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

The Machine Fired Me

idiallo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 578 posts

Re: The Machine Fired Me

#521

Post by alistairSH »

paulie_a wrote: post #293
hcknwscommenter wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sue in small claims court for week 1. Win. Obtain judgment. File lien against company assets. Sue in small claims court for week 2. Win. Obtain judgment. File lien against company assets. Repeat as necessary. Offer settlement in return for not suing anymore.

In reality it would be: spend court fees..sue in small claims court. Win. Good luck collecting in many cases. Filing for a lien? Good luck with that pointless venture...

In most states, the fee to file in small claims is somewhere between $30-$100. Filing for a lien with the local sheriff is another $100 or so. Well worth it for 3 weeks wages.

Re: The Machine Fired Me

#522

Post by alistairSH »

gambiting wrote: post #258
paulie_a wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you think you will enforce that contract? Hire a lawyer? You might as well go to the ATM grab as much cash as you possible. Then put it all in a garbage can and light a match. It will be far less costly and more productive then attempting pursue that contract.

I don't know, does US not have a small claims court? In UK you'd pay £90 to file a case, you'd get a judgement in about a week and the company would be ordered to pay. Like I really don't understand this entire issue. Did he even ask HR to be compensated for this time? I feel like the whole article is missing some crucial information.

Yes, the US has small claims courts. They are run at the state/county level, so fees and maximum recovery values vary. Fees generally run $30-$100 and max. recovery somewhere around $5k. After winning a case, filing a lien with the sheriff is another $100 or so.

Re: The Machine Fired Me

#523

Post by s73v3r_ »

rectang wrote: post #503
s73v3r_ wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're not being paid, then yes, the worker should abandon the company.

Do you seriously think I'm suggesting that they stay indefinitely without pay? Or, if you are saying that they shouldn't stay even for a day, even in the face of an emergency, then I disagree. Even if they don't have a legal obligation to do so, I respect those who would, like this worker. And I would prefer to work along such people as colleagues, trusting that if they could help it, they wouldn't leave their team i…

"I don't like the idea that complete lack of trust and hairtrigger hostility should be the default mode of workforce participation."

Then complain to the employers, who are the ones who created that culture.

Re: The Machine Fired Me

#524

Post by isostatic »

LarryL wrote: post #372
Spooky23 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not wage theft. Contractors aren’t humans, from a human resource pov.

> Contractors aren’t humans Real story from one of the (big) french telecom companies I worked for, as a contractor (a few years ago)... In that company, a regular employee was given a full desk, contractors were only given 2/3 of a desk (meaning 2 desks put side by side for 3 persons). Also, contractors were NOT allowed to go to ANY conference. Even when it was about technical stuff that was directly for their proje…

Sounds like departments were using contractors as full members of staff. Contractors should be brought in for a specific purpose, as a consultant to staff, as an extra pair of hands to follow the whims of staff.

If contractors are the only expert in a domain, there are big problems. Of course in corporations this is quite frequent - middle managers have yearly budgets for contractors, but aren't allowed to use that money to increase their headcount.

A company I work for decided to get a contractor in to run a £40m project. This makes sense for a management perspective, they get to blame the contractor (who's already left) if it fails, and they get to claim the glory if it works. It's terrible for a company though.

If I want 500 cables run in a data centre, or even 5 cables if it's a long way, I'll get a contractor in. Saves me a day by not having to do that work neatly and lets me do more important things (like ranting on HN). If I want someone to build me a fancy gui, I'll specify the frameworks, and let them mess around with the look and feel, but ultimately I own the output of the work, I need to be able to deal with it as if I wrote it myself.

Re: The Machine Fired Me

#525

Post by otakucode »

rectang wrote: post #45

> I missed 3 weeks of pay because no one could stop the machine. Why has this company not made their loyal worker whole? He stayed there when they needed him even when their system was trying to lock him out. They need to fix this. If they don't, they are not a company anyone should work for. Perhaps the worker did not want to risk making a big stink, but a manager should have taken the initiative. Humans were involv…

During the 1980s, one idea became paramount in business management schools, books, seminars, etc: The worker must be disposable. Any worker who becomes important to the success of the organization must be fired immediately upon this realization. If you permit that person to remain, they will become even more integral to the organization. Eventually, they will realize this and ask for more pay. Eventually, they will want pay which is greater than industry standard for workers in their position. That can never be permitted to occur (lest the industry standard wage rise), so they will have to be fired at that point. And then, the loss will do great damage. Best to fire them as soon as they become indispensible and deal with the smaller amount of damage then.

This sort of thinking kind of makes sense in a world where almost every company is a big factory company with their workers primarily doing repetitive physical labor. And the business management world has not adapted at all to the transition to mental labor. Their businesses fail and suffer for this, but as it's a universal condition (yes even among Google and such... if the company has a physical office, then they haven't even done the obvious to benefit from the move to mental work) there's not much pressure motivating change.

Re: The Machine Fired Me

#526

Post by rectang »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #523
rectang wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you seriously think I'm suggesting that they stay indefinitely without pay? Or, if you are saying that they shouldn't stay even for a day, even in the face of an emergency, then I disagree. Even if they don't have a legal obligation to do so, I respect those who would, like this worker. And I would prefer to work along such people as colleagues, trusting that if they could help it, they wouldn't leave their team i…

"I don't like the idea that complete lack of trust and hairtrigger hostility should be the default mode of workforce participation." Then complain to the employers, who are the ones who created that culture.

I have. Who started this thread?

For what it's worth, I attribute the worst amoral behavior to corporate personhood rather than capitalism. Thus my preferred remedy is to eliminate corporate personhood, rather than capitalism.

Re: The Machine Fired Me

#527

Post by wolfi1 »

workinthehead wrote: post #426
wolfi1 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that could pose a problem in some European countries as it is very easy to get a court order (no humans involved, it`s an automated process) to collect the money from you. it would be your duty to prove you don`t have to pay.

Interesting, as the duty of proof is the other way around in the US, but usually it seems to be the EU that favors the little guy.

the burden of proof would be on the plaintiff`s side, but as I said as it`s automated the defendant has to act, if he fails to do so in a certain amount of time the court order becomes effective

Re: The Machine Fired Me

#528

Post by otakucode »

rectang wrote: post #503
s73v3r_ wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're not being paid, then yes, the worker should abandon the company.

Do you seriously think I'm suggesting that they stay indefinitely without pay? Or, if you are saying that they shouldn't stay even for a day, even in the face of an emergency, then I disagree. Even if they don't have a legal obligation to do so, I respect those who would, like this worker. And I would prefer to work along such people as colleagues, trusting that if they could help it, they wouldn't leave their team i…

What if the worker stayed, expecting that the company would make things right, but when it was discovered that companies simply don't DO that and haven't since the 1980s, files a lawsuit or otherwise takes aggressive action to force the company to treat them fairly?

Re: The Machine Fired Me

#529

Post by Bartweiss »

mseebach wrote: post #445
Bartweiss wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a bit of paperwork I suspect this is the difference. If this company is incapable of not firing someone, I imagine their appeals process could be equally miserable. Sure, maybe the manager and director want to repay him, but actually releasing funds to pay someone who "wasn't employed" is going involve a lengthy battle with some HR/Accounting computer system that just wants its invariants not to vary. Depending on…

The good thing about places like that is (a) they don't actually care about the money, it's a rounding error. For some smaller firms paying someone for three weeks of not working (regardless of fault) could actually be a problem. (b) They also have a legal department who's invariant is "don't get sued for breach of contract because of a stupid mistake that a small cheque can make go away". But, of course, the author…

> a legal department who's invariant is "don't get sued for breach of contract

This is a good point. I was thinking that no matter how trivial the money, actually dragging a check out of the accounting system would be a serious hurdle. But the solution I missed would be to sic legal on it - their machine tends to beat out everyone else's.

Re: The Machine Fired Me

#530

Post by inimino »

krapp wrote: post #301
inimino wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They screwed up, but that happens. The point where the system takes over and even the higher-ups can't override it is where the story becomes Kafka-esque. If you build an automation system that goes out of human control after a human error, that is a failed design.

>If you build an automation system that goes out of human control after a human error, that is a failed design. Unless it was designed with the intent that human intervention should be impossible once a process was started. That would make it a very poor design, but not a failed one. I've seen lots of internal software that doesn't have failsafes or rollbacks - the operator is simply trained to follow procedure and t…

"Self-destruct sequence initiated, cannot abort." should be left in the world of sci-fi.

If there is a physical process that cannot be stopped (rocket, nuclear reactor, oil well) then of course the system must be designed around that physical fact.

But this is an HR process. The "moving parts" are people.

If it was designed with the intent that human intervention should be impossible, the design was a failure.

Perhaps more likely it was just a failure of implementation (there's a cancel button but nobody knows where) or of imagination (nobody thought about whether the process could be canceled or not).

What if instead of HR, this was a financial process, playing out over days or weeks, entirely beyond the company's control. Would any sane CFO approve such a thing?

> Cost often supersedes quality or flexibility

That helps to explain it, but it doesn't excuse it.

Post reply on HN