- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
- Error'd
-
Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
I speak very Engrish!
Admin
That entry must have been written by a woman.
Admin
This is why we nuked you during the Korean War.
U S A!! U S A!!
Admin
Will those with absolutely no clue about history please refrain from commenting on it....
Admin
As the sarcasm passes about a mile above your head.
;-)
Admin
I worked for a large organisation where they were retrenching a number of people in one go. A group of about 40 of us were taken offsite by a third party organisation and split into two groups. One group was retrenched the other was reallocated to new roles. I was in the re-allocation group (happily). I was invited into a small office where I was told what a good job I'd been doing and that I had been reallocated to another (better) job within the org. I was asked to sign some paperwork and I pointed out that the paperwork wasn't in my name - after some moments of muttered discussions the two guys left ther room and came back a few minutes later to expalin their mistake. They'd got two surnames mixed up and I should have been retrenched!! The only saving grace was the guy who should have been in the room instead of me had already been retrenched and refused to be reallocated.
Admin
Well, if he never had a customer, it's true that he had intercourse with all of them.
Admin
I can honestly say that "retrenching" is the most bizarre euphemism for firing that I've heard yet. But I'm hopeful that others will chime in with more.
Admin
in the UK, if you are made redundant, the company cannot then just hire someone else for the role, as that would essentially be getting rid of someone when you do not have a reason to fire them.
this is easily gotten around by giving the "same role" a different name.
ie. they make a "software developer" redundant, and hire an "application designer" cheaper
Admin
Regarding the first, I'm a bit more worried about that guy's driving skills than I am his engineering skills...
Admin
Unless of course your the lucky one who get retrenched, then contracted back with the company at leass hour and higher pay than you were before as seemed to have happened to my dad and so many of his friends after mining cuts in the late 90's.
That'd be the life.
CAPTHCA: dubya because everyone loves GWB
Admin
Admin
Admin
The imaging story reminded me of when I worked in a QA shop. They had announced a massive layoff of our entire department, stating it was unnecessary and redundant with a similar team they had in Arizona. But due to several contracts, they gave us all 90 days to find another job in the company or elsewhere. Nobody in the company ever returned our calls, and our resumes were often deleted from the internal resume area.
A huge job recruitment conference was being held in an nearby hotel. A bunch of us went to see what we could find. Lo and behold, there was our company, recruiting. For what? QA jobs. So a bunch of us sat and talked with the recruiters, but we didn't tell them where we worked until they asked. After a few of us, they got confused, and called the corporate office. Corporate told them to fold up the booth and leave. But before they shooed us away and fled, we found out that starting salary they were promising was at least 25% MORE than we were making now.
So, what next? Why not show up to the shareholders meeting? The one broadcast live via satellite? They had invited us after the layoff, which seemed like a slap in the face, but now it was an opportunity for mischief. So we all showed up, and one of our people stood up during "open mic" and asked the company CEO, "How come we're being laid off, nobody is willing to hire us from within, yet you have recruiters asking for new people at higher salaries for our old jobs? Have we been blacklisted? Did we do something wrong? Wouldn't it make more sense to promote people from within, who already know the system, have passed background checks, and work for less?"
Oddly enough, half of the audience started cheering. Apparently, this was a company wide problem. The CEO's face went blank, and said he'd look into the problem. To his credit, he passed down a mandate that no resumes posted would be deleted, and that anyone who submits a resume to a department would be contacted within 48 hours or they could lodge a complaint.
By the time 90 days had ended, almost anyone who hadn't left the company had a job elsewhere in the company. There were rumors that the CEO was afraid that, given the large amount of minorities on our team, this could be construed as an EOE violation.
Admin
Did you ever find out why the resumes kept getting deleted, and why the recruiters were told to leave?
Admin
Half of these horror stories is the exact reason why most countries are fucked up and don't have their priorities straight - the fact its legal for companies to string people along and pull this kind of shit is complete rubbish; the fact that when there ARE laws it's easy to circumvent is even worse. Too many laws to protect the company, and almost nothing to protect the employee. Bullshit. Complete fucking bullshit.
From what he hinted at in the story, probably because the CEO really WAS trying to discriminate against the minorities. So like a coward the company told the recruiters to leave the conference so the soon-to-be-ex-employees didn't find out any more dirt. That seems to be a common tactic: When you know you're doing something wrong, you cover it up so people can't ask questions.
Admin
In Brazil we have an "employment fund", and works like this: when you're paid, the company deposits some money in a special savings account. When you're fired, depending on the reason, they got to pay you a 40% fine of the money that's in that account. You can always be fired and some reasons let the employer not play the fine, for example, you show up drunk, refuse to use safety equipments, that sort of thing. The employer than fire you just because he feels like it, to cut costs, etc, but then he has to pay the fine. If you quit, you obviously don't get paid the fine and can't take any money out of that special saving account.
Admin
Admin
For the record, my favorite euphemism for firing is "rif" (reduction in force).
I worked with this old fart who was let go from the phone company. I don't have the specifics on whether he was fired or laid off, but they re-hired younger people at a lower cost to replace him. He and some other co-workers in the same boat found out and sued the phone company. They won the lawsuit and got paid in stock from the phone company. They weren't allowed to "touch" the stock for X amount of years (five I think), and it absolutely tanked the year after they won the lawsuit.
Admin
This is one of the greatest comments of all time.
Admin
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!
Admin
Ma dhunan do thoin agus do cach a briseach amach as do amharchlann do dti go raibh do leine dubh salach.
Have a nice day :)
Admin
Ma dhunan do thoin agus do cach a briseach amach as do amharchlann do dti go raibh do leine dubh salach.
Have a nice day :)
Admin
Sedam must have heard from his informants about our WMDs. I would have attacked Pearl Harbor, too.
Admin
Yikes, things sure have changed since I left aus 8 years ago. In the UK it's still illegal to make someone "redundant" (i.e. their position no longer exists) and hire someone else for that same job. That used to be the case in Australia too. Good to see Johnny Howard has improved things... or not.
Admin
In regards to it being illegal to hire someone after laying another person off.
In Canada, employees are protected from the whims of employers by laws that don't allow them to be fired unless there's a reason. Reasons can range from the employee being incapable of doing their job to the company cutting back.
When an employee is fired, it's because they've proven themselves incapable of doing the job (or done something bad worth firing over, such as committing fraud or wasting time or sleeping with the boss' wife). They don't have much recompense afterwards (no unemployment insurance, etc) although they could sue the company for wrongful dismissal if they can show that there was no grounds for the firing (I work in investigations and you wouldn't believe the employees that get caught stealing from the company, get fired for it, then sue the company afterwards... WTF??)
If the employee is laid off for whatever reason (downsizing, aren't capable of doing the job but job wasn't necessarily advertised appropriately, etc) then it's seen as not the fault of the employee. But then the company cannot replace that person with someone else... by a layoff, the company is saying "we don't have a fit for you but you didn't do anything wrong, so technically we're willign to rehire you if we think we can fit you back in". The company has to either change the job description / title or wait X amount of time before replacing the person they let go. If they do hire someone else to replace the person they laid off, they can easily be sued by the ex-employee as there was technically no valid reason to lay them off.
That's kinda how it works in a nutshell. I may be missing stuff or didn't explain it well, but I think that's the general gist of it.
-- Seejay
Admin
Admin
Jesus Christ. Just... stop posting, would you? Please. You make my brain hurt.
Admin
My protection is being good at my job. You might want to try it sometime.
Admin
Being good at your job is of no help if you work for shitbags. In fact you sound like the type of scumfuck who would benefit from employees having no rights and companies having them all.
Admin
Firing someone and hiring that same person again for a lower salary is illegal in most states where labor laws make it mandatory to give incremental raises/working conditions as people gain seniority. For example, in Quebec, the minimum vacation time is two weeks for anyone with under five years of seniority, three weeks after. Some employers try to cheat out of this system by firing employees then hiring them for the exact same position, minus the seniority benefits. This is an illegal practice.
Admin
Admin
ITYM "is illegal in no states" HTH!
Admin
Totally right I've been layed off of two jobs where even the Vice President of the Company told the firing executive that it was a stupid thing to do because the two of us were the only people in the company that could run and maintain their application. They had contracts in place to provide the application and had already fired the rest of the team (we were the last two of ~100 people).
They needed us off their books and were betting that their lawyers were better than their customer's laywers when the app tanked due to neglect/misuse.
Talk about a bad taste left in my mouth CAPTCA: yummy
NOT
Admin
Well if he wanted to prove that his wife was cheating in order to support a case to not pay alimony or a breach of a pre-nup, it might be worth it.
Who knows... I've not had to go through divorce or deal with the major reprecussions of a cheating boyfriend/husband that a week of crying and lots of chocolate ice cream couldn't fix. :D
-- Seejay
Admin
Ok, then my protection is being good at my job and not working for shitbags. It's a lot simpler than hoping the government will help you keep your job.
In fact, you sound like the type of clown who tries to strawman everyone who disagrees with him into some evil caricature that he's ready to argue against.
Hint: as long as you can quit your job any time you damn well please, you don't have "no rights."
Admin
I'm no lawyer, but I seriously doubt this is illegal. I don't even think it qualifies as immoral. That is, unless it is some kind of union job. Most employment agreements can be terminated by either party equally for pretty much any reason as long as it isn't discriminatory or retaliatory for whistle blowing.
This makes more sense if you flip the situation around. If you got an offer for an identical job with another employer for double the salary, I don't think you would consider it illegal or unethical to quit and take the other job.
Admin
Look if you don't have a safety net it's probably your fault, unless you barely make a living wage or less than that. If I got fired this second I could live at my level of comfort for a year or so on savings alone. If needed I have the skills to work in three different fields, granted at a relatively low salary in all but one of them.
If you live beyond your means, take massive loans on frivolous items (no you don't need a $30k car with maintenance costs up the wazoo when you still have $80k of student loans), don't save money or don't plan ahead then its your fault.
You have rights. You can quit. You're just as free to do that as the employer is to lay you off, more free actually. Find a different job, find a different employer. Do something about your problems. Stop complaining, stop expecting others to fix your problems for you, society isn't your mother. If you're too stupid or lazy (ie: don't improve your skills, etc.) for anyone else but a scumbag to hire you then likewise don't expect any sympathy.
Admin
Perhaps in most states in Canada, but raises are not mandated by law in most states in the US. If you know of any such laws, please point me to the wording of the actual law.
Jobs covered under a collective bargaining (union) agreement are a different story.
Tinkerghost: there might be a legal difference between firing and laying off; however, for many companies, they could get rid of one employee and call it a firing or a layoff, at their whim. "Layoffs" make me think of assembly line auto-workers and coal miners, not programmers.
Admin
"Defrauds the state of the value of the retraining" ???
Does the company have to pay for the retraining? I thought the state paid for it. If so, then the state is not being defrauded out of anything.
Also, you said "laying someone off ... defrauds the state of the value of the retraining budget". Don't you mean "firing" instead of "laying off", since fired employees are not eligible for the retraining?
Admin
All along I thought "mei you guanxi" meant something like "it doesn't matter" when it really means "I'm not getting any"!
Sincerely,
Mortified in the Pac Rim
Admin
"Laid off" is a technical term that means the company didn't want to fire you but was forced to because of financial difficulties. Because of those financial difficulties, if you are laid off, instead of fired, you can't get unemployment. Businesses pay into unemployment benefits system, and at the end of the year they get any unused money back. By laying someone off and then turning around and hiring anyone, it is considered fraud. Because not only does the company get a cheaper worker, they fraudulently get their unemployment money back.
Admin
Uhhm. It's the opposite. If you get fired or you quit you may be ineligible for unemployment benefits. If you are laid off then you are probably eligible.
Admin
Regarding the boring definition of intercourse... back when the United States Supreme Court was establishing itself, there was a case involving the regulation of commercial intercourse (the Stream of Commerce law if I remember correctly - early 1800s). During the debate one senator remarked that "...all forms of intercourse shall be regulated..." through and through by the end of the debate - risque at the time to say the least! Some words never see the end of their comical meanings.
Reading that blurb reminded me of the famous Biology Lecture story of a sex ed. class in High School when, after learning semen is composed primarily of "sugars", a young lady ejaculated (look it up), "If it's made of sugar, why isn't it sweet?"
CAPTCHA - selfcontrol... the one true final (and as yet unconquered) frontier for the majority of United States consumers.
Admin
Guanxi - it basically means whats said... but with the added thing of having clout.
Admin
I work at a company where it is company policy to fire all people who ask for a pay rise. This is not a joke. (Stephen, if you're out there, we miss you.)
These guys running this place are so cheap that I once interviewed and hired a System Admin with the following series of events: The guy was a genius. He had even done the very work that we required which was amazing considering how niche the work is. I even learnt a ton while interviewing him. He was a smart guy. He was hired. We would have been morons not to. Talent like that is rare. He resigned his old position. He even moved states so that he might work with us. The day before he started the boss where I work decided to save money by firing this guy. Now for the irony. We hired a completely inexperienced guy for half the price - although he is learning he sadly causes more problems than solves. But then we contracted an external team to help with the tasks. Net money spent is nearly three times the original guy's salary. (If the guy we "fired" is reading this then I apologise. I made the decision to hire you but I was outranked. There's nothing better than being powerless.)
Admin
You must be a mathematician...
Admin
Now quoting (I'm sorry):
You must be a mathematician...Admin
I have a serious question: does this sort of stuff happen for real? Do people really walk into an interview in the full knowledge they are utterly unqualified, and expect to bluff their way through it?
I have helped with interviews in the past, and I've seen both good and bad candidates, but never quite someone like that.
Admin
Once upon a time I was a contractor for one of the big boys. Everybody loved me at my sites, I got nothing but glowing reviews and the system was in balance. Then one of the executives of the company with which I had a contract got into a fight with one of the executives of the company to which I had been contracted and they eliminated about 1/2 of the contractors. Shortly after that the CEO of the contracting company came out and whined about how he couldn't find nearly enough people to fill all of the contract positions he had.