The company I work is going through its second consecutive quarterly layoff. The branch I work for exceeded their $725,000 target for last quarter by over $250,000. How does our high-priced help thank us for this feat? Why, they lay off a productive, capable, and dedicated employee who had worked 16 years for the company.
The reason? Management wouldn’t say.
The reason I think they did it? The individual was being compensated at the high side for technical people within our segment of the company. While management had no complaints about the individual or their work, they just had to lay this person off to improve their revenue outlook.
I know that this sort of practice is commonplace among U.S. companies. The shareholders and financial analysts are kings, and the workers are regarded as interchangeable pawns by a contemptuous, over-compensated upper management. But it still drives me frigged crazy that the dirty bastards can treat hard-working, dedicated, and capable people like SHIT!!!
I hope there is a special hell for ruthless people who exploit workers to enrich themselves and their fellow “club” members. Hope this doesn’t amount to me just whinning. I just feel really bad for my colleague, who is a really good person and a top-notch professional.
That’ll teach you to work hard! Seriously HP, I’m sorry to hear about your colleague, and I know that for those of us with a work ethic and professional pride, it’s impossible not to try to do good work and painful to be punished for it. But I fear that nothing short of severe productivity losses will change the policy of such companies (which fortunately don’t represent all the companies out there). When management learns that treating employees like shit leads to employees treating their jobs and employers like shit, which leads to losing money, we may see some changes.
That’s why, every day at work, I hang out and post here. If they fire me, fuck 'em, I haven’t being doing any work anyway and I’m being grossly overpaid for it.
And the kicker is, pretty soon I should be getting promoted to management. They’ll give me a raise, a free laptop, pay for my internet access so I can do emergency work from home, and increase my vacation days. More pay, more benefits and I’m sure I can do even less work than I am now.
Here here. I just woke up from a 15 minute nap here at work, which kind of sucked, because I was in the middle of reading the boards, and while I was asleep, the server reset which posts I’ve viewed. Bugger.
I feel for you. In several ways. The first is that you had to see a valuable colleague let go. The second is that you are working for a company that is so short sighted.
The company will be punished in the long run for this. Companies that realize their employees ARE part of their assets always do better than those who think of them as liabilities. Because they reward hard workers and creative thinking, and try at all costs to keep the valuable ones through finacial downturns, they have a more productive work force. It is no coincedence that (the evil empire) Microsoft did so well and grew so fast during it’s early years. Mr. Gates rewarded his workforce very well. I remember reading somewhere that his company had produced more millionares (among the workers) than any other company before. He valued his workforce and they returned the favor for him. (I am not saying that this is still the case. I don’t know if he kept this up.) IBM (You remember them, invented the PC.) couldn’t keep up because they thought of their employees as just cogs in the machine. (OK, simplified look at the whole situation, but I think it is still valid. IMHO)
Well put. Many companies would do well to follow the example of Alan Greenberg of Bear Stearns: his policy was always to hire during a downturn- that way he could pick up carelessly discarded talent and instill in them a loyalty that they thought they had lost forever.
We’d like to think so, but the companies just don’t seem to be getting this message. I’ve worked over five years as a temp; I’ve seen the inside of about 20 companies in that time, and there is very little variation from company to company. A company that values its employees is still very much the exception, not the rule. A company that values its temps is unheard of.
And yes, when I am on the job, I do as little as possible to earn my money. I started out all gung-ho and eager 5 years ago, and I learned long ago that the award for doing my best was the same as the award for doing just enough not to get fired. Except when I had given my best effort, I felt used and taken advantage of.
Yep, as soon as management starts listening to stock market analysts that have never worked a real job in their life start on how to run their company, management should be strung up from the nearest cubicle.
I’ve heard many times how “our investors are demanding we cut jobs.” And I’ve been whacked because of it.
Yep, short term it may make sense. Over the long term, it costs a company dearly.
While I understand your frustration, your thread title might have better addressed (mis)management as opposed to capitalism. As has been noted by several posters, the market will dole out the just rewards to the companies that engage in short-sighted employment policies. So, your complaint reflects a reality, but it is more of a revelation of bottom line blindness that affects many institutions as opposed to just capitalist enterprise.
I now work for a profit driven company that makes every effort to keep its people. And I come to that from many years of operating my own companies where we considered our people a major asset.
It’s not that I haven’t seen such inequaties visited upon employees - it’s just that I feel you’re failing in your appreciation of the situation to think it’s an inevitable byproduct of capitalistic endeavor. It’s a product of shortsightedness that will bite the employment incompetent capitalistic institution in the fanny just as it will the employment incompetent municipal zoo.
The shareholders are king because they are the ones who own the company. They are the ones who risk their own money and they expect a return on their investment.
Lets face it. Most lower level jobs ARE interchangeable, especially ‘temp’ jobs (In case you forgot, temp is short for temporary). I have never heard of a case of a company going out of business because they laid off some low level programmer or business analyst. People often think their individual worth to the company is a lot greater than it really is.
And if you have time to surf the web all day and send emails, guess what? Your company has too many employees! They should be laying people off.
A company is there to make money for the people who put money into it. It is not a welfare program or a rec center for people to play fooseball and surf the internet.
Why do you not consider a stock market analyst a “real job”? It’s just as real a job as an office temp or some guy who welds widgets on an assembly line.
I don’t dispute that any public corporation owes their investors a return-on-investment. I believe, however, that investors and the investment community too often focus strictly on short-term performance to the exclusion of intermediate-to-long-term growth and stability. In both business and investing, ignoring intermediate-term plans and performance is, literally, short-sighted, unstable, and highly inefficient. It amounts to continually reacting, as opposed to planning.
I believe that, in general, decision-makers within medium-to-large companies have little or no knowledge of the relative value of technical experience and expertise in relation to product development (intermediate-to-long term assets) and customer services (short-to-intermediate-to-long-term assets). The Wall Street Journal, among other financial publications, has published any number of articles commenting on the folly of “dumb-sizing” during times of short-term Corporate financial duress. I agree that low-level individuals represent far more expendable “assets” than experienced and productive individuals; but, recall that this post concerns the layoff of a capable and productive individual who had provided 16 years of significant service and revenues to the company I work for; hardly a “low-level” employee.
