What a day...

[Dattebayo]

The health insurance thing would be a serious issue right now... Bad example beans.

[Bubba1]

The health insurance thing would be a serious issue right now... Bad example beans.

the 401K match is better example (not because I suggested it earlier) but because it's a voluntary contribution by the company, one that would still attract employees to work there, but not by itself. I have worked for companies with a 100% match and a company with a 15% match.
that by itself is far more significant than 15 minutes of pay. Unfortunately Brien is too focused on himself to realize there is a bigger picture.

[Beancooker]

The health insurance thing would be a serious issue right now... Bad example beans.

How is that a bad example? It's a perfect example. My company spends $1200 per month to insure me and my wife. My contribution is $316 per month. They are not required to do this. This is given to employees at a loss to the bottom line of the GL. It is something that they do to make it a better place to work. So really, this is a perfect example. It is a benefit, not a right that I am given by my company.

People need to look at what is given to them, and not think that they are owed everything they get.

[Dattebayo]

The health insurance thing would be a serious issue right now... Bad example beans.

How is that a bad example? It's a perfect example. My company spends $1200 per month to insure me and my wife. My contribution is $316 per month. They are not required to do this. This is given to employees at a loss to the bottom line of the GL. It is something that they do to make it a better place to work. So really, this is a perfect example. It is a benefit, not a right that I am given by my company.

People need to look at what is given to them, and not think that they are owed everything they get.

I guess you don't know about the new healthcare stuff that was signed into law. That's all I was talking about anyway...

[Beancooker]

No I actually don't know about the "heathcare stuff" that was signed into law. I don't watch the news. Yes, I am uninformed.

I googled it, and after skimming the articles and the bill itself, I do not agree with it. You want something, work for it. Stop expecting a handout.

So fine, by the sounds of it, businesses of a certain size will be required by law to offer health insurance. So let me rephrase what I had previously said.

"No one will be expected to work off the clock ever again. Feel free to clock in 15 minutes early to take care of whatever you feel is necessary to do. We want to make sure you are compensated for every second of time you work.

However in order to accomplish this, your 401k is canceled - open your own IRA. Paid vacation time is no longer distributed. Those who have accrued vacation time will be cashed out for it, and it will no longer be offered. Any and all company funded functions are canceled indefinitely i.e. Holiday parties, New Years etc... Paid holidays are not required by law. Those will no longer be offered due to our new policies."

[Jesda]

Welcome to the thread, Noah! Glad to have you.

We saved you a seat.

Talk about a tough world when workers are only statistics and not even worth being called a human being.

When I open up my shop I will treat every employee the right way. And sure my shop will never be a enterprise but that makes it all the more harder to treat employee's right where the multi-million if not billion dollar company has the power to do the right thing but only cares about keeping the owners happy.

Seriously the key to a successful company is about keeping the employee's and customers happy while abiding by the law. Other wise whats the use of a law if people break it and can't pay the price for it, right?

That is not the key to a successful company. "Spreading happiness" is NOT the purpose of an enterprise. You can incorporate employee and customer satisfaction into your vision and values, but THAT IS NOT the PURPOSE of your existence. If it is, you're in for a world of hurt.

The US has to compete with Canada, Mexico, China, Korea, Japan, India, and other places in this world where costs are lower, far lower. "Spreading joy" is, by itself, a s*** way to stay competitive. You are foolishly turning a firm's values into a firm's purpose. They are NOT the same thing.

And in this case, there was not employee "abuse". The employee was given completely optional benefits (EXPENSIVE, COSTS FAR EXCEEDING 15 MINUTES OF LABOR) and a clear idea of what work had to be performed. Its good to start a business with a belief in rewarding good people and treating customers well, but you're failing to see the reality: PROFITABILITY. COMPETITION.

You also have a completely incorrect idea of what employee satisfaction means. Satisfaction comes FROM productivity. Job enrichment (deeper tasks), job enlargement (more responsibilities, more trust, promotion) and recognition (visible rewards, performance bonuses, shared ownership) are real sources of job satisfaction. Money alone is a poor motivator -- adding 15 minutes of pay would NOT have an effect on real job satisfaction.

Allowing an unruly employee to stick around and act like a d!ck is NOT the same as rewarding GOOD people with encouragement, bonuses, increased responsibility, and increased ownership. I'm not saying this to sound condescending -- I seriously suggest taking a few management courses before trying to propose sweeping philosophical notions and applying them to your new business.

And believe it or not, in business school they don't teach us how to crack the whip and drive slaves in a sweatshop. They show us how to use techniques and mechanisms to derive job satisfaction from productivity (it doesn't work the other way around). Employee turnover is a major expense in retail, for example, so believe me, management is NOT motivated to fire people. Its the last thing they want to do, not just because its unpleasant, but because it hurts the bottom line.

Not every person you hire will be a high-quality, hard-working individual. Some will work hard, some will do just enough to collect a paycheck, and the remainder should be terminated if they're unmanageable.

Drop the unicorns and fairies and try to adopt a balanced view of labor management (okay, I did say that part just to be condescending).

[Beancooker]

Welcome to the thread, Noah! Glad to have you.

Thanks. You brought up a great point Jesda...


"However in order to accomplish this, you don't have to clock in any longer. Your job has been outsourced to people in India. They can manage the call center for a fraction of what we pay you and are happy to collect the pittance we pay them. They have tenfold the work ethic you have and we don't have to offer any benefits what so ever. Enjoy soaking unemployment from the government. You're not our problem any longer."

[Infinitiguy19]

Lets end this nice and simple, Can we all agree that working 15 minutes without pay is against the state law?

What I have yet to hear is what happens when someone gets injured in those 15 minutes, Does the company pay the bill and fire them?

I understand people work without pay because they love the company and want to be a team player, But legally do you have to? That all that matters at the end of the day when your in court because you were injured and your "Team playing" company leave you high and dry.

[AZhitman]

Still clueless.

NO EMPLOYEE WHO DESERVES TO BE FIRED GETS 2 WEEKS PAY. PERIOD. EVER.

There are mechanisms by which people can appeal / grieve an unlawful termination. If that fails, then they can sue. So, why would you advocate for ANYONE getting 2 weeks notice that they're being fired? That's a good way to have a lot of disgruntled employees tearing down your business.

If there's no proof they did something wrong, guess what? You don't fire them! WHAT A CONCEPT.

In my near-decade of doing this, I've never had an employee reinstated. Why? Because I'm good at my job. I bring value to the "company" (which, in my case, is the taxpayers).

Guess what? Even when I was "the little guy", I didn't get crapped on. Ever. Why? Because I MADE myself WORTH something to my employer. Brien made himself a liability, not an asset. Simple fact, case closed.

p.s. Your argument with your boss was retarded. You don't get to work at the corporate office without working your way up. You don't get to work for the stakeholder without being promoted. So, in effect, he was completely right. You let us know when you have a job with NO ONE to answer to. Unless you're an entrepreneur, it won't happen (and even then, the customers are, in effect, your boss).

[Infinitiguy19]

I think PMQ gave up just like Maxnix (Brian) did when the new NICO came along.

I forgot to mention that I did tell my boss the customers will always be the boss, as the customer is ALWAY right.

I looked into it and apparently there is such thing as unemployment in case someone gets fired but they have to wait at least a week to get paid. Then if the former company gets involved they have to settle the dispute at a mediation. Still not good enough for me but better than nothing.

Something everyone should know is the employer isn't always right.

And outsourcing jobs well like I said I don't give them my business. If I have to use Windows (Microsoft) with a new computer I will use Linux. Outsourcing is a joke! You come to America build a company, hire Americans, that doesn't work out so you go to China, Disgrace.

[Jesda]

And outsourcing jobs well like I said I don't give them my business. If I have to use Windows (Microsoft) with a new computer I will use Linux. Outsourcing is a joke! You come to America build a company, hire Americans, that doesn't work out so you go to China, Disgrace.

Microsoft is an American company, made in America by Americans. You're free to choose to do business with whomever you want, but supply and demand will always be stronger than your individual boycott.

[Infinitiguy19]

Sadly the latter is true but Microsoft, Ford and others use workers overseas because of lower costs to keep there company running. You would think Microsoft who is laying off people for some reason would have only american workers, its not like there is not enough of them if Microsoft is getting rid of them.

But I am getting off topic here and each time I think to myself its not worth posting but then my fighting side wins.

[Jesda]

Paying terminated employees for two weeks would ENCOURAGE the movement of jobs overseas. You're asking to increase turnover costs while offering zero incentive to keep lower-level jobs in the US.

Zoom out for a minute, like you're in Google Maps, and examine the entire global economic system.

[nissangirl74]

Just out of curiosity Brien, if you were so upset and so unhappy with this company's actions, why the hell didn't you just quit?

[krash]

Because then he wouldn't get to argue and complain about it.

[MinisterofDOOM]

This thread might make me angry if I wasn't still reeling from the stench of stupid.

People who throw away decent jobs over petty s*** don't deserve jobs. But I'm not going to join the others and try and "educate you" on the matter. By all means, continue to get yourself kicked out of decent positions. There are plenty of other people out there who will happily step in to take your place, without complaint. It's hard to get a job these days. Harder still to get a GOOD job. Anyone throwing jobs away has my personal approval. Leaves more opportunities for the rest of us.

[IBCoupe]

IB, since when are activities like, removing your jacket, unpacking, getting a cup of coffee before sitting down, considered work? You're getting into some nitpicky technicality stuff here rather than a major principle.
Without a paper trail, and in an at-will state, it's a long shot to not only apply that exception but win using it. PMQ should be focusing his efforts on getting a new job rather trying to prove and "cash in" on some trivial point that he should never have brought up in the first place.

I'd like to clarify that I'm not saying that they are. That would take a greater search of caselaw than I'm prepared to do while slacking on-the-clock.

As I've said repeatedly: PMQ should contact a lawyer, and maybe not a Nissan/Infiniti web forum.

[Bubba1]

[
I'd like to clarify that I'm not saying that they are. That would take a greater search of caselaw than I'm prepared to do while slacking on-the-clock.

As I've said repeatedly: PMQ should contact a lawyer, and maybe not a Nissan/Infiniti web forum.

And I've said before, IB , he will still lose even if he somehow gets a lawyer to win his job back. He is absolutely free to find/hire a lawyer, but if you think about what he can possibly accomplish (both good and bad) by doing it, which is a bigger question, most sensible people would say it's not worth it.

A wiser, better career planfor him would be to stop acting like a self centered, must-be-right-at-all-costs jerk, and find another job.

[f1seb]

I work for Cablevision's TSG (tech support group). Years ago there was an issue like this as well. Management wanted workers to be signed into their workstations with all their tools up hitting the ready button on the phones and start taking calls. To make a long story short. Cablevision got sued with a class action lawsuit, they lost, and now we have 7 minutes to sign into our tools starting on our shift time, everybody involved in the lawsuit got $1200. The End. But this is in New York, I don't know how it goes in those lawless 3rd world countries like Floridia.

[marlin29311]

What I have yet to hear is what happens when someone gets injured in those 15 minutes, Does the company pay the bill and fire them?

Worker's compensation. There are plenty of hourly workers in my building...a lady fell down the stairs on her way out one day, severly fracturing her skull. She was on workers comp until fully healed, and then came back to work. No reason to fire her...she was a good worker, and that's what worker's comp insurance is for. Not all corporations are EVIL, and 99% of the time when it comes to employment law, they folllow it. There is NO law about 2 weeks notice, it is simply a common corporate courtesy.

And PS - the customer is NOT always right. Another big news flash.

Welcome to business: Cash is king. The sooner people learn that the business world is not what you learned in 1st grade, the better.

FWIW, no one likes nitpicky dumbasses. They're easy to spot from a mile away, despite your "incredible" interview tactics. A good interviewer sees through all the BS, asks specific and directed questions, and thrououghly reviews your resume. The hiring staff for entry level workers usually sucks because those workers are usually expendable and easier to replace. Good luck ever getting a managerial position PMQ.

[IBCoupe]

And I've said before, IB , he will still lose even if he somehow gets a lawyer to win his job back. He is absolutely free to find/hire a lawyer, but if you think about what he can possibly accomplish (both good and bad) by doing it, which is a bigger question, most sensible people would say it's not worth it.

A wiser, better career planfor him would be to stop acting like a self centered, must-be-right-at-all-costs jerk, and find another job.

And that's a conversation he should have with the lawyer, and a conversation he will have if the lawyer's any good at all.

I stand by: this is not the place to go for quality advice.

[AppleBonker]

I stand by: this is not the place to go for quality legal advice.

Hey! ftfy

[IBCoupe]

A fair correction. If ever I need advice on how to get in Tito's pants, I'll ask here.

[AppleBonker]

As if that takes any kind of advice or skill set...

FWIW, no one likes nitpicky dumbasses. They're easy to spot from a mile away, despite your "incredible" interview tactics. A good interviewer sees through all the BS, asks specific and directed questions, and thrououghly reviews your resume. The hiring staff for entry level workers usually sucks because those workers are usually expendable and easier to replace. Good luck ever getting a managerial position PMQ.

Pure gold ^

[Bubba1]

I stand by: this is not the place to go for quality advice.

Including yours?... j/k
I also disagree with you. Perhaps NICO is not the best place for technical legal advice, but for honest opinions, the advice here is generally very good.
Besides you're making a moot point. He already asked for our opinions and received them. What he does with it is up to him.

[IBCoupe]

Including my advice - I'm just a law student, with limited resources available to devote to a good legal answer. Which is why in every post I've said: he needs to talk to a lawyer (if he's serious about it).

And I don't know that he's getting advice so much as he's getting personal attacks. Maybe he brings it upon himself a la Nala (I haven't had much opportunity to interact with PMQ) but that doesn't change what he's getting. And the fact that he already requested advice doesn't preclude doing so from being a bad idea.

[Bubba1]

Including my advice - I'm just a law student, with limited resources available to devote to a good legal answer. Which is why in every post I've said: he needs to talk to a lawyer (if he's serious about it).

And I don't know that he's getting advice so much as he's getting personal attacks. Maybe he brings it upon himself a la Nala (I haven't had much opportunity to interact with PMQ) but that doesn't change what he's getting. And the fact that he already requested advice doesn't preclude doing so from being a bad idea.

Disagree. He's received a lot of good advice. And no one here is telling him not to consult a lawyer. He's being told think first about what he might gain/lose, given the actions he's already done, before he goes that route. This ain't rocket science. It's not difficult to figure out what could happen to him if you think rationally. Unfortunately he's thinking emotionally and inward.

Sure, a lawyer might possibly win back his job.... temporarily, and give him a few extra bucks (Less attorney fees), but what's the downside? Do you really think the company wants him back? Do you really think they'd promote him after being forced to take him back after what he said to management? Give him an award for costing them more money? Name a building after him? You don't need a lawyer to recognize they'll want to dump his azz as soon as possible, without any recommendation. Burning bridges is not a wise career strategy.

As far as the flaming combined with the advice, absolutely, Brien brings the flaming upon himself. He asks for advice, but instead of ignoring it like Nala, Brien frequently challenges it, obsessively trying to prove he's right to the point you want to smack him in the head.

Unlike Nala, PMQ can be intelligent and insightful if he wants. Problem is he enjoys playing the "turd in the punch bowl" role way more. And as you learned with Nala, if you act like a turd long enough, people will tease you.

[IBCoupe]

Including my advice - I'm just a law student, with limited resources available to devote to a good legal answer. Which is why in every post I've said: he needs to talk to a lawyer (if he's serious about it).

And I don't know that he's getting advice so much as he's getting personal attacks. Maybe he brings it upon himself a la Nala (I haven't had much opportunity to interact with PMQ) but that doesn't change what he's getting. And the fact that he already requested advice doesn't preclude doing so from being a bad idea.

Disagree. He's received a lot of good advice. And no one here is telling him not to consult a lawyer. He's being told think first about what he might gain/lose, given the actions he's already done, before he goes that route. This ain't rocket science. It's not difficult to figure out what could happen to him if you think rationally. Unfortunately he's thinking emotionally and inward.

Sure, a lawyer might possibly win back his job.... temporarily, and give him a few extra bucks (Less attorney fees), but what's the downside? Do you really think the company wants him back? Do you really think they'd promote him after being forced to take him back after what he said to management? Give him an award for costing them more money? Name a building after him? You don't need a lawyer to recognize they'll want to dump his azz as soon as possible, without any recommendation. Burning bridges is not a wise career strategy.

As far as the flaming combined with the advice, absolutely, Brien brings the flaming upon himself. He asks for advice, but instead of ignoring it like Nala, Brien frequently challenges it, obsessively trying to prove he's right to the point you want to smack him in the head.

Unlike Nala, PMQ can be intelligent and insightful if he wants. Problem is he enjoys playing the "turd in the punch bowl" role way more. And as you learned with Nala, if you act like a turd long enough, people will tease you.

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you've written. I'd just like to respond: (good) lawyers do more than sue people, and will often try to talk a client out of a lawsuit.

[PoorManQ45]

Sure, a lawyer might possibly win back his job.... temporarily, and give him a few extra bucks (Less attorney fees), but what's the downside? Do you really think the company wants him back? Do you really think they'd promote him after being forced to take him back after what he said to management? Give him an award for costing them more money? Name a building after him? You don't need a lawyer to recognize they'll want to dump his azz as soon as possible, without any recommendation. Burning bridges is not a wise career strategy.

Honestly, I'm not sure where you're getting this idea of getting a job back. Is that even possible?

Typically a wrongful termination results in pay without work.

Unlike Nala, PMQ can be intelligent and insightful if he wants.

True. Sorry I play the turd more often.

[Bubba1]

[

Honestly, I'm not sure where you're getting this idea of getting a job back. Is that even possible?

Typically a wrongful termination results in pay without work.

Not necessarily. Litigation results are unpredictable. There are so many variables, including the quality of your lawyer (as IB noted), how far the company and their lawyers are willing to defend themselves. (expect them to go the distance against you). Since this just happened, andIf the company chooses not to fight you that hard, (which seems unlikely) it would be far cheaper for them to offer you your old job back than to pay you anything. Of course, your reputation there is ruined, so you wouldn't last long.

Here is the bottom line. You've already admitted you made a big tactical error, and you paid a big price for it. Yes, it sucks. Now, you seem more preoccupied trying to punish them for their reaction to your big mistake rather than learning from your mistake and moving on. Your potential to win big in court based on your mistake and the state you live in is slim. Getting a new job is tough enough in this economy, even tougher when you can't use your previous companies as references. You need to stop arguing and concentrate more on getting your career back on track.