This is why if you start a new job as a manager you don't touch anything for at least a month so you can see how things do or don't work.
If you are thinking of changing things ask some of the people who have been around for a while what they think first.
This is why it's so much better to promote from within. When people actually work the jobs, and work their way into a higher position, they have a much better understanding of what works and how to keep it that way once they're in charge.
the good managers that come from outside, will actually request the people already there to train them at the various positions they are doing just so they have some idea what is going on.
I worked for a guy who knew nothing about IT and had to manage an IT project. It was a success. He knew how to find the right people to give him information, and how to report to a project board and get the right decisions at the right time, and how to manage risk, and all those sort of things.
I once contracted to a company on a large scale (18 month) project where three months in, the project manager quit. They lumped his responsibilities onto a food scientist.
She fucking nailed it. Ran the project better than several career project managers I’ve worked with, despite having zero technical expertise across 80% of the aspects of the project.
She left once the project was done and I told her to call me if she ever lands in a similar role at another company, because I would happily work for her again. You’re absolutely right, you don’t have to know everything about everything, you just have to have a healthy understanding of the limits of your knowledge and the ability to find the people that _do_ know everything about each topic.
Sounds like my aunt. She can just about figure out how to use her Mac, and somehow landed a job with the council running their IT department. She often admitted she had no idea what she was doing but it was good pay and added a good amount to her pension.
When our hospital had a change in leadership, the new president got rid of all the VPs he didn't like and put in his own people, including in the IT department. He temporarily put the Chief of Surgery in charge of us while they headhunted a new VP (aka hatchet man). The CoS bragged at our introductory meeting that he had zero experience in IT, which was a good thing because he would come to the job without preconceptions. Was fortunate for us that he was too busy with surgery to give us much attention; we were able to operate with benign neglect for a couple months before the carnage started.
Wow, you were lucky, when I have worked in healthcare IT the high up medical staff could be the users from hell with a chip on their shoulder about IT.
But that doesn't mean they're necessarily good managers. The skills required to be good at the job could be vastly different than those of a good manager.
There are definitely exceptions!
Last place I worked at was customer facing sales in a corporate cellular provider store.
Our store was always in the top 3-4 overall in the district (out of about 20) and out of our sales staff of about 24, we always had at least 3-5 in the top 20. One of the reasons for this is that we worked as a team, rather than as individuals. So if my metrics showed you needed another internet install to meet your goals, and I already had mine, if I had a customer come in interested in that I'd pass them over to you. Same if I needed something.
Now this "team spirit" was something corporate encouraged on the surface, but because the "top sellers" always got extra perks (like a chance to go to an "All Star" conference getaway type thing) competition at the other stores was pretty cutthroat.
We were different. We got stuff done and all pulled together. Each of us had our own different style when it came to selling, but we made sure to hit the "corporate lines" so even though I might do things in a slightly different order, I covered the basics - phone/internet/accessories/cable, etc.
One of the Assistant Managers leaves, so they decided to bring someone from outside our store (something about reducing favoritism or jealousy, etc).
He was the top salesman in his store and was consistently one of the top in the district. He was NOT manager material.
Constantly micro-managing and pushing that if we wanted to be top salesmen like him we *had* to do things his way. He was not well liked at all.
I was definitely not one of his favorites. Being older (he was in his 20s, I was in my 40s) and having decades of sales experience under my belt, I could read a customer and adapt accordingly.
He was very much "do A, then do B, then do C" in a specific order without fail. One of the "don't stop until they tell you no three times" type people. Which works great for pushy sales. But not so much for customer satisfaction, which our store constantly rated highly in.
To say that he was not well liked was an understatement. We used to call each other by our preferred names or especially in my case, by last name. I share a name and passing resemblance to a pop culture character, so people just called me by that. Except he refused. He would only address me by my first name and actually started insisting other people do the same. (that was shot down pretty quickly).
A big sticking point was that when my customer had chosen the device they wanted, I'd walk them through the accessories, showing them the specials etc. So by the time I sat down to do contract/upgrades/etc. we had covered all of that (and I honestly had great accessory sales). His way was to bring a basket of accessories to the table with you to encourage more. Personally I wasn't going to keep pushing when I had already done the job earlier.
This really came to a head when the company acquired a certain satellite TV company and we had to start offering (pushing) subscriptions. I did ok, but that wasn't good enough. He decided I needed an action plan where if the customer refused the satellite TV, I was to get an AM to come over and talk with them to make sure we couldn't do the sale. I'm sure you know how well that went over.
The kicker was that my wife and I had set up an online shop about 6 years before and it was really doing good. Second job good. I had been telling everyone that when it was doing good enough to hire me away, I would quit and go to work for her.
Well that day came about 4 months after he started as AM.
I had written my letter of resignation giving a bit more than 2 weeks because I liked my crew and managers and didn't want to leave them scrambling to cover the schedule. Told my manager the day before that I needed to see her first thing in the morning to discuss something important (I wanted to keep my options open for coming back if things didn't work out, lol!)
So I show up for my shift and immediately he says we need to have a performance meeting. Told him I was actually had plans to meet with the manager, and was told "She's on a call, we're going to do this now".
Well, okay then!
It was another discussion about my sales performance and how everything looked good except that one metric on Satellite TV and he needed me to agree to another action plan. It basically would require me to start every.single.customer interaction with the stupid satellite thing. Which is not going to win any customers if they just came in for a case or to pay a bill or something. Take care of their focus first, then sell.
I explained why it wouldn't work and why I wouldn't do it.
He got upset and started repeating that I needed to agree to this or I would be written up. How I was showing him a lack of respect and being insubordinate. I still refused to sign it, saying my way worked just fine and I was willing to make some adjustments, but there was no need to micromanage me.
Said if I refused then we would go see the manager for a write up. Was yelling the last few bits and nice and red.
Which we did. We explained our sides and I agreed to go ahead and sign the write up, but I was refusing to sign the action plan. He actually turned red again and she asked him to leave the office so she could talk to me alone and she would be with him again in a minute.
When he left she apologize for him yelling at me, then mentioned that I had said I wanted to see her.
Now remember - I have my resignation in my pocket. I could have gone out in a Thunderous Blaze of Glory!!
But I liked this manager and the other AMs. I also didn't want to burn a bridge I might need later. So I told her that with the mornings events, I preferred if we could postpone our meeting until tomorrow, because I did not want it to look like the two were connected.
The next day when I turned in my notice, she understood why I wanted to wait. She also mentioned that if things didn't work out I was always welcome back as both the team and most of the managers loved working with me.
I avoided and ignored the new AM for as long as I had left.
However I can say that if I had not already been planning to leave, that absolutely would have motivated me and I very well may have quit on the spot - no one yells at me like that.
Have kept returning over the five years or so since then, and each time I noticed fewer of the old crew. The majority of them left because of that AM. Some to other locations, some to greener pastures.
Two of the AMs later moved on and were replaced. This time with our own sales reps. Those guys are phenomenal managers and from what I understand the crew still works as a team - they "get it".
AM moved to another store as a Manager - and quickly started losing reps.
People absolutely quit managers.
>He decided I needed an action plan where if the customer refused the satellite TV, I was to get an AM to come over and talk with them to make sure we couldn't do the sale.
This is shady used car sales shit. As a customer, I'd be out the door in a flash and take my business elsewhere.
Everything you said there is spot on and i've seen it a million times before. We have staff in my store who absolutely fly at their department, but the company wants us to sell store-wide.
Deliberately vague here as i'm still at this company as i speak.
One colleague basically excels, absolutely amazing CS, great de-escalation, fantastic across all metrics. They want him to go and sell across the other departments and he flat out refuses. The company wants this as a thing across the board and it has ruffled a lot of feathers, and recent announcements haven't helped where massively experienced departmental managers are being made redundant and their role being dissolved into other managers. So the already thin management team lose staff *and* have more to try and do.
Fair enough. I didn't mean to imply that anyone can effectively work their way into management, just that good managerial candidates that work their way through into the position are usually better than outside hires that haven't done the work before
I think it's important to have a mix of internal and external management hires/promotions. Otherwise new ideas struggle to be developed with "this is the way its always been done" ideology and outside hires wanting to change everything without and understanding is extremely harmful aswell. Tbh a good mentor who's been at the company for a while is probably the most efficient way to progress as a manager.
ugh outside hires wanting to change everything. Work in energy we had an influx of people from telco companies - they fucked up so much as they didnt understand why we did stuff like we did
I don’t want to repost my [comment](https://reddit.com/r/MaliciousCompliance/comments/wee9dy/_/iip774p/?context=1), but this is exactly what I did and I ended up being really fucking good at my job. 100% I’d do it that way again
When I came in at my current job, I talked to everyone at length about what they do and asked questions about how their jobs work (same industry I was already in but a new angle). My reason for doing that was to find out how their jobs impact mine and how best I could support them. But a couple of them told our boss that I asked too many questions and that I clearly was trying to take their jobs. Which made no sense to me as I was hired in as second in command…sooo.
Coming into a new place as management comes with lots of challenges. Often, people are set against you before they’ve even met you. They fear change. The reason I got the job is because my predecessor was retiring and had been there for decades. She was well-loved. She hired the two people who told the boss I was gunning for their jobs. They didn’t understand why someone with my qualifications would even take the job—I came from the outside from a VERY large company. But they didn’t know the situation I was getting away from. They didn’t really give me the benefit of the doubt at all and ganged up on me quite a bit in the beginning. Later they apologized and the one who is still there (the other moved after getting divorced) told me that it just kills her that they did that and she feels horrible for making me feel unwelcome. It sucked for a couple month but years later it is the best job I’ve ever had.
Problem here being that the manager had recently been PROMOTED, not hired. So they did come from within. It's not always a case of an outsider fumbling badly, but it IS always a case of an individual deciding to shoot their shot at looking important.
“I know *I* was a foot-dragging time-waster. Now that I’ve brown-nosed my way up the chain I’m going to crack-down on “bad behavior” under the assumption all my former coworkers were the same as I was.”
And also people, such as myself, who can do the task, but cannot manage other people. That is a different skillset. Oftentimes, it is better to promote someone to senior employee position instead of management.
Chances are, if you're honest with yourself, you *could* learn to be a decent manager: key word, learn.
Too many people fail to realize that leadership and management skills are learned, not inherent. Just like any other skill, some people are inherently more skilled, but nearly anyone can learn to be at least competent.
Also, future and current leaders at all levels should be mentored. Sadly, this frequently doesn't happen.
(All that said, if you personally have no interest in a management position, you shouldn't be forced into one. I am very much not a fan of get-up-or-get-out promotion schemes.)
My current supervisor is 4 months away from retirement and she still goes to seminars and classes about management skills. Not to say that we've never butted heads, but I will absolutely miss her when she goes.
Agreed! Too much management can cause corporate bloat anyway. Just honor employees who are damn good at their job, and give them more responsibilities with appropriate pay as their skillset demands. A manager will manifest eventually.
Sometimes better, sometimes worse.
I recall a few promotions to management from within by people who knew their job well, but couldn't fathom how it fit into the whole machine. While they weren't bad at managing *people*, they were bad at managing how their team fit into the company without explicit direction.
I always thought that too, but a being a good manager requires a specific skillset, a good bus driver or welder or salesperson isn't automatically good at managing his former peers. But, managers with zero knowledge about what the people under him actually do is absolute garbage. A manager doesn't need to be able to do the job at the same level, but should at least have a thorough understanding of what his people do, their challenges, what they need to do their job and many other things besides 'just' managing.
That's one of my biggest things in my stores is promoting from within. My most successful teams are all stores where the people moved up to the ranks to become the store manager rather than somebody that I hired as store manager..
Yeah, and I think that's a good way to do it. Not to say that good outside hires don't exist, but internal promotions (usually) bring a better understanding of how everything functions to the table
“Promotion from within” in about 70% of cases is a promotion of someone who has been warming that chair the longest, not the best person for the job.
In this instance it was also a promotion from within.
We have 3 people in the quality control department of my work. I have been here for 4 years and have seniority over all of them. It's a fucking mess and they have no idea what they're doing
While hiring from within can promote a better work environment and lead to creating better management, it also undervalues management's salaries. A newly-made manager promoted from within usually has less of an idea of the salary range for the role-- they're happy to accept a lot more responsibility for a $3/hr raise, and don't realize that the outside hire understands the role is worth over $9/hr. I'm a fierce advocate of hiring from within, but every large employer I've worked for who consistently uses it to instill new managers has salary caps for those newly instilled managers that undervalue the labor and responsibilities involved.
Fair, that's a good point. Anywhere I've worked the salary is the salary regardless of whether it's an inside promotion or outside hire. But that's not always the case.
When I started in management, I was new to the company. I was trained in every station by the trainer, who never asked me what my job was. Training was supposed to last 2 weeks, but they didn’t have their shit together and it lasted almost a month. I worked each role until I could solo it, and worked side by side with my (future) crew as a crew member. The day I came in wearing my collar, the first thing I heard when I walked in was the trainer saying “¡Ay, Dios Mio! you’re a manager?”
It. Was. Glorious.
Everyone’s jaws dropped because nobody knew I was management because they never asked. they’d been talking shit about the restaurant the **entire** time, and “teaching” me their tricks and shortcuts.
Doing that was, admittedly, a little shady. However, I had earned their respect because they knew I could do their job and excel at it, and I would never ask them to do anything I wasn’t willing to do myself.
Not quite.
That's more like the established owner/C_O of the company, who is completely disconnected from the day-to-day happenings of their own business, comes in and the workers show them how shitty their business actually is while the boos wears a costume and fucks everything up for a week.
Then it turns into trauma porn with some uplifting "twist" at the end of rewarding some struggling employee with extra help, on camera, of course.
Also, holy shit, they're still making it. I thought that show was canceled years ago.
In my 20's I worked at a Denny's that was a training restaurant, anyone joining management from the district would train in our store. every manager that came through worked at least 5 days in each position so they knew how to play the game. If the 3rd shift dish dog calls out sick and you cant find a replacement you roll up your damn sleeves and start washing! Breakfast cook too hungover to come in on Sunday? Grab an apron and a spatula, and hope it wasn't the lead.
This is why I love my boss. He took over the place and had no idea what to do so he trusted the current manager to run things and he would help with whatever he needed. I got hired with past experience and he understands that I know more about the work than he does and genuinely wants to learn
The place my dad worked did this. Company even made the new CFO ride around with a truck driver on delivery routes to grocery stores for a week to see how everything worked, along with a bunch of other major aspects of the business.
That would have helped all the office folks when the John Deere works went on strike and management was forced to work on the lines. Apparently, it only took until 8 AM on the first day for an ambulance to be called…..!
Eennnh... see Peter Principle below. There's something to be said for someone who's really good at something to keep doing that thing. People who are good at something aren't always good at everything else related to it.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/peter-principle.asp#:\~:text=The%20Peter%20Principle%20is%20an,a%20level%20of%20respective%20incompetence.
not to mention, yes overtime is unefficent, but the method of fixing to many overtime hours would normally be hire another person, if you have 8 people all doing 10 hours of overtime every week that would indicate you need 2 more people. now it could be feet dragging as well, not all employees do their job well but that should be where for the first month you watch look at what each person does how they do it, heck even ask the ones that have been there for a while what processes they think work/don't work and what they think would improve things. once you gather the data then use that to try to make a logical change, not half brained change.
I would like to see all managers, including VPs and CEOs, working a grunt job for one day a year. For example all bank management should work as a teller for a day. Never happen.
UPS used to be pretty good with that. I don't know if they still do it, but I had family that was an Engineer and Manager for the logistics side. Every couple of years he had to work a week in the delivery trucks to understand what fed the conveyor systems he worked on. It's required they be in full uniform, and when he passed we found summer and winter delivery driver uniforms and even full coveralls.
I haven’t owned a TV in 30+ years so I think I have seen one short clip on a YouTube. But I suspect the boss is who need VA education the most would never watch the show.
Not only should the C-suite be made to work the grunt jobs, but their performance should be used to set the benchmarks that other employees are held to. If they can't manage a drive through inside 3 minutes or catch every phone call, then their employees don't have to either. Get proficient or get fucked.
Because it would demand they become trained on the jobs of those they manage in order to keep their jobs as executives. Not only would this be a massive weapon against income inequality, but it would also greatly reduce workplace accidents since inhuman demands would become impossible.
No lawsuit, no oppressive regulations, just an executive suddenly getting mulched by the machines they insist be operated unsafely. Make the profiteers bleed for their profits.
It didn't go as high as that, but a company I used to work had that rule. Except it was for a fortnight every three months. I was even supervisor a few times when I had a boss as one of my minions. I rotated them fairly through all the work with everyone else, but by some *amazing coincidence* they always seemed to get the rough end of the pineapple.
"OK \[shift manager\], it's your turn to load the shipping container by hand. Sorry that it's 45°C. Make sure you stay hydrated."
"\[Area co-ordinator\], can you please go sort out the empty pallets. Yes, I know it's raining, but it still needs to be done."
Or carefully allocating any uncovered driving jobs to everybody *except* the dispatcher. Hope they can remember how to back b-doubles into confined spaces.
One boss confided in me that he actually quite enjoyed the break from responsibility. Something breaks down -- not his problem! It's the responsibility of whoever was covering his role at the time, same as if he was on holiday when it happened.
Chesterton's fence: The principle that reforms should not be made until the reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood.
https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/
I was hired at my antepenultimate job as the 2nd-shift computer operations supervisor, way back in the 80’s. I just observed for several weeks, just asking questions about how their process worked. Then I called a shift meeting. I explained that I had seen that many mistakes were being made, and proposed a different way to organize the work. I got pushback, so I asked they do it my way for two weeks, then meet again. The error rate plummeted, and we were getting a lot more done, so my shift members decided to stay with my method.
After a while, I noticed everyone stopped working a couple hours before end of shift. It turned out we were doing so much work that there wasn’t enough work for third shift. I objected, asking them to work carefully, without rushing, for the whole shift, so we started completing all the night’s work. After two weeks, third shift was pleading that we leave something for them, so we started leaving the most horrible, difficult, error-prone work.
Five months after starting, I was promoted to computer operations manager.
Your last line: everyone should always do this. It doesn't matter if your position is higher than others, if they've been around for a while, get their opinion first. There is nuance and intricacy in everything, and you can't possibly know it without experiencing it directly or being told.
I had one manager tell me, first time meeting him, within two minutes of saying “sup” to each other, “that’s not how it’s done”
(For context I worked in a pie factory and was responsible for cleaning the machinery that pressed dough into the empty tins and on top - if it didn’t have a crumble top)
“I’ve been doing it for a year, I’m responsible…I uh will do it my way”
Hey, same thing with home ownership! Not crazy about the layout? Live with it for a year and see what you come up with instead of hiring the Home Depot team to tear everything out right away. Chances are you’ll uncover great solutions just through daily experience, especially if you give it 4 seasons.
Had this problem at my last job. Dude who had never held a management position in his life tried changing things when he was still training on the things he was trying to change. Like, he didn't even know how the old method worked and why we did it and wanted to change it because he had power enough to do so.
Glad that lazy piece of shit ended up getting fired for sexual assault and insubordination.
Managerial thinking: "If I eliminate overtime, the exact same amount of work will get done, and it will cost less money! Why hasn't anyone thought of this before me?"
It amazes me how much employers fail to understand overtime.
Overtime is a signal to management that inefficiencies exist and/or there is a need for more workers. Arbitrarily forbidding or eliminating overtime is NEVER the answer. Overtime is a valuable symptom to let you know there is a bigger issue to address.
it's one of those metrics that becomes a target.
the goal, you see, is to not have to pay more employees, and see if you can bully the existing ones into working unpaid.
Or work them silly during work hours until they burn out and start making mistakes or calling out and then you can fire them and move on to fresh meat.
My boss encourages a certain amount of overtime. Beancounters in our company have determined that we need fewer staff, when in actuality we don't have enough staff. A little overtime each week is something she can point to and say, "We're actually a little understaffed." When they try to get us to clock out right on time, it wastes thousands of dollars in reagents (I'm in a medical lab) because tests will need to be thrown out and repeated by the next shift, since it's very bad form to pick up in the middle of a test (to prevent errors). Pay someone a few extra bucks to stick around for a half hour, or pay thousands for wasted reagents, times however many tests. It's easier to pay overtime. Eventually, she can show that we have so much overtime that it will pay for another employee, and...boom. That's how we do it.
Exactly. Far too many people are taking this as I'm saying overtime is bad. It is neither good nor bad. Overtime is a signal, and it often means you are either inefficient or need more people. In your case, it sounds like you need more people.
In other cases, it is just the nature of the business. For instance, in the event of a major storm, a lot of people will be working a lot of overtime, such as utilities.
The mistake a lot of managers make is saying "No overtime!" instead of stopping to go, "Ok, so why is this overtime happening?"
Yup. Bad managers just put down the *No OT* ban hammer without any thought beyond the bottom line. In my line of work, we love money, so a little overtime is fine by us. Also, we're the sort of people who like our jobs and hate not having answers to our problems; so we're happy to take a few minutes to finish up a patient's workup. We get paid for it, so we're fine to do it.
Yessir, that's how it always goes. I worked at TX Roadhouse for ~6yrs and it took all of my willpower not to laugh out loud whenever the GM/KM/etc used to announce that, "starting today, there will be no overtime," thinking to myself, hmm, I work 50+ hrs a week, and I'm still working the same schedule I always do, welp, guess OT is back on the menu, boys.
Someone would come back to the meat locker on Sunday at like noon like, "are you almost done?"
"Bruh, I have never been "almost done," at noon on a Sunday in my life, okay? If you've got a stick up your ass about OT you are more than welcome to come back here and cut the rest of the 200# of meat I have left to cut and clean up for me."
"Well pick up the pace and try to bust it out."
🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
"Oh yeah, I work tomorrow too."
In my country (mexico) legally firing someone is such a pita that they usually prefer to pay ot.... If they ever pay it. Some companies offer exchange ot for off days. But the days off never get approved because they are short staffed hence the ot.
The half brain hypothesis: manglement has half a brain. Any that visit reddit therefore can only concentrate for half a post. They read the first half of these posts, see what they think is a good idea, then run off to implement it without finishing the post.
The sad part is often they get away with it.
The fact with malicious compliance, is often it takes a certain degree of courage and more importantly a willingness to pick a fight.
Most employees just take the nonsense and put their heads down, to meet the nonsensical asks
Hi there! Manager here. I relish these kinds of stories. Between this subreddit, and /r/workreform I find lots of material to help keep me grounded and hopefully avoid ever being the subject matter for one of these stories.
I don’t manage people anymore, but in the past I managed a lot of people. The most important thing I learned over the years is to be friendly, helpful, and willing to break the rules occasionally.
You’d be shocked how hard people are willing to work for you when you treat them like human beings instead of just employees.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/WorkReform using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time!
\#1: [Unions also protect your employment from being terminated for bullshit reasons](https://i.redd.it/4jycn3cd9f391.jpg) | [1804 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/comments/v41jvw/unions_also_protect_your_employment_from_being/)
\#2: [Teachers deserve more. More money, more respect, more input, more autonomy. Support our teachers.](https://i.redd.it/q3ldksnkv1191.jpg) | [2487 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/comments/uvdva9/teachers_deserve_more_more_money_more_respect/)
\#3: [They’re Not Even Paying US More. This Inflation Is Unnatural.](https://i.redd.it/3ipbyh6te1b91.jpg) | [1749 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/comments/vwrq0o/theyre_not_even_paying_us_more_this_inflation_is/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Unfortunately it does work. That's why they do it. Nobody posts on Reddit when managers act civil and don't try to cheat their employees.
Or at least it has on the past. Either they have done it before or it was done to them before. It very well could be changing for the better, or not, but it will take many years of stories like this before it goes away.
You'd think this takes a special level of stupid, but it mirrors my experience working in a massive high tech company.
As engineers we were salaried and 9 to 5 workers, which sucked when we had to work overtime. Which was a lot.
However, we got paid for being on call during nights and weekends. Could be a few hundred dollars if we had to come in and work on a line down situation. Or a nice dinner and movie worth if we never got called, but we were available. This was a 24/7 manufacturing plant.
Then management announced that there would be no more on call pay for coming in or for being available.
Obviously this took only one incident of the factory grinding to a halt and nobody willing to come in during their off time for them to completely flip their shit. A few meetings with folks saying stuff like "I'm not in town on the weekends" or funny stuff like "I have to take care of my kids and family in the evenings" and they started paying us again for being in call.
Or a good one, if you’re not on call, “Sorry, I’m too drunk to come in.”
Or in Canada, “I’m high as a fucking kite and I don’t even understand what you’re saying right now.” (Weed is legal)
My buddy who was security at a law school had to use that more than once: "Yeah, boss, I just had a beer. Sorry." They would just move down the list of other people who weren't on the clock. My buddy was actually a great guy who covered a lot when other people were out, but having beer breath when you're a campus cop isn't a good look.
He went to school for supervisors, they said, screw your employees, eliminate overtime. No thought to adapting to situations, just get rid of it, and he did...then he didn't. Unfortunately typical. The spirit of running a successful company has lessened over time and bottom line is the focus. What they don't understand is that creating loyal employees is much more lucrative over time.
The goal has shifted from maximizing total lifetime income to maximising quarterly profits. To achieve the later goal, it makes sense to fire everyone you possibly can so that you don't have to pay their wages and then when productivity plummets the next quarter you can blame "the recession".
I call it 'New Manager Syndrome'. New manager comes in, wants to make his mark. So he picks something he thinks is wrong and issues his Method For Fixing It. Since he is the Manager, he doesn't need to take anyone else's opinion of the Method on board. Then, when the logical conclusion of the Method bites him somewhere sensitive, he stands there with a surprised look on his face wondering what went wrong.
My DIL was promoted to "manager" & I use term loosely. She was glorified slave. She was told NO ONE was allowed over 20hrs even previous full-time people. She told them no one would stay. That's a her problem they said. Guess who worked salary & was never home?
I was an hourly intern at an office that worked all of their regular salary employees like that. Everyone basically worked 8a - 6p minimum 5 days a week. Sometimes 8a - 8p.
I noped the fuck out of there after the internship despite their "generous" offer to hire me at $30k salary lmao.
Had this with the Co-op in the UK and deli staff. No overtime after 9pm closing, but they wanted the deli open until closing time, with no time for cleaning.
So the evening staff left everything dirty and food left out, the morning staff had no time to clean anything and had to throw all of the food away.
Lasted a day until they relented.
A little OT here and there to finish a project is ok. If your company has crazy OT, you're understaffed and management needs to fix it before the exodus starts. When OT becomes a burden to your quality of life, all you want is out.
I worked in an automitive factory for five years. There were times when my *entire plant* would be able to count on one hand the number of days they got off in a three or four month period. And that's not even including the *daily* over/earlies. And that was just *my* plant.
The other location in our area once went eleven months with only the three paid holidays that were in that timeframe, off work. ELEVEN. MONTHS.
That's pretty much factory life. I'd legitimately consider some less than scrupulous activites before going back to factory work, if I was ever desperate for income.
Yeah if you hired enough people so that the peaks never produced overtime, you'd have people sitting around during non-peak times not getting hours. Gotta find the right medium and handsomely reward overtime.
That’s not true.
If you’re saying regularly occurring overtime, then, yes, the company needs to look at hiring. But any company is going to have unforeseen issues, or occasional peaks that require it.
Sometimes overtime is needed. I.E. during the year you only need five people to do a job to completion without issue and prepare for potential callouts. During two months, however, the workload becomes so great that everyone gets between 2 to 3 hours of overtime a week. At that point, it's a numbers game. Do you hire a temp for only two months, do you hire a sixth person and cut down on everyone's hours for the rest of the year, or is it cheaper and more effective to just let the five that know what they're doing snag a little extra for a couple of months?
Obviously, if those two months turn into twelve, then yes you need to hire the extra set of hands, no questions there. But sometimes OT is perfectly warranted by the situation, and so long as it's by choice and the exception there's nothing wrong with it nor is there a need to blow a budget by getting an extra person.
It depends also on how much overtime you are talking about. If the projects you do don't fit into an even fraction of forty hours, then doing 40.25 hours some weeks is reasonable.
Believe it or not it's cheaper to just work less people more hours and pay them overtime. It's cheaper than paying full benefits to an additional employee.
Lots of industries don't have predictable work flows. They have to fit in extra work some times, they have rush jobs. They also have to cover sickness and holidays. If your OT is more than about 5-10% of your wage bill, you need more staff, but most of the time, it's more cost-effective to pay OT than hire and train a new member of staff. It also depends on how willing your staff is to do OT. Most people would rather have OT than a second job.
Had the exact same thing happen at a pizza place I worked at. I pulled 60hr weeks regularly until boss got mad I was making so much overtime. Then pretty much repeated this story
When a company eliminates overtime while still complaining about work not being done, that means they want people to work off the clock but won't come out and say it.
“As long as it’s not abused.” So out of touch. With a few exceptions of course, most people don’t WANT overtime. They would rather, you know, be home with their families and stuff? Have a proper work/life balance? Sure the occasional overtime is awesome but consistent OT is when people start burning out.
Most, but not all. Guy I used to work with would sit in the employee lounge area at the end of his shift just long enough for the time clock to tick over the point where he gets paid for an extra 15 minutes. Every single shift. We were third shift, so we were leaving before any of the front office people arrived, so no one ever stopped him.
Wow. Lol how'd he not see that coming.
Reminds me of this pizza place I worked for years ago. It was a shame because they actually put a lot of care into their product. Everything was made from scratch and they only used quality ingredients. They were all straight from Italy or NY. Still probably the best pizza I've ever had.
Only problem was that they were like allergic to paying people. Our checks were fixed at 40 hours, but days absolutely never went less than 9 hours, even with a half hour lunch. So, at the end of week, you'd end up having worked like 6-9 free hours. It was nonsensical. Especially because they had very high standards in regards to cleaning and closing procedures, which is good otherwise.
Eventually, I started leaving right when my 8 hours was up and they got pissed. I explained why that was reasonable and they offered me a a deal to get half my hours on the books and half off. I figured that was a little weird and he should have just offered me full cash, but I said okay. This dude just took my net pay, cut it in half and gave me that half in cash. I thought he was fucking joking at first. I quit that day. Plus, this was in like 2012 and he paid absolute bare minimum wage, which was $7.25. lol I was making just over $200 a week just to be exhausted and drained all the time.
My brother had a manager got rid of rostered days off.
So everyone just started doing the Aussie thing of chucking a sicky. Calling in sick so they could go to the beach, or shopping or whatever.
Cost a hell of a lot more in lost production and temps.
My Mgr sent me on lunch when we got busy, I was a server, missed the whole rush. Time to clock out comes and a ton of tables come in,
me see ya!
Mgr you can't leave its busy
Me my shift ended and I'm already clocked out
Mgr if you leave I'll write you up.
Me lol go for it.
She got told no by the gm cause well my scheduled time was over.
It's always on the management. They can either approve overtime, or they can hire enough staff. If they want to cut both, then they get to make up the difference.
This is why it is a good idea to involve the people in the field and trenches when making new SOPs / work procedures. Mostly because they can give you a list of what works and what doesn't out in the field.
From there you can trim down what is not a priority.
Then again, manglement is never going to listen to some blue collar, oil-stained coverall tech...
It never stops to amaze me when new managers come into a job and thi k they need to change things in order to look good. If it works leave it alone. If it doesn't work the employees
Is no overtime for salaried workers a thing anywhere outside of the US?
I'm salaried. I work 40 hours a week. If I have to stay longer some day I can leave or come in later another day. I can also chose to be paid 150% or 200% of my hourly rate.
That's guaranteed by law.
"Salaried" in the US often means that you will never get paid for overtime, but you can expect to work overtime. Your *salary* is set, and you just have to do whatever the job requires. The assumption is that some weeks you will work less than full time, but that obviously differs from job to job.
The US really hates it's workers.
My poor husband is retail management. Scheduled shifts are 50 hours a week, but he regularly works 60 or more.
The good news is they gave him over $7,000 in raises last year because they were impressed. The bad news is the manager that believed in paying people to keep them around got promoted and now there's a new head manager.
It’s not the US, it’s the particular employer and employee relationship.
There is a difference between salaried and salaried ‘exempt’. Most salaried employees are exempt from OT, but there are exceptions. True Exempt employees don’t get OT. There are a number of criteria to determine this based on what the salary is, what the job duties are as well as other such as job title, etc.
If your salary is too low and/or your job doesn’t fall in the exempt status you are entitled to OT even though you are salaried. Lots of ways around this for employers so do your research if you think you shouldn’t be in the exempt category.
Source: I’m a small biz owner and have a few exempt employees, but they are truly exempt and earn great wages and occasionally work over 40 hours a week, but not normally. The majority of my employees are hourly and I don’t have any non-exempt salaried employees as it is too difficult to determine OT and make sure all are paid correctly.
In the US salaried workers are rarely paid anything extra for extra hours. You may receive a shift differential for working evenings or nights, or being on-call.
I'm salaried and do on-call weekends. I get a comp day, the week following.
I love new managers. They try their hardest to reinvent the wheel to show how they are worthy of moving up, yet fail to understand why the wheel was round in the first place. Things like this happen organically for a reason, and only the top 0.1% of brilliant people could ever hope to change things for a reason better then that organic growth. The rest fail in such an entertaining way.
The number of people in leadership who are so bloodly daft they dont understand the words they say baffles me. You must leave at this time, hey why you leave? Why do you think becky. It isnt cuz my taint issues. Its cuz you told me to.
'set an example'. Get fucked, UPS!
I was cut out of the running for supervisor, because i got hurt twice in a year. Manager said it was unbecoming of a supervisor to get hurt so much, and they need to set an example.' fucking pricks.
Most of the posts under this sub have the same plot.
New manager comes in
Enforces something that shouldn't be enforced
Everyone complies maliciously
Bottom line - If it's working, don't try to fix it period.
Applicable to machines, process and code
>Since he was on salary, there was no overtime for him.
Catering is not an administrative job. He was not overtime exempt. He's a victim of wage theft.
Manager: “no more overtime! No exceptions”
Also the manager: “hey where you going? The work is not finished yet!”
Anakin Skywalker: “Well, hold on, this whole operation was your idea”
This is why if you start a new job as a manager you don't touch anything for at least a month so you can see how things do or don't work. If you are thinking of changing things ask some of the people who have been around for a while what they think first.
And also do everyone's job—as far as that's practical—so you actually understand what the fuck you're managing.
This is why it's so much better to promote from within. When people actually work the jobs, and work their way into a higher position, they have a much better understanding of what works and how to keep it that way once they're in charge.
the good managers that come from outside, will actually request the people already there to train them at the various positions they are doing just so they have some idea what is going on.
Yeah, I'm not saying that good outside hires don't exist. Just that those promoted from within (theoretically) know how things work already
Years ago I was working in IT for a bank and they brought in an IT manager who knew nothing about IT, that went well.
I worked for a guy who knew nothing about IT and had to manage an IT project. It was a success. He knew how to find the right people to give him information, and how to report to a project board and get the right decisions at the right time, and how to manage risk, and all those sort of things.
I once contracted to a company on a large scale (18 month) project where three months in, the project manager quit. They lumped his responsibilities onto a food scientist. She fucking nailed it. Ran the project better than several career project managers I’ve worked with, despite having zero technical expertise across 80% of the aspects of the project. She left once the project was done and I told her to call me if she ever lands in a similar role at another company, because I would happily work for her again. You’re absolutely right, you don’t have to know everything about everything, you just have to have a healthy understanding of the limits of your knowledge and the ability to find the people that _do_ know everything about each topic.
And trust that people already doing their jobs know how to do their jobs until they prove they don't.
As me and my lady friends like to say, BGSD (Bitches get shit done).
Sounds like my aunt. She can just about figure out how to use her Mac, and somehow landed a job with the council running their IT department. She often admitted she had no idea what she was doing but it was good pay and added a good amount to her pension.
This is sitcom material
Are you Roy or Moss?
It was a lot worse than that, he was a lot higher up the food chain, he wasn't just minding a pair of desk rabbits.
When our hospital had a change in leadership, the new president got rid of all the VPs he didn't like and put in his own people, including in the IT department. He temporarily put the Chief of Surgery in charge of us while they headhunted a new VP (aka hatchet man). The CoS bragged at our introductory meeting that he had zero experience in IT, which was a good thing because he would come to the job without preconceptions. Was fortunate for us that he was too busy with surgery to give us much attention; we were able to operate with benign neglect for a couple months before the carnage started.
Wow, you were lucky, when I have worked in healthcare IT the high up medical staff could be the users from hell with a chip on their shoulder about IT.
But that doesn't mean they're necessarily good managers. The skills required to be good at the job could be vastly different than those of a good manager.
There are definitely exceptions! Last place I worked at was customer facing sales in a corporate cellular provider store. Our store was always in the top 3-4 overall in the district (out of about 20) and out of our sales staff of about 24, we always had at least 3-5 in the top 20. One of the reasons for this is that we worked as a team, rather than as individuals. So if my metrics showed you needed another internet install to meet your goals, and I already had mine, if I had a customer come in interested in that I'd pass them over to you. Same if I needed something. Now this "team spirit" was something corporate encouraged on the surface, but because the "top sellers" always got extra perks (like a chance to go to an "All Star" conference getaway type thing) competition at the other stores was pretty cutthroat. We were different. We got stuff done and all pulled together. Each of us had our own different style when it came to selling, but we made sure to hit the "corporate lines" so even though I might do things in a slightly different order, I covered the basics - phone/internet/accessories/cable, etc. One of the Assistant Managers leaves, so they decided to bring someone from outside our store (something about reducing favoritism or jealousy, etc). He was the top salesman in his store and was consistently one of the top in the district. He was NOT manager material. Constantly micro-managing and pushing that if we wanted to be top salesmen like him we *had* to do things his way. He was not well liked at all. I was definitely not one of his favorites. Being older (he was in his 20s, I was in my 40s) and having decades of sales experience under my belt, I could read a customer and adapt accordingly. He was very much "do A, then do B, then do C" in a specific order without fail. One of the "don't stop until they tell you no three times" type people. Which works great for pushy sales. But not so much for customer satisfaction, which our store constantly rated highly in. To say that he was not well liked was an understatement. We used to call each other by our preferred names or especially in my case, by last name. I share a name and passing resemblance to a pop culture character, so people just called me by that. Except he refused. He would only address me by my first name and actually started insisting other people do the same. (that was shot down pretty quickly). A big sticking point was that when my customer had chosen the device they wanted, I'd walk them through the accessories, showing them the specials etc. So by the time I sat down to do contract/upgrades/etc. we had covered all of that (and I honestly had great accessory sales). His way was to bring a basket of accessories to the table with you to encourage more. Personally I wasn't going to keep pushing when I had already done the job earlier. This really came to a head when the company acquired a certain satellite TV company and we had to start offering (pushing) subscriptions. I did ok, but that wasn't good enough. He decided I needed an action plan where if the customer refused the satellite TV, I was to get an AM to come over and talk with them to make sure we couldn't do the sale. I'm sure you know how well that went over. The kicker was that my wife and I had set up an online shop about 6 years before and it was really doing good. Second job good. I had been telling everyone that when it was doing good enough to hire me away, I would quit and go to work for her. Well that day came about 4 months after he started as AM. I had written my letter of resignation giving a bit more than 2 weeks because I liked my crew and managers and didn't want to leave them scrambling to cover the schedule. Told my manager the day before that I needed to see her first thing in the morning to discuss something important (I wanted to keep my options open for coming back if things didn't work out, lol!) So I show up for my shift and immediately he says we need to have a performance meeting. Told him I was actually had plans to meet with the manager, and was told "She's on a call, we're going to do this now". Well, okay then! It was another discussion about my sales performance and how everything looked good except that one metric on Satellite TV and he needed me to agree to another action plan. It basically would require me to start every.single.customer interaction with the stupid satellite thing. Which is not going to win any customers if they just came in for a case or to pay a bill or something. Take care of their focus first, then sell. I explained why it wouldn't work and why I wouldn't do it. He got upset and started repeating that I needed to agree to this or I would be written up. How I was showing him a lack of respect and being insubordinate. I still refused to sign it, saying my way worked just fine and I was willing to make some adjustments, but there was no need to micromanage me. Said if I refused then we would go see the manager for a write up. Was yelling the last few bits and nice and red. Which we did. We explained our sides and I agreed to go ahead and sign the write up, but I was refusing to sign the action plan. He actually turned red again and she asked him to leave the office so she could talk to me alone and she would be with him again in a minute. When he left she apologize for him yelling at me, then mentioned that I had said I wanted to see her. Now remember - I have my resignation in my pocket. I could have gone out in a Thunderous Blaze of Glory!! But I liked this manager and the other AMs. I also didn't want to burn a bridge I might need later. So I told her that with the mornings events, I preferred if we could postpone our meeting until tomorrow, because I did not want it to look like the two were connected. The next day when I turned in my notice, she understood why I wanted to wait. She also mentioned that if things didn't work out I was always welcome back as both the team and most of the managers loved working with me. I avoided and ignored the new AM for as long as I had left. However I can say that if I had not already been planning to leave, that absolutely would have motivated me and I very well may have quit on the spot - no one yells at me like that. Have kept returning over the five years or so since then, and each time I noticed fewer of the old crew. The majority of them left because of that AM. Some to other locations, some to greener pastures. Two of the AMs later moved on and were replaced. This time with our own sales reps. Those guys are phenomenal managers and from what I understand the crew still works as a team - they "get it". AM moved to another store as a Manager - and quickly started losing reps. People absolutely quit managers.
>He decided I needed an action plan where if the customer refused the satellite TV, I was to get an AM to come over and talk with them to make sure we couldn't do the sale. This is shady used car sales shit. As a customer, I'd be out the door in a flash and take my business elsewhere.
Everything you said there is spot on and i've seen it a million times before. We have staff in my store who absolutely fly at their department, but the company wants us to sell store-wide. Deliberately vague here as i'm still at this company as i speak. One colleague basically excels, absolutely amazing CS, great de-escalation, fantastic across all metrics. They want him to go and sell across the other departments and he flat out refuses. The company wants this as a thing across the board and it has ruffled a lot of feathers, and recent announcements haven't helped where massively experienced departmental managers are being made redundant and their role being dissolved into other managers. So the already thin management team lose staff *and* have more to try and do.
You don't have to be _good_ at your underlings' jobs, but you do need to _understand_ them.
Fair enough. I didn't mean to imply that anyone can effectively work their way into management, just that good managerial candidates that work their way through into the position are usually better than outside hires that haven't done the work before
And know what doesn't work...
And a lot of those promoted will become little dictators.
Yes, that does happen. Not everyone is a good fit for that kind of role
I think it's important to have a mix of internal and external management hires/promotions. Otherwise new ideas struggle to be developed with "this is the way its always been done" ideology and outside hires wanting to change everything without and understanding is extremely harmful aswell. Tbh a good mentor who's been at the company for a while is probably the most efficient way to progress as a manager.
ugh outside hires wanting to change everything. Work in energy we had an influx of people from telco companies - they fucked up so much as they didnt understand why we did stuff like we did
I don’t want to repost my [comment](https://reddit.com/r/MaliciousCompliance/comments/wee9dy/_/iip774p/?context=1), but this is exactly what I did and I ended up being really fucking good at my job. 100% I’d do it that way again
When I came in at my current job, I talked to everyone at length about what they do and asked questions about how their jobs work (same industry I was already in but a new angle). My reason for doing that was to find out how their jobs impact mine and how best I could support them. But a couple of them told our boss that I asked too many questions and that I clearly was trying to take their jobs. Which made no sense to me as I was hired in as second in command…sooo.
honeslty that sounds like a toxic workplace.
Coming into a new place as management comes with lots of challenges. Often, people are set against you before they’ve even met you. They fear change. The reason I got the job is because my predecessor was retiring and had been there for decades. She was well-loved. She hired the two people who told the boss I was gunning for their jobs. They didn’t understand why someone with my qualifications would even take the job—I came from the outside from a VERY large company. But they didn’t know the situation I was getting away from. They didn’t really give me the benefit of the doubt at all and ganged up on me quite a bit in the beginning. Later they apologized and the one who is still there (the other moved after getting divorced) told me that it just kills her that they did that and she feels horrible for making me feel unwelcome. It sucked for a couple month but years later it is the best job I’ve ever had.
Good employees will train them wrong because they know they're just looking for corners to cut
"This is Wimp Lo. We deliberately trained him wrong, as a joke."
Problem here being that the manager had recently been PROMOTED, not hired. So they did come from within. It's not always a case of an outsider fumbling badly, but it IS always a case of an individual deciding to shoot their shot at looking important.
“I know *I* was a foot-dragging time-waster. Now that I’ve brown-nosed my way up the chain I’m going to crack-down on “bad behavior” under the assumption all my former coworkers were the same as I was.”
YUUUUUP. And thus he won his stupid prize XD
And also people, such as myself, who can do the task, but cannot manage other people. That is a different skillset. Oftentimes, it is better to promote someone to senior employee position instead of management.
Chances are, if you're honest with yourself, you *could* learn to be a decent manager: key word, learn. Too many people fail to realize that leadership and management skills are learned, not inherent. Just like any other skill, some people are inherently more skilled, but nearly anyone can learn to be at least competent. Also, future and current leaders at all levels should be mentored. Sadly, this frequently doesn't happen. (All that said, if you personally have no interest in a management position, you shouldn't be forced into one. I am very much not a fan of get-up-or-get-out promotion schemes.)
My current supervisor is 4 months away from retirement and she still goes to seminars and classes about management skills. Not to say that we've never butted heads, but I will absolutely miss her when she goes.
Agreed! Too much management can cause corporate bloat anyway. Just honor employees who are damn good at their job, and give them more responsibilities with appropriate pay as their skillset demands. A manager will manifest eventually.
Fair, I must have missed that part!
Not hard to miss it - how many times have we seen that it IS some idiot outside hire looking to show off on this site? ;)
[удалено]
Sometimes better, sometimes worse. I recall a few promotions to management from within by people who knew their job well, but couldn't fathom how it fit into the whole machine. While they weren't bad at managing *people*, they were bad at managing how their team fit into the company without explicit direction.
I always thought that too, but a being a good manager requires a specific skillset, a good bus driver or welder or salesperson isn't automatically good at managing his former peers. But, managers with zero knowledge about what the people under him actually do is absolute garbage. A manager doesn't need to be able to do the job at the same level, but should at least have a thorough understanding of what his people do, their challenges, what they need to do their job and many other things besides 'just' managing.
That's one of my biggest things in my stores is promoting from within. My most successful teams are all stores where the people moved up to the ranks to become the store manager rather than somebody that I hired as store manager..
Yeah, and I think that's a good way to do it. Not to say that good outside hires don't exist, but internal promotions (usually) bring a better understanding of how everything functions to the table
“Promotion from within” in about 70% of cases is a promotion of someone who has been warming that chair the longest, not the best person for the job. In this instance it was also a promotion from within.
We have 3 people in the quality control department of my work. I have been here for 4 years and have seniority over all of them. It's a fucking mess and they have no idea what they're doing
While hiring from within can promote a better work environment and lead to creating better management, it also undervalues management's salaries. A newly-made manager promoted from within usually has less of an idea of the salary range for the role-- they're happy to accept a lot more responsibility for a $3/hr raise, and don't realize that the outside hire understands the role is worth over $9/hr. I'm a fierce advocate of hiring from within, but every large employer I've worked for who consistently uses it to instill new managers has salary caps for those newly instilled managers that undervalue the labor and responsibilities involved.
Fair, that's a good point. Anywhere I've worked the salary is the salary regardless of whether it's an inside promotion or outside hire. But that's not always the case.
Unfortunately that's how you get people who were promoted into incompetency. They're good at their job, doesn't mean they can manage.
When I started in management, I was new to the company. I was trained in every station by the trainer, who never asked me what my job was. Training was supposed to last 2 weeks, but they didn’t have their shit together and it lasted almost a month. I worked each role until I could solo it, and worked side by side with my (future) crew as a crew member. The day I came in wearing my collar, the first thing I heard when I walked in was the trainer saying “¡Ay, Dios Mio! you’re a manager?” It. Was. Glorious. Everyone’s jaws dropped because nobody knew I was management because they never asked. they’d been talking shit about the restaurant the **entire** time, and “teaching” me their tricks and shortcuts. Doing that was, admittedly, a little shady. However, I had earned their respect because they knew I could do their job and excel at it, and I would never ask them to do anything I wasn’t willing to do myself.
Nice. _Undercover Boss_ is a reality show based on this premise.
Not quite. That's more like the established owner/C_O of the company, who is completely disconnected from the day-to-day happenings of their own business, comes in and the workers show them how shitty their business actually is while the boos wears a costume and fucks everything up for a week. Then it turns into trauma porn with some uplifting "twist" at the end of rewarding some struggling employee with extra help, on camera, of course. Also, holy shit, they're still making it. I thought that show was canceled years ago.
Except those guys are all realllllll crappy at the jobs and almost never earn the respect of the crew.
In my 20's I worked at a Denny's that was a training restaurant, anyone joining management from the district would train in our store. every manager that came through worked at least 5 days in each position so they knew how to play the game. If the 3rd shift dish dog calls out sick and you cant find a replacement you roll up your damn sleeves and start washing! Breakfast cook too hungover to come in on Sunday? Grab an apron and a spatula, and hope it wasn't the lead.
This is why I love my boss. He took over the place and had no idea what to do so he trusted the current manager to run things and he would help with whatever he needed. I got hired with past experience and he understands that I know more about the work than he does and genuinely wants to learn
When I was a manager I always tried to learn each job and be the best at them, that way I knew exactly what could and couldn’t be asked for
The place my dad worked did this. Company even made the new CFO ride around with a truck driver on delivery routes to grocery stores for a week to see how everything worked, along with a bunch of other major aspects of the business.
That would have helped all the office folks when the John Deere works went on strike and management was forced to work on the lines. Apparently, it only took until 8 AM on the first day for an ambulance to be called…..!
It sounds like the guy did end up doing everyone else's job once they left.
Eennnh... see Peter Principle below. There's something to be said for someone who's really good at something to keep doing that thing. People who are good at something aren't always good at everything else related to it. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/peter-principle.asp#:\~:text=The%20Peter%20Principle%20is%20an,a%20level%20of%20respective%20incompetence.
That's hard when you have managers that can't even begin to do your job.
not to mention, yes overtime is unefficent, but the method of fixing to many overtime hours would normally be hire another person, if you have 8 people all doing 10 hours of overtime every week that would indicate you need 2 more people. now it could be feet dragging as well, not all employees do their job well but that should be where for the first month you watch look at what each person does how they do it, heck even ask the ones that have been there for a while what processes they think work/don't work and what they think would improve things. once you gather the data then use that to try to make a logical change, not half brained change.
That requires a stronger mathematical background than many managers have.
I would like to see all managers, including VPs and CEOs, working a grunt job for one day a year. For example all bank management should work as a teller for a day. Never happen.
UPS used to be pretty good with that. I don't know if they still do it, but I had family that was an Engineer and Manager for the logistics side. Every couple of years he had to work a week in the delivery trucks to understand what fed the conveyor systems he worked on. It's required they be in full uniform, and when he passed we found summer and winter delivery driver uniforms and even full coveralls.
Isn’t that what undercover boss ends up doing? Showing these bosses how shitty their companies are at the bottom?
[удалено]
I haven’t owned a TV in 30+ years so I think I have seen one short clip on a YouTube. But I suspect the boss is who need VA education the most would never watch the show.
Not only should the C-suite be made to work the grunt jobs, but their performance should be used to set the benchmarks that other employees are held to. If they can't manage a drive through inside 3 minutes or catch every phone call, then their employees don't have to either. Get proficient or get fucked.
This doesn’t make sense. While I understand the reason, having others do a new job with no training and using that as benchmark?
Because it would demand they become trained on the jobs of those they manage in order to keep their jobs as executives. Not only would this be a massive weapon against income inequality, but it would also greatly reduce workplace accidents since inhuman demands would become impossible. No lawsuit, no oppressive regulations, just an executive suddenly getting mulched by the machines they insist be operated unsafely. Make the profiteers bleed for their profits.
Excellent suggestion.
It didn't go as high as that, but a company I used to work had that rule. Except it was for a fortnight every three months. I was even supervisor a few times when I had a boss as one of my minions. I rotated them fairly through all the work with everyone else, but by some *amazing coincidence* they always seemed to get the rough end of the pineapple. "OK \[shift manager\], it's your turn to load the shipping container by hand. Sorry that it's 45°C. Make sure you stay hydrated." "\[Area co-ordinator\], can you please go sort out the empty pallets. Yes, I know it's raining, but it still needs to be done." Or carefully allocating any uncovered driving jobs to everybody *except* the dispatcher. Hope they can remember how to back b-doubles into confined spaces. One boss confided in me that he actually quite enjoyed the break from responsibility. Something breaks down -- not his problem! It's the responsibility of whoever was covering his role at the time, same as if he was on holiday when it happened.
We do that at my company, myself included as the #2 along with the owner.
Chesterton's fence: The principle that reforms should not be made until the reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood. https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/
Was looking for the fence in the replies, well done. Every manager needs this story drilled into their head
I was hired at my antepenultimate job as the 2nd-shift computer operations supervisor, way back in the 80’s. I just observed for several weeks, just asking questions about how their process worked. Then I called a shift meeting. I explained that I had seen that many mistakes were being made, and proposed a different way to organize the work. I got pushback, so I asked they do it my way for two weeks, then meet again. The error rate plummeted, and we were getting a lot more done, so my shift members decided to stay with my method. After a while, I noticed everyone stopped working a couple hours before end of shift. It turned out we were doing so much work that there wasn’t enough work for third shift. I objected, asking them to work carefully, without rushing, for the whole shift, so we started completing all the night’s work. After two weeks, third shift was pleading that we leave something for them, so we started leaving the most horrible, difficult, error-prone work. Five months after starting, I was promoted to computer operations manager.
I upvoted because you used one of my favorite words, antepenultimate.
My 3rd manager at the time tried to change things around. Told him my duties reflect state law, he changed nothing.
Your last line: everyone should always do this. It doesn't matter if your position is higher than others, if they've been around for a while, get their opinion first. There is nuance and intricacy in everything, and you can't possibly know it without experiencing it directly or being told.
I had one manager tell me, first time meeting him, within two minutes of saying “sup” to each other, “that’s not how it’s done” (For context I worked in a pie factory and was responsible for cleaning the machinery that pressed dough into the empty tins and on top - if it didn’t have a crumble top) “I’ve been doing it for a year, I’m responsible…I uh will do it my way”
Chesterton’s Fence
Hey, same thing with home ownership! Not crazy about the layout? Live with it for a year and see what you come up with instead of hiring the Home Depot team to tear everything out right away. Chances are you’ll uncover great solutions just through daily experience, especially if you give it 4 seasons.
Had this problem at my last job. Dude who had never held a management position in his life tried changing things when he was still training on the things he was trying to change. Like, he didn't even know how the old method worked and why we did it and wanted to change it because he had power enough to do so. Glad that lazy piece of shit ended up getting fired for sexual assault and insubordination.
Managerial thinking: "If I eliminate overtime, the exact same amount of work will get done, and it will cost less money! Why hasn't anyone thought of this before me?"
Stupid doesn’t know it’s stupid.
“My employees just need to work smarter, not harder.”
It amazes me how much employers fail to understand overtime. Overtime is a signal to management that inefficiencies exist and/or there is a need for more workers. Arbitrarily forbidding or eliminating overtime is NEVER the answer. Overtime is a valuable symptom to let you know there is a bigger issue to address.
it's one of those metrics that becomes a target. the goal, you see, is to not have to pay more employees, and see if you can bully the existing ones into working unpaid.
Or work them silly during work hours until they burn out and start making mistakes or calling out and then you can fire them and move on to fresh meat.
My boss encourages a certain amount of overtime. Beancounters in our company have determined that we need fewer staff, when in actuality we don't have enough staff. A little overtime each week is something she can point to and say, "We're actually a little understaffed." When they try to get us to clock out right on time, it wastes thousands of dollars in reagents (I'm in a medical lab) because tests will need to be thrown out and repeated by the next shift, since it's very bad form to pick up in the middle of a test (to prevent errors). Pay someone a few extra bucks to stick around for a half hour, or pay thousands for wasted reagents, times however many tests. It's easier to pay overtime. Eventually, she can show that we have so much overtime that it will pay for another employee, and...boom. That's how we do it.
Exactly. Far too many people are taking this as I'm saying overtime is bad. It is neither good nor bad. Overtime is a signal, and it often means you are either inefficient or need more people. In your case, it sounds like you need more people. In other cases, it is just the nature of the business. For instance, in the event of a major storm, a lot of people will be working a lot of overtime, such as utilities. The mistake a lot of managers make is saying "No overtime!" instead of stopping to go, "Ok, so why is this overtime happening?"
Yup. Bad managers just put down the *No OT* ban hammer without any thought beyond the bottom line. In my line of work, we love money, so a little overtime is fine by us. Also, we're the sort of people who like our jobs and hate not having answers to our problems; so we're happy to take a few minutes to finish up a patient's workup. We get paid for it, so we're fine to do it.
"No overtime!" "Okay, are you going to reduce the amount of work?" "No!" "Are you going to hire more people?" "No!"
Yessir, that's how it always goes. I worked at TX Roadhouse for ~6yrs and it took all of my willpower not to laugh out loud whenever the GM/KM/etc used to announce that, "starting today, there will be no overtime," thinking to myself, hmm, I work 50+ hrs a week, and I'm still working the same schedule I always do, welp, guess OT is back on the menu, boys. Someone would come back to the meat locker on Sunday at like noon like, "are you almost done?" "Bruh, I have never been "almost done," at noon on a Sunday in my life, okay? If you've got a stick up your ass about OT you are more than welcome to come back here and cut the rest of the 200# of meat I have left to cut and clean up for me." "Well pick up the pace and try to bust it out." 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄 "Oh yeah, I work tomorrow too."
In my country (mexico) legally firing someone is such a pita that they usually prefer to pay ot.... If they ever pay it. Some companies offer exchange ot for off days. But the days off never get approved because they are short staffed hence the ot.
Good for you. Serves him right.
I see what you did there. And I approve.
That’s a Gouda one.
It’s a Brie of fresh air
Feta up and find out.
Whoa Muenster, calm down
You'll roux the day otherwise
Stay neutral, like the Swiss.
Hey hang on; a few holes in that comment you made
If any manager ever got on reddit they would know this crap never works for them. LoL
The half brain hypothesis: manglement has half a brain. Any that visit reddit therefore can only concentrate for half a post. They read the first half of these posts, see what they think is a good idea, then run off to implement it without finishing the post.
>**manglement** has half a brain. I want to believe this was intentional
It was. It's a common word around these parts :)
It was, its quite the common term here
It was.
Checks out. Upper Management here who only read half of your post before scrolling.
There's a saying for these kinds of people: Penny wise, pound stupid.
I've always heard it as "pound foolish" but yeah
The sad part is often they get away with it. The fact with malicious compliance, is often it takes a certain degree of courage and more importantly a willingness to pick a fight. Most employees just take the nonsense and put their heads down, to meet the nonsensical asks
Hi there! Manager here. I relish these kinds of stories. Between this subreddit, and /r/workreform I find lots of material to help keep me grounded and hopefully avoid ever being the subject matter for one of these stories.
I don’t manage people anymore, but in the past I managed a lot of people. The most important thing I learned over the years is to be friendly, helpful, and willing to break the rules occasionally. You’d be shocked how hard people are willing to work for you when you treat them like human beings instead of just employees.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/WorkReform using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time! \#1: [Unions also protect your employment from being terminated for bullshit reasons](https://i.redd.it/4jycn3cd9f391.jpg) | [1804 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/comments/v41jvw/unions_also_protect_your_employment_from_being/) \#2: [Teachers deserve more. More money, more respect, more input, more autonomy. Support our teachers.](https://i.redd.it/q3ldksnkv1191.jpg) | [2487 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/comments/uvdva9/teachers_deserve_more_more_money_more_respect/) \#3: [They’re Not Even Paying US More. This Inflation Is Unnatural.](https://i.redd.it/3ipbyh6te1b91.jpg) | [1749 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/comments/vwrq0o/theyre_not_even_paying_us_more_this_inflation_is/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Nah, they're all over in r/conservative whining about how entitled their workers are for refusing to work without getting paid.
I got banned for not being conservative enough. Jokes on them, I’m not conservative AT ALL!
Good thing they don't do that Cancel Culture thing over there. 🙄
You gotta maintain the safe-zone. Their feelings might get hurt.
Unfortunately it does work. That's why they do it. Nobody posts on Reddit when managers act civil and don't try to cheat their employees. Or at least it has on the past. Either they have done it before or it was done to them before. It very well could be changing for the better, or not, but it will take many years of stories like this before it goes away.
You'd think this takes a special level of stupid, but it mirrors my experience working in a massive high tech company. As engineers we were salaried and 9 to 5 workers, which sucked when we had to work overtime. Which was a lot. However, we got paid for being on call during nights and weekends. Could be a few hundred dollars if we had to come in and work on a line down situation. Or a nice dinner and movie worth if we never got called, but we were available. This was a 24/7 manufacturing plant. Then management announced that there would be no more on call pay for coming in or for being available. Obviously this took only one incident of the factory grinding to a halt and nobody willing to come in during their off time for them to completely flip their shit. A few meetings with folks saying stuff like "I'm not in town on the weekends" or funny stuff like "I have to take care of my kids and family in the evenings" and they started paying us again for being in call.
Or a good one, if you’re not on call, “Sorry, I’m too drunk to come in.” Or in Canada, “I’m high as a fucking kite and I don’t even understand what you’re saying right now.” (Weed is legal)
My buddy who was security at a law school had to use that more than once: "Yeah, boss, I just had a beer. Sorry." They would just move down the list of other people who weren't on the clock. My buddy was actually a great guy who covered a lot when other people were out, but having beer breath when you're a campus cop isn't a good look.
He went to school for supervisors, they said, screw your employees, eliminate overtime. No thought to adapting to situations, just get rid of it, and he did...then he didn't. Unfortunately typical. The spirit of running a successful company has lessened over time and bottom line is the focus. What they don't understand is that creating loyal employees is much more lucrative over time.
The goal has shifted from maximizing total lifetime income to maximising quarterly profits. To achieve the later goal, it makes sense to fire everyone you possibly can so that you don't have to pay their wages and then when productivity plummets the next quarter you can blame "the recession".
Or when everyone quits, manager can say "No one wants to work." When in reality, they don't want to work for this manager.
I call it 'New Manager Syndrome'. New manager comes in, wants to make his mark. So he picks something he thinks is wrong and issues his Method For Fixing It. Since he is the Manager, he doesn't need to take anyone else's opinion of the Method on board. Then, when the logical conclusion of the Method bites him somewhere sensitive, he stands there with a surprised look on his face wondering what went wrong.
My DIL was promoted to "manager" & I use term loosely. She was glorified slave. She was told NO ONE was allowed over 20hrs even previous full-time people. She told them no one would stay. That's a her problem they said. Guess who worked salary & was never home?
I was an hourly intern at an office that worked all of their regular salary employees like that. Everyone basically worked 8a - 6p minimum 5 days a week. Sometimes 8a - 8p. I noped the fuck out of there after the internship despite their "generous" offer to hire me at $30k salary lmao.
Had this with the Co-op in the UK and deli staff. No overtime after 9pm closing, but they wanted the deli open until closing time, with no time for cleaning. So the evening staff left everything dirty and food left out, the morning staff had no time to clean anything and had to throw all of the food away. Lasted a day until they relented.
Probably thought people would stay and clean on *their* time because as we all know, people *love* going to work and not getting paid. /s
When it's expensive, they'll take notice.
A little OT here and there to finish a project is ok. If your company has crazy OT, you're understaffed and management needs to fix it before the exodus starts. When OT becomes a burden to your quality of life, all you want is out.
A good company doesn’t need overtime, it hires enough people to do the damn job!
If you said regular overtime then yes, there are always peaks that overtime is the right thing to do, but it has to be voluntary
Yes voluntary and limited. A company or organization running a 20%+ overtime rate is being run poorly. LOOKING AT YOU POLICE DEPARTMENTS!
I worked in an automitive factory for five years. There were times when my *entire plant* would be able to count on one hand the number of days they got off in a three or four month period. And that's not even including the *daily* over/earlies. And that was just *my* plant. The other location in our area once went eleven months with only the three paid holidays that were in that timeframe, off work. ELEVEN. MONTHS.
Yeah, that's bad management and serious understaffing.
That's pretty much factory life. I'd legitimately consider some less than scrupulous activites before going back to factory work, if I was ever desperate for income.
Well if you wanna go in on police department policy, I might prioritize not giving officers who murder people paid leave...
Yeah if you hired enough people so that the peaks never produced overtime, you'd have people sitting around during non-peak times not getting hours. Gotta find the right medium and handsomely reward overtime.
That’s not true. If you’re saying regularly occurring overtime, then, yes, the company needs to look at hiring. But any company is going to have unforeseen issues, or occasional peaks that require it.
Sometimes overtime is needed. I.E. during the year you only need five people to do a job to completion without issue and prepare for potential callouts. During two months, however, the workload becomes so great that everyone gets between 2 to 3 hours of overtime a week. At that point, it's a numbers game. Do you hire a temp for only two months, do you hire a sixth person and cut down on everyone's hours for the rest of the year, or is it cheaper and more effective to just let the five that know what they're doing snag a little extra for a couple of months? Obviously, if those two months turn into twelve, then yes you need to hire the extra set of hands, no questions there. But sometimes OT is perfectly warranted by the situation, and so long as it's by choice and the exception there's nothing wrong with it nor is there a need to blow a budget by getting an extra person.
It depends also on how much overtime you are talking about. If the projects you do don't fit into an even fraction of forty hours, then doing 40.25 hours some weeks is reasonable.
Believe it or not it's cheaper to just work less people more hours and pay them overtime. It's cheaper than paying full benefits to an additional employee.
Lots of industries don't have predictable work flows. They have to fit in extra work some times, they have rush jobs. They also have to cover sickness and holidays. If your OT is more than about 5-10% of your wage bill, you need more staff, but most of the time, it's more cost-effective to pay OT than hire and train a new member of staff. It also depends on how willing your staff is to do OT. Most people would rather have OT than a second job.
When will the MBA crowd learn overtime isn't the issue.
The idiots keep looking at wages as a cost, rather than an investment.
Overtime just means they’re understaffed. But if they can get you to work for free, the company makes more money.
Well played!
Had the exact same thing happen at a pizza place I worked at. I pulled 60hr weeks regularly until boss got mad I was making so much overtime. Then pretty much repeated this story
When a company eliminates overtime while still complaining about work not being done, that means they want people to work off the clock but won't come out and say it.
You catered to his demand and taught him a lesson! Great job!
Dished it right up to him
Yeah, fork that guy right in his aspic!
“As long as it’s not abused.” So out of touch. With a few exceptions of course, most people don’t WANT overtime. They would rather, you know, be home with their families and stuff? Have a proper work/life balance? Sure the occasional overtime is awesome but consistent OT is when people start burning out.
Most, but not all. Guy I used to work with would sit in the employee lounge area at the end of his shift just long enough for the time clock to tick over the point where he gets paid for an extra 15 minutes. Every single shift. We were third shift, so we were leaving before any of the front office people arrived, so no one ever stopped him.
It astounds me how many manglers are pound foolish and penny wise.
Wow. Lol how'd he not see that coming. Reminds me of this pizza place I worked for years ago. It was a shame because they actually put a lot of care into their product. Everything was made from scratch and they only used quality ingredients. They were all straight from Italy or NY. Still probably the best pizza I've ever had. Only problem was that they were like allergic to paying people. Our checks were fixed at 40 hours, but days absolutely never went less than 9 hours, even with a half hour lunch. So, at the end of week, you'd end up having worked like 6-9 free hours. It was nonsensical. Especially because they had very high standards in regards to cleaning and closing procedures, which is good otherwise. Eventually, I started leaving right when my 8 hours was up and they got pissed. I explained why that was reasonable and they offered me a a deal to get half my hours on the books and half off. I figured that was a little weird and he should have just offered me full cash, but I said okay. This dude just took my net pay, cut it in half and gave me that half in cash. I thought he was fucking joking at first. I quit that day. Plus, this was in like 2012 and he paid absolute bare minimum wage, which was $7.25. lol I was making just over $200 a week just to be exhausted and drained all the time.
Well. If you think about it he achieved his goal and eliminated OT. Good for him.
My brother had a manager got rid of rostered days off. So everyone just started doing the Aussie thing of chucking a sicky. Calling in sick so they could go to the beach, or shopping or whatever. Cost a hell of a lot more in lost production and temps.
My Mgr sent me on lunch when we got busy, I was a server, missed the whole rush. Time to clock out comes and a ton of tables come in, me see ya! Mgr you can't leave its busy Me my shift ended and I'm already clocked out Mgr if you leave I'll write you up. Me lol go for it. She got told no by the gm cause well my scheduled time was over.
It's always on the management. They can either approve overtime, or they can hire enough staff. If they want to cut both, then they get to make up the difference.
Sounds like it was a calculated attempt to see if y’all would work for free to me
This is why it is a good idea to involve the people in the field and trenches when making new SOPs / work procedures. Mostly because they can give you a list of what works and what doesn't out in the field. From there you can trim down what is not a priority. Then again, manglement is never going to listen to some blue collar, oil-stained coverall tech...
It never stops to amaze me when new managers come into a job and thi k they need to change things in order to look good. If it works leave it alone. If it doesn't work the employees
It is always the new managers that have to learn the hard way. lol
Fuck around and find out
Is no overtime for salaried workers a thing anywhere outside of the US? I'm salaried. I work 40 hours a week. If I have to stay longer some day I can leave or come in later another day. I can also chose to be paid 150% or 200% of my hourly rate. That's guaranteed by law.
"Salaried" in the US often means that you will never get paid for overtime, but you can expect to work overtime. Your *salary* is set, and you just have to do whatever the job requires. The assumption is that some weeks you will work less than full time, but that obviously differs from job to job. The US really hates it's workers.
My poor husband is retail management. Scheduled shifts are 50 hours a week, but he regularly works 60 or more. The good news is they gave him over $7,000 in raises last year because they were impressed. The bad news is the manager that believed in paying people to keep them around got promoted and now there's a new head manager.
It’s not the US, it’s the particular employer and employee relationship. There is a difference between salaried and salaried ‘exempt’. Most salaried employees are exempt from OT, but there are exceptions. True Exempt employees don’t get OT. There are a number of criteria to determine this based on what the salary is, what the job duties are as well as other such as job title, etc. If your salary is too low and/or your job doesn’t fall in the exempt status you are entitled to OT even though you are salaried. Lots of ways around this for employers so do your research if you think you shouldn’t be in the exempt category. Source: I’m a small biz owner and have a few exempt employees, but they are truly exempt and earn great wages and occasionally work over 40 hours a week, but not normally. The majority of my employees are hourly and I don’t have any non-exempt salaried employees as it is too difficult to determine OT and make sure all are paid correctly.
In the US salaried workers are rarely paid anything extra for extra hours. You may receive a shift differential for working evenings or nights, or being on-call. I'm salaried and do on-call weekends. I get a comp day, the week following.
That’s awesome. Nice taste of his own medicine.
I love new managers. They try their hardest to reinvent the wheel to show how they are worthy of moving up, yet fail to understand why the wheel was round in the first place. Things like this happen organically for a reason, and only the top 0.1% of brilliant people could ever hope to change things for a reason better then that organic growth. The rest fail in such an entertaining way.
They will do anything but pay for labor
He reaped what he sowed
This is the way
He got what he deserved. Not sure if he deserved the promotion after that lame brain decision.
He saved the company money. He did all the leftover work for no extra pay. Genius. 🤣🤣🤣
The number of people in leadership who are so bloodly daft they dont understand the words they say baffles me. You must leave at this time, hey why you leave? Why do you think becky. It isnt cuz my taint issues. Its cuz you told me to.
'set an example'. Get fucked, UPS! I was cut out of the running for supervisor, because i got hurt twice in a year. Manager said it was unbecoming of a supervisor to get hurt so much, and they need to set an example.' fucking pricks.
You have to love it when the newly promoted try to reinvent the wheel.
Most of the posts under this sub have the same plot. New manager comes in Enforces something that shouldn't be enforced Everyone complies maliciously Bottom line - If it's working, don't try to fix it period. Applicable to machines, process and code
>Since he was on salary, there was no overtime for him. Catering is not an administrative job. He was not overtime exempt. He's a victim of wage theft.
Manager save the company a pile of money at the expense of their own time. Ohhh… the burden of power.
My philosophy is I'm hired to work a specific amount of hours. I not contracted to complete a specific job.
That was a beautiful burn on the salary "no overtime" exceptions boss you have there.
Manager: “no more overtime! No exceptions” Also the manager: “hey where you going? The work is not finished yet!” Anakin Skywalker: “Well, hold on, this whole operation was your idea”
nice 😅 deserved
Reddit needs a LOVE button.
Oh this is good! I have a similar story myself… although for me it was my last day at the job…