4 ms·

Presumably because he didn't actually want to go to the office and go through the motions. Must be nice to have so much money that you can play risky games with

Presumably because he didn't actually want to go to the office and go through the motions. Must be nice to have so much money that you can play risky games with your future like this.

lotsofpulp 2y ago
What risk? The situation being discussed is an employee who is terminated, and then rehired. At this point, the employee has 2 options: 1) quit (aka resign) - no more income from employer, and disqualifies employee from unemployment benefits. 2) do the bare minimum at work - income keeps flowing, and employee can look for another source of income I see a downside for the first option, and no downside at all for the second option.
- wakawaka28 2y ago
  The employee in question was terminated because they didn't want to go to the office. They had a third option, which was to go to the office and look for another job in the meantime, and not get fired in the first place. That's what most people would do. >do the bare minimum at work - income keeps flowing, and employee can look for another source of income This is right, but if they demand that you go to the office then you have to do it. Trying to trick them into thinking that you're going to the office when you're not is asking for trouble. If you need the money then you should just go and not make too much noise about it.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
Joel_Mckay 2y ago
Be nice friend... as money comes and goes... if one lives a low-burn lifestyle, than one never has to worry about investment passive revenue dropping you into the red. =3 Rule #1: Quickly identify a failure to resolve critical paths to completion. Some projects are simply doomed without the right people, resources, and market conditions. See "Law of holes" corollary: "Nor would a wise man, seeing that he was in a hole, go to work and blindly dig it deeper..." ( The Washington Post dated 25 October 1911 )
- wakawaka28 2y ago
  This isn't about a doomed project, it's about a guy who quit because he didn't feel like he needed to go to the office. As far as I'm concerned, if you need the money then you should just go to work. You mention "passive investment revenue" which is usually code for "invest hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars to maybe get enough ROI to pay some bills." If someone is emboldened to quit his job over probably petty reasons because they can fall back on such "investments" they may still be reckless.
  - lotsofpulp 2y ago
    > it's about a guy who quit because he didn't feel like he needed to go to the office. What are you referring to? The linked article is about a man whose employment was terminated for asking Dimon a question about how coming into the office helps when everyone he works with is not in the same office. And then he was rehired.
    - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
      There are some managers that will assert authority through public firing of problematic staff for insubordination. However such measures are rarely ever necessary, as most corporate cultures are not that difficult to manage. The old adage "It's Not What You Say—It's How You Say It" is very true when working within a team. =3
    - wakawaka28 2y ago
      Right, I misremembered. Anyway, if you really NEED the job then you don't ask questions like that to the CEO lol. Everyone knows that asking is risky even if you're right.
      - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
        "You can be Right, or you can be happy..." ...it is good marriage advice too. Have a wonderful day =3

Presumably because he didn't actually want to go to the office and go through the motions. Must be nice to have so much money that you can play risky games with your future like this.

lotsofpulp 2y ago

What risk? The situation being discussed is an employee who is terminated, and then rehired. At this point, the employee has 2 options: 1) quit (aka resign) - no more income from employer, and disqualifies employee from unemployment benefits. 2) do the bare minimum at work - income keeps flowing, and employee can look for another source of income I see a downside for the first option, and no downside at all for the second option.

wakawaka28 2y ago
The employee in question was terminated because they didn't want to go to the office. They had a third option, which was to go to the office and look for another job in the meantime, and not get fired in the first place. That's what most people would do. >do the bare minimum at work - income keeps flowing, and employee can look for another source of income This is right, but if they demand that you go to the office then you have to do it. Trying to trick them into thinking that you're going to the office when you're not is asking for trouble. If you need the money then you should just go and not make too much noise about it.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

Joel_Mckay 2y ago

Be nice friend... as money comes and goes... if one lives a low-burn lifestyle, than one never has to worry about investment passive revenue dropping you into the red. =3 Rule #1: Quickly identify a failure to resolve critical paths to completion. Some projects are simply doomed without the right people, resources, and market conditions. See "Law of holes" corollary: "Nor would a wise man, seeing that he was in a hole, go to work and blindly dig it deeper..." ( The Washington Post dated 25 October 1911 )

wakawaka28 2y ago
This isn't about a doomed project, it's about a guy who quit because he didn't feel like he needed to go to the office. As far as I'm concerned, if you need the money then you should just go to work. You mention "passive investment revenue" which is usually code for "invest hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars to maybe get enough ROI to pay some bills." If someone is emboldened to quit his job over probably petty reasons because they can fall back on such "investments" they may still be reckless.
- lotsofpulp 2y ago
  > it's about a guy who quit because he didn't feel like he needed to go to the office. What are you referring to? The linked article is about a man whose employment was terminated for asking Dimon a question about how coming into the office helps when everyone he works with is not in the same office. And then he was rehired.
  - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
    There are some managers that will assert authority through public firing of problematic staff for insubordination. However such measures are rarely ever necessary, as most corporate cultures are not that difficult to manage. The old adage "It's Not What You Say—It's How You Say It" is very true when working within a team. =3
  - wakawaka28 2y ago
    Right, I misremembered. Anyway, if you really NEED the job then you don't ask questions like that to the CEO lol. Everyone knows that asking is risky even if you're right.
    - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
      "You can be Right, or you can be happy..." ...it is good marriage advice too. Have a wonderful day =3