While I doubt this actually happened, I'm still disturbed by everyone cheering it on absent any context that would make OP not look like a petulant child.
Quitting without notice doesn't require justification, fuck the bosses, whatever.
But for all we know, this manager had bent over backwards to stand up for their employees, or cover for them. Maybe this employee took advantage of that and was miserable to his coworkers. Those are just as likely as anything else, given that no further information was provided.
At least invent a backstory how this manager was dogshit or abusive, or the company was awful. Make us want to believe that you're not just someone with a persecution complex who's quick to anger and lash out.
Pointing out the lack of context and the tantrum like behavior isn't nuance. The fact that you think otherwise makes me concerned for your ability to safely cross the street.
If you see this and your immediate reaction is to chastise some hypothetical tantrum then you might just be a bootlicker. At least own up to it instead of deflecting with arrogant ableism
Tantrum behavior like doing mass layoffs in response to a labor strike, a la UPS?
Of course. When workers stand up for their rational self interest, it's a tantrum. When bosses retaliate en masse against workers standing up for their rational self interest, that's just business 101.
Read your comment again, and then try and demonstrate the extrapolative capability of an adult crow, human child, or large language model. Go on, I believe in you.
Alright chucklefuck, pointing out that one whiney dick is throwing a tantrum has no logical bearing on the labor movement writ large, or my support of it.
It is sad this is the defacto situation now, but it shouldn't be that way. Managers should be there in interest of employees, to keep them on board, happy, and able to do their job efficiently... The company can't run without workers. Too many companies have forgotten that. A manager should be a buffer between the employees and the "corporate machine" (or better yet get rid of the corporate machine, but ya know...).
They're saying that just because you claim something ought to be a certain way it has no bearing in how it is, or ever was.
This is a common thing done by libs to support capitalism. They talk about how it "ought" to work, as if there is any way for capitalism to exist that is not inherently anti-social. Its a defense used by the cynical and well meaning alike, a deflection to ignore the reality of how these hierarchical relationships were always designed to be. Its similar to how libs say its not capitalism its "crony capitalism"
What you're saying ought to be not only isn't, but never was. And talking about how it "ought to be" isn't a defense of reality
Ah, thanks for the explanation. I wasn't trying to defend anything, but I suppose I see how including the "now" in my original comment might be construed in a "things used to be better" way. Wasn't my intention, I have no idea how it used to be anyway.
Not going to edit the original though, for preservation of the context for this conversation.
Of course. Yeah i didn't think you meant it as a hard defense of anything. Your comment seemed totally well intentioned. And if capitalism was capable of good and not an inherently anti-social system then it ought to be like you're describing.
I think a lot of well intentioned people can get caught in that place of talking about how it ought to be instead of realizing why its not.
Maybe MY experience is limited, but what manager these days isn't pulling double duty? They do 3/4 of the job time with duties no different than the people under them, and also have to do all the managing part when possible. This is how it's been in the public service, retail, and customer service jobs I've worked.
Basically my experience. 90% of my job is unchanged, but I have to deal with extra emails and making sure there's toilet paper. Granted, I'd never bring up 2 week notices. Companies will not ensure that for workers, so workers should make fun of those companies for suggesting that. Hell, my mom's work asked if she'd give them 6 months noticed because they were understaffed and the other staff couldn't do their jobs and she laughed at her boss and told them they wouldn't do that for her.
I'm curious about the relationship to managers in different industries. Fast food compared to programming. Warehouse/stacking managers have always treated the workers like idiots where I've been at. IT support depended on the company. Mail sorting was pretty chill as long as the work got done.
While I doubt this actually happened, I'm still disturbed by everyone cheering it on absent any context that would make OP not look like a petulant child.
Quitting without notice doesn't require justification, fuck the bosses, whatever.
But for all we know, this manager had bent over backwards to stand up for their employees, or cover for them. Maybe this employee took advantage of that and was miserable to his coworkers. Those are just as likely as anything else, given that no further information was provided.
At least invent a backstory how this manager was dogshit or abusive, or the company was awful. Make us want to believe that you're not just someone with a persecution complex who's quick to anger and lash out.
I have a very nuanced take that involves licking boots nuancedly
Pointing out the lack of context and the tantrum like behavior isn't nuance. The fact that you think otherwise makes me concerned for your ability to safely cross the street.
If you see this and your immediate reaction is to chastise some hypothetical tantrum then you might just be a bootlicker. At least own up to it instead of deflecting with arrogant ableism
lol
"🌽"
Tantrum behavior like doing mass layoffs in response to a labor strike, a la UPS?
Of course. When workers stand up for their rational self interest, it's a tantrum. When bosses retaliate en masse against workers standing up for their rational self interest, that's just business 101.
Are you high? What the fuck are you talking about?
Please tell me how you read my comments, and arrived at that response.
Read your comment again, and then try and demonstrate the extrapolative capability of an adult crow, human child, or large language model. Go on, I believe in you.
So... Did you reread everything and realize how fucking stupid you sound?
Did you come up with a better way to project your anxiety over being wrong as fuck?
The irony in your projection is next level.
"No u"
Alright chucklefuck, pointing out that one whiney dick is throwing a tantrum has no logical bearing on the labor movement writ large, or my support of it.
Like I said, next level irony in your projection.
Look how verbose I am while talking out of my ass. I learned how to argue on reddit.
"stop using words that make me look stupid"
Being redundant in your speech doesn't make you look smart and it certainly doesn't make other people look dumb
Who's verbose now?
"logical bearing"
Confused? Yandex it.
Confused why you need both words to express an idea accomplished with one of them. You asked who was being verbose so I'm explaining.
It was more succinct than pointing out each individual logical fallacy.
Tommy needy drinky
(Immediately after inventing two paragraphs of fan fiction about how awesome the boss is and didn't deserve this)
You fucking suck. You're lame as shit. Scumbag behavior. Starting shit like that just to bootlick a hypothetical boss.
lick that funky toe mold, white boy
Silence, nerd
U NO AGREE WITH ME THAT MAKE YOU STOOPID punches wall and cries
The manager is an agent of the company, the default assumption is that they have the company's interests ahead of the workers.
Individually, your experience may vary.
It is sad this is the defacto situation now, but it shouldn't be that way. Managers should be there in interest of employees, to keep them on board, happy, and able to do their job efficiently... The company can't run without workers. Too many companies have forgotten that. A manager should be a buffer between the employees and the "corporate machine" (or better yet get rid of the corporate machine, but ya know...).
Can't derive an is from an ought, idiot
Wat?
They're saying that just because you claim something ought to be a certain way it has no bearing in how it is, or ever was.
This is a common thing done by libs to support capitalism. They talk about how it "ought" to work, as if there is any way for capitalism to exist that is not inherently anti-social. Its a defense used by the cynical and well meaning alike, a deflection to ignore the reality of how these hierarchical relationships were always designed to be. Its similar to how libs say its not capitalism its "crony capitalism"
What you're saying ought to be not only isn't, but never was. And talking about how it "ought to be" isn't a defense of reality
Ah, thanks for the explanation. I wasn't trying to defend anything, but I suppose I see how including the "now" in my original comment might be construed in a "things used to be better" way. Wasn't my intention, I have no idea how it used to be anyway.
Not going to edit the original though, for preservation of the context for this conversation.
Of course. Yeah i didn't think you meant it as a hard defense of anything. Your comment seemed totally well intentioned. And if capitalism was capable of good and not an inherently anti-social system then it ought to be like you're describing.
I think a lot of well intentioned people can get caught in that place of talking about how it ought to be instead of realizing why its not.
Maybe MY experience is limited, but what manager these days isn't pulling double duty? They do 3/4 of the job time with duties no different than the people under them, and also have to do all the managing part when possible. This is how it's been in the public service, retail, and customer service jobs I've worked.
calling retail workers "managers" was a ploy to get around giving them union benefits.
Basically my experience. 90% of my job is unchanged, but I have to deal with extra emails and making sure there's toilet paper. Granted, I'd never bring up 2 week notices. Companies will not ensure that for workers, so workers should make fun of those companies for suggesting that. Hell, my mom's work asked if she'd give them 6 months noticed because they were understaffed and the other staff couldn't do their jobs and she laughed at her boss and told them they wouldn't do that for her.
There is a line somewhere up the chain in basically every company where they shift to being corporate boot heels.
Thank god you're here, I was tossing and turning in bed at the thought that nobody was considering the feelings of the poor managers!
*removed externally hosted image*
removed externally hosted image
Very fun "both sides" argument about a potentially billion dollar company ;)
It appears lemmy.world and the midwest has found us.
Tell me your dad left you his RV dealership and you never had a job before that without telling me
Amazing. You're really something special. Have you tried staring at goats?
no
I'm curious about the relationship to managers in different industries. Fast food compared to programming. Warehouse/stacking managers have always treated the workers like idiots where I've been at. IT support depended on the company. Mail sorting was pretty chill as long as the work got done.
Hog out or log out.
federation was a mistake folks