51–60 of 135 posts
After all, if he thinks this is reasonable for his employees, he should lead by example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's speculation. They've done better than the NASDAQ, but how do you know they couldn't have done better without the memo being sent out?
Of course you're right, but that's a pretty high standard to hold him to. You'd have to say the same thing about CEOs who behave in a way you support, too. ("Yeah, their stock improved after he started treating employees with respect, but how do you know they couldn't have done better without that change in behavior?")
The CEO should be required to go to Kansas City and work alongside the employees who he thinks are slacking off. That includes being in by 8am, staying late every night, and coming in on Saturdays. Everyday, he cannot leave until all of the employees leave, and while he's there he must help do the actual work that needs doing so badly. He cannot leave Kansas City until the productivity levels rise to his liking. Afte…
But we apparently don't check for spelling or grammar.
Hmm... sounds like this issue could be solved if everyone stopped car-pooling.
If there are lots of nice cars, it's a good sign that the company is doing well and compensates its staff accordingly.
If there are lots of older cars, it's probably a geek-friendly start-up atmosphere, not making much money yet, but everyone's in it together.
If there are a small number of very expensive cars in reserved spots for senior management, and in the few other spaces available there are lots of old cars, IME there is a 100% probability that I will not want to work there.
If people start doing things like car pooling, this almost perfect way to avoid wasting several hours in an interview for a job I'm never going to accept anyway will be spoiled, and I'll have to find some other obvious prejudice to use! :-)
The CEO should be required to go to Kansas City and work alongside the employees who he thinks are slacking off. That includes being in by 8am, staying late every night, and coming in on Saturdays. Everyday, he cannot leave until all of the employees leave, and while he's there he must help do the actual work that needs doing so badly. He cannot leave Kansas City until the productivity levels rise to his liking. Afte…
Have you ever been around senior management of a larger company? Everyone I have met works at least 10 hours a day, and often more. Except for vacation days perhaps, but even then they are still tied to the laptop and phone.
If the CEO wants to work him/herself into an early grave, that's his/her choice. But to force employees who, let's face it, aren't going to be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor like the CEO will, to give up large portions of their personal time to improve the wrong metric? That's unreasonable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. I'm pointing out that he may be a total ass, but it doesn't seem to have hurt his company.
Yes, but you didn't present evidence that he didn't hurt his company. You presented evidence that he didn't hurt the company so badly that it didn't grow, but not that he didn't hurt the company.
Since no one has presented evidence showing that he hurt his company....
In my book, you don't get to complain about the quality of someone else's evidence unless your evidence is better. And no, "self-evident" doesn't count. YMMV.