False. While Michael’s new company may be a pipedream, a customer list has incredible value. Michael is an excellent salesman - and could very well be an immense asset to a competing paper company, especially if he were to bring along a list of all of DM’s Scranton contracts and price points. To allow that to continue would be foolish. And it would most likely violate a non-compete clause that I would think very likely to be in any and all DM employee contracts.
Yeah, I’ve seen that happen in the real world a few times. That scene rung very true to me.
Well, it’s fairly obvious that Charles doesn’t hold Michael in high regard, but he’s only known him for about a few weeks. He doesn’t know what Michael is capable of and even if Michael can’t set up his own company, he can badmouth DM to current customers. Charles has no reason to make this easier to accomplish.
Are we watching the same series? I’m amazed Michael doesn’t get threatened with violence on an hourly basis.
I dunno, the whole thing kinda reminds me of early seasons of MASH* where much was made of Frank’s incompetence, while simultaneously touting how the 4077 overall had the highest success rate. There’s a contradiction between what we’re shown and what we’re told.
Charles may be within his legal rights to do the forced march out the door thing, but it was an utterly unproductive thing to do. Oooh, Michael might steal some of our client information–bitch, please. Michael Scott doesn’t need a list of your clients; he’s been dealing with them for 15 years and knows good and well who the local ones are. He might not have their phone numbers right at hand without his client list, but this is 2009 and it’s not exactly difficult to find that and other contact information. Michael knows this. The rest of the staff knows this. Corporate knows this.
And if Charles has any sense whatsoever, he knows this. But it kind of looks like Charles doesn’t know this. Just like he doesn’t know that putting Stanley in charge of productivity or Kevin in charge of the phones is a dumb idea. It makes a certain sort of management-school-theory sort of sense–giving disaffected employees more power and responsibility to help them engage–but anyone who has actually spent any time around these people knows it’s a disaster waiting to happen. Besides, what’s up with the whole “productivity czar” thing, anyway? This is the highest-selling branch in the company, so they’re clearly plenty productive. “Productivity czar” sounds rather like “assistant to the regional manager” if you ask me.
Dio, I’m kind of stunned by your take on this. Do you have experience in corporate sales environments? In reality, as soon as Michael gave notice, he would have been barred from the property, just in case he tried to take any customer information or any other kind of information that would be of assistance to competitors.
In this case, Michael compounded the situation by behaving disruptively – preventing other employees from working, consuming alcohol, etc.
Not if he started trying to poach customers and employees, he wouldn’t.
There was absolutely no contrivance here. We all know Michael would suck atstarting his own business, but no prudent corporate vice president would assume that.
Absolutely wrong. These fall under trade secrets, which is a kind of intellectual property. Sales people – especially at the management-level – are subject to all kinds of contracts that bar them from taking any customer information with them when they leave. This is all covered by trade secrets law.
How exactly is Charles supposed to know that? You know that it’s actually very common for people to quit a job at one company in order to form a competing company? And it’s very common for them to try to take customer information and other employees with them. And, especially for management-level employees, there are all kinds of contracts that prohibit this kind of thing. Customer information is very well protected in the corporate world and, no, it does not belong to individual employees; it belongs to the company.
What’s productive about letting him stand at the door giving a 15 minute goodbye speech?
I thought the episode was pretty accurate. DM was nice enough to give Michael 2 weeks and all he’s doing is stealing company time and being disruptive. Charles knows this and the new “company letterhead” was just the last straw.
Threatening violence? Michael’s the one who started down that road and all Charles had to do was take a step toward him (hardly a threat) and Michael’s tail was between his legs.
Charles comes off as an asshole, but he is also new to the company and probably feels that he needs to prove himself to Corporate. He sees the disfuntion of the Scranton branch and figures he was hired to fix it.
Michael’s a successful salesman, but far from a savant.
I actually kind of like Charles.
Yeah, he’s coming off as the heavy right now, but it works within the show. He’s in charge but he’s also an outsider. Yeah, he doesn’t need to come down so hard on Jim and Michael, but they’re both goofs.
Still, they did show Charles acting pretty loose in the corporate office last week. There’s got to be some point coming where he relaxes a little. Maybe everyone goes out for a drink on a Friday night or some really crazy stuff happens and he just throws his arms up in the air and gives up.
Kevin will man the phones while they look for a new Pam.
Stanley will be the new productivity guru.
I don’t think Charles is going to last long 
It avoids alienating the rest of the staff. Charles is shit for office morale. He’s probably going to hurt sales by trying to fix what wasn’t broken and destroying the loose atmosphere that existed under Michael.
Michael gave DM two weeks, they didn’t give it to him.
They’re giving him two weeks’ pay and allowing him to come to work. As I said before, in the real world, he would have been sent home to collect his pay and his personal belongings would have been sent on to him.
Yes, but they let him stay in the office for two weeks, a decision that is beyond me.
Tough shit. If Charles would have allowed Michael’s antics, it would have told the staff that he’s willing to put up with any amount of jackassery and willing to let anyone hijack work production. I don’t think Charles sees any need to befriend anyone in this office. If they all quit - fine. There’s a line out the door of people dying to get a job.
I don’t think Charles is a good manager - he’s made that clear. But that doesn’t mean EVERY decision he makes is bad either. Getting Michael out the door asap was the right decision. (Letting him in the door after he quit was a terrible one. Let him collect his two weeks at home.)
He gave THEM notice. In the real world, people keep going to work after they give notice. He wasn’t fired. If they’re not going to let you come to work, what’s the point of requiring notice?
Makes sense to me.
There is a huge difference between giving your two weeks notice and being fired without warning. If you are the one giving notice, then you have already stolen client lists or done whatever long before you let them know you are quitting. So it makes sense for the employer to use those two weeks to help with the transition.
Fired, without notice. That is when you are escorted immediately out. So you don’t have a chance to do any damage.
It will be tough shit for Charles and DM when the most successful branch goes to shit because Charles is destroying office morale.
That line would quickly include Charles since Scranton is the only branch having decent success in the company right now. It’s not about befriending people, it’s about not killing the golden goose.
He didn’t get Michael out the door, Michael quit. It would have been a stupid decision just to fire him since Scranton is a branch that doesn’t need any fixing.
This is irrelevant.
Not for all kinds of jobs. You understand that different industries and companies may have different practices, right? It is very common for companies whose employees have access to information that might benefit competitors to send an employee out the door regardless of the reason for separation. This includes companies that rely on information about their customers in order to make ongoing sales.
(1) Two weeks’ notice is standard practice in the United States. (2) To give themselves the option of making you work for another two weeks. Just because they have that option doesn’t mean it’s always in their interest to exercise it.
Again incorrect. Have you ever worked in an office environment? When someone who’s given their notice is being disruptive, they are - 9 times out of 10 - just told to stay home. He wasn’t coming to work - he was coming to Playtime With Michael.
Yup. As is usually the case. But the last thing Michael was doing was helping with the transition.
And David spent a great deal of time in previous episodes trying to define what that golden goose actually is. He wasn’t successful. Claiming it’s something as nebulous as “office morale” is just as false as suggesting that a 15 minute farewell speech would solidify it forever.
It sure would have. Let me find where I suggested they should have fired him and retract it…oh - I didn’t. How about that?
What corporate should have done is brought David in and have a series of intensive meetings during Michael’s last two weeks and try to nail down specifically why the Scranton branch was succeeding. What did they actually do? Let him fuck around, drink booze on site, and generally piss away the opportunity.
Of course he got Michael out the door. Don’t you remember that part where Charles got Michael out the door? Before his 2 weeks were up? Don’t remember that? Maybe you should rewatch the episode.
Like Lionel said, if an employee is going to take information with them, they’d get it before the gave their notice. Not letting them in the office after they give notice is closing the gate after the horse is already out.
Plus there IS no “Michael Scott Paper” and never will be. It was a totally fake concern on Charles’ part.
No one is disputing that.