This isn’t what they want to happen. They know it will happen, but this isn’t the goal or objective.

Amazon is a big boy company, if they want to cut staff, they’ll cut staff. The problem with cutting staff this way, is that they don’t get to decide who they’re cutting. They don’t want to cut talented employees at random, they want to pick the low performers and let them go. This is kind of the opposite of that.

The higher skilled the employee is, the more likely they are to have been hired remote, and to feel they can find another job also. That means they’re effectively shooting themselves in the foot and getting rid of some of their talented employees for the benefit of bringing people into the office.

There has been a swing in the business opinion that work from home isn’t as efficient. This is basically the higher-ups falling in line with that opinion.

If you made it, you’re welcome to do that if you want. If someone else made it then you’re an asshole of assholes and this is grounds for execution or exile to the farthest reaches of the globe.

That sucks man. Religion ruins childhoods.

Technology has moved from nitch nerdy thing to general public usage and as it did so it became usable without knowing what’s going on. Gen Z doesn’t know shit about technology, they just know how to use it.

When I was a kid, if you wanted to get a computer working you had to screw with the RAM settings or build the computer yourself from components. If you didn’t know how to do this you talked with someone who did. I’ve forced my kids to learn at least some of this, but the idea that they’re more tech savvy is ridiculous. They’re users of tech, but it’s become too complicated (and more user friendly), so they don’t know what’s happening behind their screen.

The US tends to suck for many things worker related, I wasn’t arguing about all the different policies. However, I double checked, all our Scottish employees have a “use it or lose it” rule on vacation days. They must use all their vacation days per calendar year. They get their vacation days on Jan 1st and if they don’t use them by Dec 31st, they lose them. This is also the model the other employees have in the US, with the exception of the two of use who live in California where that type of policy is illegal.

Since you must know, I get 20 days of vacation a year plus all federal holidays (11 days). I don’t get sick days, they come out of my vacation days. However I’m a high value employee and you’re comparing me against the blue collar workers in Scotland. I believe they get either 15 or 20 vacation days per year and I don’t really know about their sick day program. I hate the calendar “use it or lose it” vacation day plan and I think the California rules are much better.

It’s absolutely a company policy, but in California it’s not legal to have a policy like that. The whole idea that you must use all your holidays every calendar year is stupid. Having a policy where if you haven’t used all your vacation days by December 31st, you lose it, is stupid.

The main difference from a vacation standpoint is that the vacation days are allocated per calendar year, and must all be used in that calendar year. You’re given x amount on January 1st and they must all be used by December 31st.

In California, vacation days are treated as an accruing asset. They can’t reset my vacation days at the turnover of a calendar year . The vacation hours build up over time. This means there’s not an end of the year rush to use vacation days, there is no use it or lose it, and if I’m ever laid off the company has to pay me for all the vacation days I’ve accrued. The California system is a much better system than the one the employees have in Scotland.

With the US is it the vacation rules are mostly not required. Many states have different rules, and the more conservative the state, the more anti worker the rules are.

And all the jobs I’ve worked, I’ve never seen any pushback for taking vacation. But that’s because I work in a white collar industry that is competitive and I can find another job if I wanted to. The less skilled you are, and the lower the opportunities are in the industries around you, the more opportunity exists for shitty employers.

The interesting thing is, that I currently work for a Scottish company, and their vacation rules are worse than mine because I am guided by California labor laws, and they’re under shitty UK labor laws.

“fire one million” - Musk

It totally works.

The rich people I’ve spoken with just don’t think they’re premium enough. It had nothing to do with politics. Most of their politics line up conservative anyway.

I’m target demo for a Tesla. Upper middle class techie. My next car will be an EV and I actually like Teslas. I like a lot of things about them but I will absolutely not buy one while Elon is in charge of the company. Fuck that guy. He’s not getting any of my money.

Hey, whatever works for you. There are many people who I’m friendly with, but I’m not friends with, and they can be useful to find out information about employment opportunities or other things like that. Whether or not you want to call it “corporate hustle poison” or networking, or just being friendly is up to you. If you refuse to be part of it, no skin off my back, but if someone wants to be part of it then that’s perfectly fine too. There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with LinkedIn, Facebook or almost any other social media platform. It’s really in how you use it.

Thank you for being the only person who actually answered my question. I appreciate your response.

Really? That’s worth wishing she was dead? Who the fuck cares? Again, on a scale of 1-10, I think that rates a 2.

If you actually read her posts (the ones I read in 5 min of internet searching before I asked this question), her message is basically (paraphrasing) “I support trans people’s rights to live as they want, but I value womanhood and take pride in my womanhood. As such, I want trans people to live as they want, but I want to keep the idea of womanhood separate because I value it as a space for women.” I’m assuming she said something much worse somewhere else??? … but that’s really a fucking lame thing to base all this hate on. Really, there has to be something more, right? Right?

Clearly it wasn’t. The original post showed one manager being an asshole. OPs follow-up is that all managers are assholes. The leap and logic there is a relatively stupid way to view the world. It’s the same logic that says my sister is bad at driving, therefore all women are bad at driving. If you or the op want to have an immature view of the world, that’s your prerogative, but I’m interested in understanding at least the first level argument to be made for why all managers are bad.

You seem to have a very immature view of life.

That seems so weird. Linked in is simply a way to connect with co-workers so you can contact them when you’re no longer at the same job. I don’t have them in my Facebook, I didn’t have them in my phone, but if I want to contact them for connections or anything, LinkedIn is the place for that. How much you interact with the posting garbage is entirely up to you. I do it extremely little and I have no problem with LinkedIn.

I’m a manager, why am I a bastard?

It really feels like people hate on her way more than they should. Can someone explain to me where it’s all coming from? I read some of her trans statements and honestly they weren’t that bad. If feels too me like on a scale of 1 to 10, the hate should be at a 3, but it always seems to be at an 8 or 9. WTF?

As an engineering manager, I’ve already received AI cover letters. Don’t do that. They suck. They get “round filed” faster than no cover letter at all. It’s insulting.

(Realistically if I couldn’t tell the difference then it would be fine, but right now it’s so fucking obvious.)