s73ver_

36 ms·

391.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
If that's the situation, either the boss needs to call, or one of the other equally capable people in the office should be able to fix it.
392.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Because most companies have to offer that, now. Otherwise, in most cases, we can go somewhere else doing the same kind of stuff, but with a company that does offer that flexibility. As a bonus, I might get a raise for doing so, too.
393.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
You mean the employers who don't want to pay for decent employees?
394.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
If the employer is not paying what the "work ethic" is worth, then why should they get it?
395.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
It's software. It can be done any time of the day. Hell, it can be done at home. Quite frankly, they are right. Those that complain are in the wrong.
396.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Yes, those things can happen. Doesn't mean they will. Remember, a large chunk of people in this country are working under at-will employment. That means that if the company doesn't want to accommodate you, they don't have to;
397.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Yeah, but your job likely doesn't involve hard, physical labor, and you're likely paying more.
398.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
We don't know what the circumstances of the interview were, though. It easily could be a minimum wage job, and the other people just found something else.
399.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Right, people can be flaky, and those that are flaky will continue to be flaky, regardless of the amount paid. But paying more can attract more of the people who aren't flaky. Those who are good employees are already employed, and prob
400.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Right... but this thread is about employers complaining that they can't find qualified applicants. They can't have it both ways. If they want to continue to be picky, and carry on with the "No one owes you a job" bs, the
401.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
It doesn't help that most employers are not willing to do what it takes to attract qualified employees.
402.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Nothing I've seen indicates that's even remotely close to the truth. He wants power to be concentrated with him.
403.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
But that's not Thiel at all. He does want power concentrated; he just wants to be one of those it's concentrated with.
404.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
"I am still really puzzled over exactly why Peter Thiel so so hated." Honestly, it's because he's a jackass. Don't forget his absurdly libertarian stances regarding regulation, to the point where he funded studies t
405.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
I would say that one does not need to intentionally be a jerk to be one. As you said, all it takes is to simply not think of how your actions affect others.
406.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Well, the "nice guys", who often get upset that women go after the aggressive/manly/"jerk" guys instead of them, and who secretly do believe that women owe them something, would generally be considered jerks. H
407.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
They didn't feel he was a good fit, or maybe Thiel didn't want to transition to whatever they replaced the partner program with. Simple as that.
408.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
"Are we even talking about the same thing? There are absolutely groups that commit more crimes than others. Do you honestly need a citation for a claim like, "young men commit more crimes than elderly women?"" You should
409.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
"I think it's murkier when one group commits a disproportionate amount of crime - accurate/percise coverage might look disproportionate even though it's actually representative." You're gonna have to prove that
410.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
"I think what Trump himself did is actually irrelevant to the point I'm making." It's not. They're reporting on what Trump did. If that's mostly negative, then the coverage is, by necessity, going to be mostly
411.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
No, I don't believe so. They're not people that "the police just said were Nazis". They're people who self-identify as white nationalists and Nazis.
412.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
"He has continually distanced himself from the Alt-Right and neo-Nazis" When? "He has also recently married his fiance, who is a person of colour." And? Because a man marries a woman, they can't be misogynist?
413.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Trump did very few positive things, so I don't think it's really a fault of "impartiality" if the coverage of him isn't that positive.
414.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
No. That's a very uncharitable description of their view.
415.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
It was like that long before T_D existed.
416.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Because nothing happens in a vacuum. How would it be fair if Franken were to be held accountable (which he should be, absolutely), but Trump not?
417.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Depends on where it is. In parts of Europe, it is.
418.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Then why are you here? HN is extremely heavily moderated.
419.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
I think the problem is "who gets to be verified?" Why can't I be verified? The implication was that verified users were special in some way (maybe just in a Sneeches "stars upon thars" way), and so giving it to admi
420.
by s73ver_ 9y ago
Most of those things you listed are dubious claims at best. However, if you promise you're in good faith, pointing out the crimes of one group disproportionately is a pretty bigoted thing to do. Breitbart had (maybe still does) a secti

More ›