a different company.  They get raises and bonuses and benefits and holidays and maternity leave, but the peons?  Nope, you get churn.


I totally agree but I don't see how it makes sense in the short term either.

I've seen it happen six times now where someone ragequits citing dumb management and management says, "That's okay, it's a buyer's market. We're better off without that person. A qualified candidate will proceed to fall in our lap tomorrow."

Months will then go by with the position still unfilled because, mysteriously, either no one is applying to the vaguely worded and poorly advertised posting or they're horribly underqualified. The smarter workers are content to let deadlines slip while the dumber ones work futile hours of unpaid overtime just to stay afloat. Finally someone will apply who just barely qualifies.

At this point the remaining workers will inevitably be coming to terms with the fact that the disgruntled quitter was correct about the manager being an idiot as said manager then proclaims everyone should now be back to 100% production with the replacement of the team member and there will be trouble if deadlines are missed. But we not only have a few months of backlog from the shortage but we also have to bring the rookie up to speed, the workers complain. Not my problem, declares the manager, forgetting what it is they do for the company.

At that point you get a racemic mixture of more resignations and passive-aggressive sabotage as the workers wait for the crappy manager to be "promoted" to a different department. Three of the six times I've seen this happen, the rookie bails out also. (And one of those times I was the rookie).

All of this happens in the space of one year.

It's really amazing how much damage one bad manager can do to a company by ignoring churn.
 
2013-07-20 06:31:36 PM
Yeah, keep this in mind when you're shopping at your local grocery store or the food section of the big box store. All that equipment that touches food in some manner, or the storage areas where the food is kept or where the food is displayed? The workers who do the cleaning on that stuff probably don't even have half the time they need to properly work on that single objective, AND they probably have several other jobs to do on top of that as well.
 
2013-07-20 08:33:59 PM
Another bowl of gruel, please, sir?

thecurrentmoment.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-07-20 09:13:59 PM
Simple, raise the part time minimum wage to be equal to wage + benefits.  minimum wage = $7.00   part time minimum wage=$9.25
 
2013-07-20 09:16:57 PM

Little_Dictator: Yeah, keep this in mind when you're shopping at your local grocery store or the food section of the big box store. All that equipment that touches food in some manner, or the storage areas where the food is kept or where the food is displayed? The workers who do the cleaning on that stuff probably don't even have half the time they need to properly work on that single objective, AND they probably have several other jobs to do on top of that as well.


Something that corporate loves to do to screw over the inventory teams (at least at the retail chain I worked out) was send out return-to-vendor notices that had to be filled within 24 hours or the store would be charged the full price (not wholesale/bulk rate, the full price). They wouldn't send this notice out until 8-10AM ... and the inventory team works 6am - 3pm.

One of the times this happened, it was for 2300 pairs of clearance shoes. This complicated matters because clearance shoes were out of the box and on the clearance racks. Each shoe had what was called a license plate sticker on it and there was a corresponding LP sticker on the box. So you had to go to the floor, pull the clearance shoe and find its corresponding box before you could even do the actual inventory side of the RTV process, which was scanning the RTV barcode (provided in the email sent between 8 and 10am) and scanning each shoe. Then, the shoes had to be organized on pallets, shrink-wrapped, slapped with shipping stickers and loaded onto a truck via a pallet jack.

We were expected to do all of that as well as the regular day-to-day inventory duties (price markdowns, product counting and restocking, etc) and prepare for the next day's incoming truck.

That day blew monkey balls ... I worked either 12 or 13 hours. It was one of the few times where overtime was approved for me.

/Glad I'm outta retail.
 
2013-07-20 09:27:26 PM

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: I totally agree but I don't see how it makes sense in the short term either.

I've seen it happen six times now where someone ragequits citing dumb management and management says, "That's okay, it's a buyer's market. We're better off without that person. A qualified candidate will proceed to fall in our lap tomorrow."

Months will then go by with the position still unfilled because, mysteriously, either no one is applying to the vaguely worded and poorly advertised posting or they're horribly underqualified. The smarter workers are content to let deadlines slip while the dumber ones work futile hours of unpaid overtime just to stay afloat. Finally someone will apply who just barely qualifies.

At this point the remaining workers will inevitably be coming to terms with the fact that the disgruntled quitter was correct about the manager being an idiot as said manager then proclaims everyone should now be back to 100% production with the replacement of the team member and there will be trouble if deadlines are missed. But we not only have a few months of backlog from the shortage but we also have to bring the rookie up to speed, the workers complain. Not my problem, declares the manager, forgetting what it is they do for the company.

At that point you get a racemic mixture of more resignations and passive-aggressive sabotage as the workers wait for the crappy manager to be "promoted" to a different department. Three of the six times I've seen this happen, the rookie bails out also. (And one of those times I was the rookie).

All of this happens in the space of one year.

It's really amazing how much damage one bad manager can do to a company by ignoring churn.


Can I venture a guess that you work in either the IT industry or a highly technical, specialized field?  Because what you're describing seems like the manager hasn't read the mythical man month when he really should.

Also, I'd probably have a word with the HR Department as well, because if they see a multiple number of requests for the same position over and over again somebody needs to smack that manager upside the back of their head and ask what in the holy fark are they doing to these people.


The change reflects business owners' reluctance to hire full-time workers while they still have so many worries about the strength of the recovery and the cost of the Affordable Care Act, Mathur says. "You want to maintain flexibility so you can respond to the economy" without having to carry the costs of hiring and firing full-time employees, she says.

So when businesses only or mostly hire during part-time it's because of a shrinking economy, and when they only or mostly hire during a growing economy they it's because they don't know if the economy's going to turn them into a millionaire vs a billionaire.  Since when did so many shrinking lillies manage to get themselves into positions as owners of business?
 
2013-07-20 09:28:05 PM

pueblonative: only or mostly hire part time during a growing economy


FTFM
 
Displayed 50 of 64 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report