3 ms·

> So are women. There sure are plenty of them around. Conflation FTW. > If not, your next best course of action is to work for actual human beings rather than

> So are women. There sure are plenty of them around. Conflation FTW. > If not, your next best course of action is to work for actual human beings rather than douchebags. So, you are implying that businesses should not fire under-performers if they are not able to get another job because that makes their management "douchebags"? That's patently ridiculous.

pron 14y ago
> So, you are implying that businesses should not fire under-performers... Not at all. All I'm saying is, once you've hired people, you have a responsibility towards them. You are quite literally in a relationship with them, a relationship that cannot be taken lightly. At the very least, termination should be a very painful process for both parties. And yes, management that treats people as a commodity is a bunch of douchebags that, in a more just and virtuous society, would have some or most of their teeth knocked out.
- jamiequint 14y ago
  > "management that treats people as a commodity is a bunch of douchebags that, in a more just and virtuous society, would have some or most of their teeth knocked out." Well then I'm happy that in this society there is jail for people with your proclivities.
  - pron 14y ago
    Just for those who have the courage to act on them :) Nevertheless, I'm sure you're only saying that because you believe you are unlikely to find yourself on the side of the exploited. I, myself, do not know what fate holds for me, and have seen too much to put all of my chips on red, so I'd rather promote a society that protects its members from both sorts of violence, physical and economic, or -- to make things more interesting yet still fair -- from neither.
- PKop 14y ago
  What in the hell are you talking about, knocking teeth out? Why is a current employee, all things equal, "owed" something by management when they underperform relative to another potential hire, or some standard level of performance? The CEO should be beaten for expecting exceptional performance from his or her employees? Why? Should not satisfying the demands of customers be the goal of most businesses? Does this not dictate that employees meet certain criteria that they are judged against, and if they don't meet these standards while others standby ready to take their place... they are, what entitled to not have to earn their position? Absurd. You have a responsibility to satisfy the terms of the employment contract and in so far as an employees work meets the demands of your customers and the standards you've set in place, it's in your interest to treat them well and reward them for their work. Beyond that, I don't see how violence is necessary when if a worker thinks they are being undervalued, then they could by definition sell their labor to someone else and get compensated fairly.

pron 14y ago

> So, you are implying that businesses should not fire under-performers... Not at all. All I'm saying is, once you've hired people, you have a responsibility towards them. You are quite literally in a relationship with them, a relationship that cannot be taken lightly. At the very least, termination should be a very painful process for both parties. And yes, management that treats people as a commodity is a bunch of douchebags that, in a more just and virtuous society, would have some or most of their teeth knocked out.

jamiequint 14y ago
> "management that treats people as a commodity is a bunch of douchebags that, in a more just and virtuous society, would have some or most of their teeth knocked out." Well then I'm happy that in this society there is jail for people with your proclivities.
- pron 14y ago
  Just for those who have the courage to act on them :) Nevertheless, I'm sure you're only saying that because you believe you are unlikely to find yourself on the side of the exploited. I, myself, do not know what fate holds for me, and have seen too much to put all of my chips on red, so I'd rather promote a society that protects its members from both sorts of violence, physical and economic, or -- to make things more interesting yet still fair -- from neither.
PKop 14y ago
What in the hell are you talking about, knocking teeth out? Why is a current employee, all things equal, "owed" something by management when they underperform relative to another potential hire, or some standard level of performance? The CEO should be beaten for expecting exceptional performance from his or her employees? Why? Should not satisfying the demands of customers be the goal of most businesses? Does this not dictate that employees meet certain criteria that they are judged against, and if they don't meet these standards while others standby ready to take their place... they are, what entitled to not have to earn their position? Absurd. You have a responsibility to satisfy the terms of the employment contract and in so far as an employees work meets the demands of your customers and the standards you've set in place, it's in your interest to treat them well and reward them for their work. Beyond that, I don't see how violence is necessary when if a worker thinks they are being undervalued, then they could by definition sell their labor to someone else and get compensated fairly.