You're viewing a single thread.
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.
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.
I'd be more inclined to see your point, except that the manager in question said "each job requires 2 weeks notice" like he was indignant that he didn't get something he deserved.
That's not only not true at all, it's active manipulation on their part in a hail Mary attempt to have their work covered for enough time to look for another employee.
It may be unprofessional to quit without notice, but it's really unprofessional to present the act of quitting as requiring 2 weeks' notice, particularly in a place that might also allow the employer to fire someone for any reason at any time with no notice.
it's really unprofessional to present the act of quitting as requiring 2 weeks' notice
If it's part of the contract then it's not unprofessional at all to bring up the terms that you've agreed on. My job requires a month's notice and it wouldn't be unprofessional for my employer to bring that up if I tried to quit on the spot.
That being said, I don't live in a place with "at-will employment", which is a fucking travesty and should never have been allowed in the first place.
I'm not from the US but I always assumed "at-will employment" works both ways. You're telling me it doesn't?
It's not typically written into the contract for most jobs I've seen, but it's still considered very unprofessional to leave without giving the company time to find a replacement. It doesn't just mess with the company or your boss; it messes with your coworkers, too, who now have to pick up the slack.
Basically, while it's not written into your contract, it's still considered socially unacceptable not to give a two week notice barring any unusual circumstances.
It's not unprofessional at all; at worst, it's discourteous, because notice of departure has zero to do with your professional conduct, it's a courtesy. You can professionally quit on the spot, look:
"Due to a change of personal circumstances, I will be resigning immediately, effective at the end of the day. I will work with you to make this transition as smooth as possible within that timeframe, but it is not negotiable."
Yeah, I think I accidentally confused the two words. You're right.
That quote you posted would actually be fine, so you're right.
I think discourteous and unprofessional is a difference without distinction here though.
I can understand going either way on that because they're semantically similar. However, I personally draw a distinction here because I'd much more readily accept being considered discourteous at work than unprofessional.
Na my dude, as long it's not considered at least as unprofessional for companies to let people on the spot they can go an fuck them self.
Want a mandated notice period? Put it in contract for both parties. That's how it works in countries with sane worker laws.
It's always been in my contracts, a month's notice is the norm here. I've never broken that but I've also been fortunate enough to work at places where work and life are balanced. I wouldn't have wanted to disrupt the work for my colleagues and my managers have always shown their respect for me to the point that I want to work with them instead of against them. I don't think I'll ever work for an employer that puts the company over the wellbeing of their employees. I've seen what being a real team means. People cooperate freely and go the extra mile for eachother if necessary and cut massive amounts of slack to anybody in the team that's having a tough time and needs to focus on their life outside of work for a bit.
That said I won't ever get any bonuses or make large amounts of money in my career either but that's not what I'm after if it would mean putting work before life.
If it's considered 'unprofessional' then that is a raging misconception. At will contracts also mess wirh the company and your coworkers, demanding a courtesy you won't give your workers is horseshit.
I'll be honest, I've never lived in a place that has at-will employment so I don't know the details, but I'd also assume that it works both ways.
Mine tend to ball out to a month's notice (on either side) for every year employed at the company....but i do business critical shit. I do not get the impression this is what is in the text conversation depicted.
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?
Are you high? What the fuck are you talking about?
(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.
Think a little slower, friend. Like you said, "hypothetical" boss - his whole point was that from the meme we don't actually know anything about the boss. You psychic?
lick that funky toe mold, white boy
Silence, nerd
U NO AGREE WITH ME THAT MAKE YOU STOOPID punches wall and cries
It's not licking boots to acknowledge that managers are people.
Every evil organization in history has had good people working for it. You hating them is yet another way the "above" people divide the "lower" people.
That being said, absolutely assume the manager is on the side of the company. This is a meme, we can't even prove if this shit is real. Fuck the company.
I just like the taste, ok? Same with cocaine, I just like how it smells. Got any coke? Or boots?
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.
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
- It's a meme, all that backstory wouldn't fit
- You're saying it's silly to assume/make up the backstory of the employee, yet you dedicated a whole paragraph making up a backstory for the boss
- It's a meme my guy, in a community titled Lefty Memes, what do you expect?
Hey, fuck you... just kidding.
TBH I just clicked on this when scrolling All and didn't even notice what community it was until well into my comment taking off with replies.
The conversation evolved, and devolved, from there. Not much to do about it now.
Hey, fuck you too. Just kidding, have a great day
If you doubt this actually happened clearly you've never worked in customer service/ food service
I’ve spent my life in customer service/retail sales/food service and I doubt this actually happened.
All 2 years of it I see, my man you gotta open your eyes then. The amount of pettiness in that industry is insane. Your ignorance of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist
My man… just because you’ve seen it doesn’t mean everyone else has or that it’s common. Maybe you’ve just worked a shitty places. But that doesn’t mean it’s industry standard.
At least in the US, it seems pretty standard. Never worked retail myself, but everyone I know has hated it. Certainly a lot would like to imagine doing this kind of thing (but few actually would).
I can only say that my experiences in the field has been completely fine- and this includes working for Disney. And I can say that at 52 years old- I’ve been in the business for a long time. Never had a problem with anyone, and no one has had a problem with me.
If a person has a gripe with an entire industry- maybe the problem is with the person and not the industry.
How many Lemmy users do you think have never worked retail customer facing jobs, or food service? I'm betting it's a minority, but I could be wrong.
Either way, whatever internal compass you use to determine another user's job history needs some tuning because I've worked in plenty of service industry jobs.
Y'all are pretty tech savvy around here. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that the majority of Lemmy users skipped the retail/CS/hospitality jobs in favor of entry level IT/ tech jobs.
Entry level IT is tech support, which is customer service, but with dumber than average customers.
I'm guessing this has more to do with the US, than the particular profession.
I'm so used to workers rights, that getting a glimpse into how things are over there feels dystopian. Laws everyone would want, and benefitting everyone, except perhaps exploitative businesses, are "controversial".
It's very difficult to even fire someone here, and even if you did, 3 months to find something else is the norm. More often than not, you'd also be paid without doing much work during that time. If you resign, the company also has 3 months to figure something out.
Why... Would you not want that kind of predictability be the norm? It's not a net benefit to be able to resign or be fired on the spot. The only way that makes any sense is to just focus on one of the sides, at the convenient time. Bleh.
why would you not want that kind of predictability to be the norm?
You say this like this is most people's choice
You say this like this is most people’s choice
Isn't it?
Setting aside hefty political corruption in the US, and media owned private interests that would make the Pinkertons shed a tear of joy... hm, and aside for a very peculiar election system that not only goes for the worst 2-party approach, but even has set it up in multiple ways in order to allow the minority of the two, to win.... ah... I see your point.
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
Permanently Deleted
federation was a mistake folks
Hog out or log out.
Nah. Fuck em. If they were a decent manager they'd thank them for the notice they did get because they know that many managers punish people for giving notice.
No. The managers speaking on behalf of the company, and the company can fuck itself.
All companies can fuck themselves.
I'd say the reply from the boss is enough to justify that response. The boss is chiding him for not putting in a 2 weeks notice, calling him unprofessional. From this one interaction you can make a pretty good assumption as to the quality of the boss. The only proper response to someone quitting is either a counter offer or a farewell, not a guilt trip.
Not really... It is unprofessional. That doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong, just that it's not always unreasonable for a manager to point that out. Again, we lack any other context for the situation.
I would add, that he also followed it up with a good luck and didn't drag it out. So, based off what limited evidence we have available, he seems like the more reasonable person in this situation.
Have you never had a good manager and a bad coworker?
Not really… It is unprofessional.
When companies firing people for base reasons, i.e. reaching quarterly targets, is also universally seen as unprofessional and shunned as such, we can talk again. Until then, they deserve exactly as much courtesy as they are willing to give.
When we hang all the bosses, will that include the POC Arby's assistant manager? How about the call center team lead?
That's some pretty wild stuff you have to make up just because you have no good response. That's not even a straw man but a straw giant space monster. Sheesh dude ...
Sorry, how is it unprofessional? Who set that standard? What is it there for?
It is unprofessional though. And that boss was not really being a dick.
Now this person has to go call the staff to find someone to fill shifts last minute, which everyone hates.
Unless your relationship with your boss is absolutely awful, it's not hard to give notice.
The "you're lucky you even got a text" really looks like the employee is toxic.
A good rule of thumb is to never, ever burn bridges with past managers. Keep your dignity and remain professional. You never know when you'll need them as a reference.
Yes, and references are not the same as employment checks.
All the jobs I've applied to have had a reference check. I've been a reference.
It is very valuable to have a former boss say "oh, X, I liked them, they were professional and good at XYZ".
In the US, that's straight up illegal unless they write you a reference separately. When the hiring company calls they can only give the legal answers.
Also, you could just write that letter yourself and have a friend be your ex boss. The rules are meaningless and the points are made up.
It is not illegal to call and talk about you with a reference that you gave them - that's the whole point of a reference. Separately, yes, calling a former boss may only get the prospective employer answers like "they worked here and are eligible for rehire", but that's usually a human resources policy to avoid a costly, but ultimately winnable if you only tell the truth, lawsuit. It's not illegal for a former boss to shit on you if you were shitty, and it happens all the time at smaller firms, in small industries, or small towns.
Why in the name of Murphy would you give them a bad reference?
This is explicitly an issue with employment verification and there are very clear legal boundaries there. Your revenge fantasy does not apply to reality.
What on earth? I don't know why you're trying to make me out like I have a revenge fantasy. Did you read anything I wrote?
Again, what you're saying is wrong. It's not illegal. Show me a law where telling the truth about someone is illegal. It's not illegal in employment verification, and it's definitely not illegal for a reference which is what you were talking about about, and does not need to be some separate written document. As I wrote, it is a common HR policy to not give feedback to avoid a costly but ultimately winnable lawsuit, always in the case of truth and often in the case of opinions: https://www.findlaw.com/employment/hiring-process/is-a-former-employer-s-bad-reference-illegal-.html#:~:text=Legal actions based on misstatements,employee to a potential employer.
It's a common misconception, so totally understandable, but if you're going to be very wrong don't be a dick about it.
Because you seem hellbent on finding a way around the law. HR departments don't do more than dates, rehire eligibility, and character of termination specifically because of legal liability.
So who am I going to believe, the guy saying you can shit talk whoever you want, or the professionals who do this every day in a legally safe manner?
Because you seem hellbent on finding a way around the law.
Please show me the law.
A former manager of mine has been trying to convince me to return anytime she sees me since I left almost 2 years ago, offering me better pay and a position much higher on the foodchain. She also respects why I left (I had bigger ambitions that they couldn't meet at the time) and respects my reason that I haven't taken her up on that offer (that place only has really garbage benefits)
One of my wife's friends babysits for the director of IT at a large company 2 hours away and apparently I can get an interview with them if I just say the word.
Being professional and staying on good terms is not just for the employer, but it can also be a safety net to fall back on if things go sideways. Being able to reach out to contacts and say "Hey, I'm unexpectedly looking for a job now, do you have any openings?" is a very good place to be, plus sharing openings with former colleagues is a good way to help eachother out.
Fuckin managers will fire you with 0 notice, but that’s life and “at will employment”. You fire the business and you have to give 2 weeks because business run “lean” and “at will” is only supposed to be used by the business.
Well, there’s risk and reward in business, and more risk in running lean. Managers can always structure their departments to not be impacted by an inopportune departure. After all, people can get hit by a bus leaving their house in the morning.
Hell, if an employee is that critical, maybe they should be put under an employment contract with set terms and compensation agreement. You know, like most directors have.
But we all know these things will never happen.
Sir, this was a shift manager at a Wendy's, not a VP at FedEx.
Saying you did something unprofessional is a guilt trip?
It is to the kids on lemmy.
It is if that thing wasn't unprofessional. We can split hairs about what professionalism is, but at the end of the day he's acting perfectly within the law so the employer is getting what they legally deserve.
Anything more than that depends on the relationship that preceded it, and we can only speculate about that. The point is that quitting immediately isn't inherently unprofessional.
I feel like this is absolutely an appropriate response. A really shitty boss would sue or fire them for cause. Chiding them is pretty dang tame.
You can't (successfully) sue someone for quitting and you can't fire them when they have already quit.
I am obviously not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you can sue for breach of contract if it was in the employment contract and it causes actual damages. This random site agrees with me: https://www.mannlawyers.com/resources/can-my-employer-sue-me-for-quitting/
You can absolutely fire someone after they quit if notice is in your contract. Employee gives notice, doesn't show up for two weeks, and is fired with cause.
I have never heard of notice being in a contract. I'm sure it's a thing, but it's very uncommon.
I don't know where you all work. But over here it is standard even for 'unqualified' work to have at least 1 month notice. For both sides. This gives employers and employees some time to find something new.
I'm speaking for the United States, minus Montana (if I recall correctly).
Neither employers nor employees are required to give notice. However, it is standard practice that employers do not give notice and employees do (usually two weeks).
Well, that just looks like an unfair system. Both sides need the same mandatory notice.
Oh, the vast majority of us agree with you. Yet here we are.
When I worked at a callcenter they offered a new contract trading an agreement to give 2 weeks notice for a better paid vacation plan, with the consequence of failing to give notice being that the any unpaid pay periods would be paid at the minimum legal wage (which is of course a very pitiful wage I might add)
Dunno why you're getting blasted, you're right. What good is chastising the employee at that stage going to do if it isn't meant as a guilt trip? Does anyone really think the manager had his best interest in mind and is trying to look out for his future? Or is it more likely he is trying to keep shifts covered for 2 more weeks so productivity doesn't completely tank? I'd be completely okay with a simple "ok" or thumbs up emoji compared to a lecture.
Pretty much this. The manager, from one text, comes across as a holier than thou, "think of your coworkers!! We're family!!" Kind of person. One text can reveal that much. The "good luck" doesn't come across as sincere, since it follows that whining. Dude wants shifts covered for 2 weeks, he can hire someone else, do it himself , or fix whatever problems (probably money) made the person leave in the first place. Or they're a middle manager and get off on being overly focused on the "rules". Or he's just a low end shift manager, in which case why lick the boot that hard my dude?