Newman: Scobbs: GG: rocket88: So what, you got to work for them getting a bunch of money coming in, and then they can just cut you loose without paying you? I'd be smelling lawsuit if it were me, but then I'm a whiny *** liberal so there you go. I'm with Rocket here. If you contributed to the sales and they cut you right before they cut the commission checks, that sounds shady at best and borderline illegal at worst. I'd look into it. Thirded. The problem is the process that we go through to get a deal closed. All of these deals are still "potential" deals. What they do is they conduct an analysis which usually lasts about 2-3 weeks. After that, they put together a proposal and send it to the potential client. Statistically, if we do an analysis for a company, there's an 90% chance it's a closed deal. The sales I'm talking about are split up among three potential clients, two of which are having their analysis done at the end of this month and the third will have it done in April. So, technically, there's no sale yet. I have a feeling there's nothing I can really do. I like Rost's idea. Hopefully I can find something in the same industry and swoop in on these companies before they close.
Scobbs: GG: rocket88: So what, you got to work for them getting a bunch of money coming in, and then they can just cut you loose without paying you? I'd be smelling lawsuit if it were me, but then I'm a whiny *** liberal so there you go. I'm with Rocket here. If you contributed to the sales and they cut you right before they cut the commission checks, that sounds shady at best and borderline illegal at worst. I'd look into it. Thirded.
GG: rocket88: So what, you got to work for them getting a bunch of money coming in, and then they can just cut you loose without paying you? I'd be smelling lawsuit if it were me, but then I'm a whiny *** liberal so there you go. I'm with Rocket here. If you contributed to the sales and they cut you right before they cut the commission checks, that sounds shady at best and borderline illegal at worst. I'd look into it.
rocket88: So what, you got to work for them getting a bunch of money coming in, and then they can just cut you loose without paying you? I'd be smelling lawsuit if it were me, but then I'm a whiny *** liberal so there you go.
So what, you got to work for them getting a bunch of money coming in, and then they can just cut you loose without paying you? I'd be smelling lawsuit if it were me, but then I'm a whiny *** liberal so there you go.
I'm with Rocket here. If you contributed to the sales and they cut you right before they cut the commission checks, that sounds shady at best and borderline illegal at worst. I'd look into it.
Thirded.
The problem is the process that we go through to get a deal closed. All of these deals are still "potential" deals. What they do is they conduct an analysis which usually lasts about 2-3 weeks. After that, they put together a proposal and send it to the potential client. Statistically, if we do an analysis for a company, there's an 90% chance it's a closed deal. The sales I'm talking about are split up among three potential clients, two of which are having their analysis done at the end of this month and the third will have it done in April. So, technically, there's no sale yet. I have a feeling there's nothing I can really do.
I like Rost's idea. Hopefully I can find something in the same industry and swoop in on these companies before they close.
You should just for pure revenge. That dude royally stuck it in you. Return the favor. Even if you get nothing out of it, you might get to see his business burn to the ground (not literally).
Ha! Can you imagine a union sales job?
"Yeah but...he sold more than me. He's getting paid more! NO FAIR!!!!"
We were all Quitnesses.
GG: Ha! Can you imagine a union sales job? "Yeah but...he sold more than me. He's getting paid more! NO FAIR!!!!"
hahaha
I am the thread killer.
Guile: Too bad it wasn't a union job; then you'd have some protection against this type of thing.
Too bad it wasn't a union job; then you'd have some protection against this type of thing.
ACTUALLY...my mother was just laid off from a union job at HCMC in which she had the most or second most seniority and shouldn't have been even close to the cutting block. a manager wanted to get rid of her and did, and the union was modest at best about protecting her job...
-V
Uh, I really wasn't trying to start a union debate. Just noting that in this case, where an employer actually is doing shady stuff and screwing an employee out of money, a union might be beneficial.
Guile: ...a union might be beneficial.
...a union might be beneficial.
or not.
thestallion: ACTUALLY...my mother was just laid off from a union job at HCMC in which she had the most or second most seniority and shouldn't have been even close to the cutting block. a manager wanted to get rid of her and did, and the union was modest at best about protecting her job... -V
Happens all the time. We had our entire classification (6 people) eliminated for "budgetary reasons" and then the employer turned around and created new jobs to replace us that were effectively the same but were in a different union, had higher pay and more benefits. Our union filed a grievance and was granted a civil service commission hearing. At the hearing, the employer presented fake job announcements/postings, lied about what ACTUAL work folks in these classifications do and even admitted that most of us either had been or were capable of performing the new jobs. Documents were produced that showed the employer had lied to union officials regarding our positions - the union was told that there was no intent to replace our positions and an internal memo dated 2 weeks prior to this discussion showed a hiring timeline and new job descriptions for our jobs. Best part? The nearly singular difference in the new jobs was that you were required to have a bachelor's degree to apply. None of us have bachelor's degrees so we weren't eligible to apply for our old jobs. The hearing had appeared to go in our favor, which was a good thing since it meant we would get our jobs back but after 4 months of deliberating, the commission voted two for and one against the employer. If there were a "spirit of the law" provision regarding union contracts, I'm confident the employer would have been found at fault.
During my seven years as a member of a13 person department, I saw jobs get reclassified 4 times in order to avoid having to take or keep a more senior person. Other departments were fully eliminated and then re-configured and re-staffed to facilitate getting rid of people or ensuring that a chosen person could work with someone. Dozens of people working out of their classifications or working in newly created classifications tailored to them, folks holding jobs for which they never passed the civil service exams, seniority dates from other classes being grandfathered in to avoid layoffs. Myself and others had reported these activities as they were happening to our steward to no avail. My union (AFSCME Local 5) was a joke.
I wish unionized places could just be transparent and layoff or terminate people who aren't working out. At least then so many people wouldn't be affected by the machinations.
I also do not want to derail this thread into a "Unions: Working for you or Past their prime?" debate, I just wanted to share that what happened with Stallion's mom is unfortunately pretty common.
Chica!:I also do not want to derail this thread into a "Unions: Working for you or Past their prime?" debate, I just wanted to share that what happened with Stallion's mom is unfortunately pretty common.
petty quibbles with Guile aside, i was actually really surprised that the union was unable to prevent her from being cut. in ~8 years she had amassed 200+ sick hours and 200+ vacation hours because she always showed up to work. never written up. never late.
i seem to hover at 0 vacation hours and my sick time is not far behind...
thestallion: Chica!:I also do not want to derail this thread into a "Unions: Working for you or Past their prime?" debate, I just wanted to share that what happened with Stallion's mom is unfortunately pretty common. petty quibbles with Guile aside, i was actually really surprised that the union was unable to prevent her from being cut. in ~8 years she had amassed 200+ sick hours and 200+ vacation hours because she always showed up to work. never written up. never late. i seem to hover at 0 vacation hours and my sick time is not far behind... -V
With the right HR staff, a union contract is better for wiping your butt than protecting employees.
I had 100+ hours of sick time when I got my layoff letter. I called in sick every day for my last 2 weeks (I forewarned my boss)
being in a union is like paying a gang to help you keep your job. might as well get a neck tat
i'll buy your album just so i can throw it away
Newman:I'm fine with unemployment benefits being there....for six months. Anything more than that is ridiculous, IMO.
Speaking for myself, I hate being on unemployment. The times when I've had to use it I hated every minute of it and I couldn't find a new job fast enough. First of all, they pay you a fraction of what you make so it ain't like you're getting rich. Secondly, you have to check in with them and jump through hoops to get it. They made me attend a f*ckin' class for christsake. Finally, I hate accepting welfare.
I understand there are people who will milk this system and try to get the max amount of money that they can from it- but I think they ultimately do themselves a disservice by not looking for new work. You end up in a career quagmire... and the space you create on your resume is not attractive. Not to mention you could be doing things to advance your career during that time that you're sitting around eating Munchos.
I was laid off right after 9/11 and my wife was too. I remember those times being very hard for both of us because the economy tanked and work just wasn't available, and on top of it we both lost our jobs and were collecting unemployment. That was also the first and only time in my life that I went to the food shelf. It was embarassing, and the guy at the food shelf told me to stop sweating it because "you aren't the people who are the problem. I'll see you a few times until you get back on your feet and then I'll probably never see you again." He was right- I haven't been back since. But I really appreciated what they do there and am very glad they exist to help people in times of need.
So I guess my point is that unemployment is a type of welfare really, but that's not all bad. If people use it as it's intended, it works and is a very good thing that happens in our society. It's those who abuse it that really cast the negative light on it. With this being said, I think they are extending benefits too long and that doesn't really help the people who are trying- it helps those who want to milk the system.
~€~