3 ms·
No comment on the merits of the case, but the headline is really hiding the ball. Instead of "Manager" they should say "Man Tasked With Granting Out-Of-Hours-Ac
by avar 8y ago
No comment on the merits of the case, but the headline is really hiding the ball. Instead of "Manager" they should say "Man Tasked With Granting Out-Of-Hours-Access to Office".
I.e. this wasn't just some random manager, but evidently someone they needed to be available to grant out of hours access to their offices.
- barbecue_sauce 8y agoIs there no one to delegate this task to when the employee is unavailable?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- doktrin 8y agoUnless that was his only job function (unlikely), I dont see why the headline should be that granular.
- avar 8y agoBecause it means one of two things. One, Yelp is incompetent enough to make it someone's literal job to open the office in a timely manner at all hours without thinking to have a conversation first that establishes an SLA for that. Two, they did have such an agreement, but the employee is claiming a religious exception supersedes any such agreement. Both would be interesting to discuss, but the article doesn't have any details.
- michaelt 8y agoIf there was an important function that relied on the availability of a single employee, with no bus factor, that rather implies Yelp is incompetent to me.
- doktrin 8y agoarticle != headline I don't disagree that more information is often better than less, but you haven't really made the case for overstuffing the headline. Imagine a potential developer equivalent - "man-tasked-for approving-pull-request" : reads to me like an absurd amount of detail for the title of a general audience news article... even if failing to merge in a PR is 100% the reason said developer was contacted beyond standard office hours in the first place.