Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

henrytapper.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 166 posts

Re: An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

#131

Post by ensignavenger »

hdctambien wrote: post #84
jstanley wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry if this should be obvious, I've read it 3 times and still don't understand this bit: > They also did this because they cashed every last check of every employee that left and there were a lot of those. "They also did this" - Who also did what? The candidates accepted the job? The company hired the fake guy to get sacked? And who cashed whose checks? Did they cash them before or after they left? And why does tha…

The company kept the "last check" of the employees who quit (probably by no-showing which is why they didn't pick up their last check) so the company got a few hours of free labor from each employee. "They did this" means they had the actor convince the applicants to take the job. The more employees they hire, the more free hours they get (since the quitters don't pick up their last check)

Is that legal? Don't they have to mail the check to the employees if they don't come in to pick it up? And why wouldn't some one pick up their check? If they are working a job like that, I imagine they need the money?

Re: An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

#132

Post by DoreenMichele »

Moru wrote: post #55
squiggleblaz wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is to discourage the customer from complaining because of the harsh treatment the customer will receive. Therefore yes, if it comes to that, it has failed.

Some people complain just so they can watch the boss chew out some employee. That's satisfaction for being badly treated/buying something that was faulty.

It's also satisfaction because you failed to get laid, you are going through a divorce, your own job is a shit experience or your life otherwise sucks in some fashion and you are the kind of asshole who enjoys taking your crap out on other people.

Re: An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

#133

Post by jdmichal »

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #127
jdmichal wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Use a lottery system with prepaid authorizations? Pretty much any system where people can put up some money and walk away. Fixed price, no queues.

Then it's just random chance. People usually don't like that sort of thing, outside of literal lotteries.

That's the entire point. Anything other than random chance means that someone has "priority". Priority which is typically decided by spending resources. Either time by waiting in queue. Or money by buying at higher than face value from a scalper -- who probably waited in queue, thereby exchanging their time for money.

If the principle being striven for is fair, then most fair to me would be to allow all potential attendees to participate in the sale. If there are more participants than tickets, then the most fair mechanism which does not reward time-rich participants is random lottery, not a queue. A queue rewards those who happen to be available for registration the moment it opens.

Re: An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

#134

Post by ender341341 »

ensignavenger wrote: post #131
hdctambien wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The company kept the "last check" of the employees who quit (probably by no-showing which is why they didn't pick up their last check) so the company got a few hours of free labor from each employee. "They did this" means they had the actor convince the applicants to take the job. The more employees they hire, the more free hours they get (since the quitters don't pick up their last check)

Is that legal? Don't they have to mail the check to the employees if they don't come in to pick it up? And why wouldn't some one pick up their check? If they are working a job like that, I imagine they need the money?

A lot of people don't know their rights, or know their rights but think they'll need a lawyer to deal with it and don't have that sort of money.

In reality a call to the Department of Labor or whatever the local equivalent is will get the money, though usually with a pretty big lag time (a threat to call the DoL can be faster).

Re: An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

#135

Post by Can_Not »

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #68
godelski wrote: post #41

Ticketmaster the employee There's actually a good Freakanomics episode on this[1]. How tickets are undervalued and part of Ticketmaster's value is that they take blame for the high prices. [1] http://freakonomics.com/podcast/live-event-ticket-market-scr...

There are a lot of assumptions in that piece, especially regarding the motives of artists and the fan/idol relationship. It is absolutely not a normal type market, and it shouldn't be treated like one. The way forward is not to inflate ticket prices, ensuring only the richest fans can afford to go to concerts, and screwing over the ordinary people. The way forward is to make it illegal to resell tickets at higher tha…

Why not a blind auction? Have everyone who wants a ticket choose any value above $10 (including $10). The highest 10,000 (presumed seat capacity) priced bids get their tickets. If there is a tie at the end, sort by first come, first serve, excluding excessive bulk orders.

Re: An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

#136

Post by Can_Not »

cornholio wrote: post #119
evandijk70 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't a better system to just hold a lottery? Yes, maybe now you have fans with dedication, but it just feels like an enormous waste of time for everyone to be online refreshing a page for an hour when it will boil down to luck anyway who will get a ticket

Do I have to pay to play the lottery? If that case, it's practically equivalent to a ticket price of (lottery price)*(probability of winning), so you haven't really solved anything, the scalpers will buy many lottery tickets. Double more so if the lottery is free, then the price becomes expressed as the grinding of multiple identities, straw buyers, etc. into fooling the system to give them more chances; scalpers are…

Would a limit of 2 per verified cellphone or 5 per credit card fix this?

Re: An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

#137

Post by godelski »

Can_Not wrote: post #136
cornholio wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do I have to pay to play the lottery? If that case, it's practically equivalent to a ticket price of (lottery price)*(probability of winning), so you haven't really solved anything, the scalpers will buy many lottery tickets. Double more so if the lottery is free, then the price becomes expressed as the grinding of multiple identities, straw buyers, etc. into fooling the system to give them more chances; scalpers are…

Would a limit of 2 per verified cellphone or 5 per credit card fix this?

Well what are you trying to fix? What are you trying to do? Profit maximize? Or ensure that only people that are going to watch the concert buy tickets?

Re: An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

#138

Post by oldandtired »

emodendroket wrote: post #108
jstanley wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand that it's a bit impolite not to tip, but surely it's much more impolite to hold a grudge against someone for not tipping. If you want more money, put your prices up.

Yeah, why doesn't the pizza driver just independently change the prices Domino's charges for pizza? It's not just "a bit impolite" to not tip service staff in an American context; it's a grave insult that most people would only do in response to service they thought was shockingly below adequacy -- and likely they wouldn't even patronize the business again after doing so.

Up front, I'm not an American of the USA variety.

I had a long argument with two Americans of the USA variety about tipping. The attitude they displayed about tipping was that it was "criminal" if a customer didn't tip. My argument was that, since I was NOT a party to the employment agreement between business and employee, I had no responsibility to make up any shortfall between minimum wage and what the business was paying the employee.

It was interesting that they felt very strongly that even though you, as a customer, were not part of the the business/employee employment agreement, you still had a moral obligation to ensure that the employees got their due. They could not understand that the employee was a representative of the business and that the charges for service (of whatever kind) to the customer were set by the business by their prices. Any other charges had to be up front (and not called gratuities).

The Americans of the USA variety do not seem to understand that a gratuity is a freely offered gift on the part of the person giving it and it is in no way a requirement to be given. Otherwise, it is not a gratuity.

It seems to me that the attitude towards tipping in the USA makes it one of the tenth world countries where the society has no concept of an employer paying an employee a fair wage for the work being done.

Now, I don't have a problem with tipping (at my discretion) for above and beyond the call of duty service. However, for normal service being provided by a business, it is not appropriate for that business and employees to have an expectation that I make up any shortfall in living wages agreed between business and employee.

Re: An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

#139

Post by oldandtired »

emodendroket wrote: post #109
jstanley wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the company wants to get more money from the customer (to pay to the driver or not) they need to put the prices up. If the driver wants more money he needs to negotiate that with his employer. It's not the customer's responsibility to pay over the quoted price just because the driver thinks he is underpaid.

But it is, because this is an obligation that everybody understands, even if it is not legally enforced.

But it isn't. The customer has no part in the wage negotiations between business and employee. All it shows is that they (business and employees) are not being honourable towards each other or to their customers.

A business should set it prices so that it fulfils it responsibilities (including to it staff). If the business cannot run at the prices so set then it fails. That is not the responsibility of the customer to make the business successful. It is the business' rite of passage to provide services or goods that customers want to buy,

Re: An employee whose job was to be sacked (2010)

#140

Post by oldandtired »

emodendroket wrote: post #129
bkor wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Stop commenting about this until after you've done a bit of research. In US most states have to make up to ensure people are paid at least minimum wage. Even if that's not the case, it's the governments responsibility (in case employers don't) to ensure people get paid enough. This as individual employees don't have a strong negotiation ability. A customer is not obliged at all to tip; not unless the definition did…

Such rules are routinely violated. Perhaps tips "should" be a reward, but they aren't; they're an essential part of compensation, and you're not striking a blow against the system by denying your server their tip. You're just being a cheapskate.

Why should I be considered a cheapskate when I don't tip? I choose to buy goods and service from whomever I please. The prices are set and that is what the agreement is. The agreement is between me and the business. Wages are an agreement between the business and the employee. If the two want to agree to a specific wage regime that is their right. But it in no way, obligates any customer to supply any shortfall between wage and minimum wage.

Any services provided by the employee to the customer are as a business representative. They are a function of the agreement between the business and the employee. If the employee decides that he or she should, by their own estimation, provide a service that is well and truly beyond what they are doing as the business representative then they are doing so on their own behalf. If the customer then believes an appropriate reward is to be given for that exemplary service, then it is the customer's right to choose such an action.

It is not an obligation but a freely chosen reward.

Post reply on HN