I got "let go"
-
Shog9 wrote: But you did the right thing, Really? I couldn't disagree more. Telling your employer you "might have to leave" in a few months just handcuffs them: they can't promote you, can't have you as an integral part of a major project, and can't plan for a replacement (because they don't know if or when it will happen). No employer wants that kind of uncertainty. I think employees tend to overestimate their employer's expectations. I expect my employees to abide by the local employment standards and any agreements that were signed when they were employed (and they can't supersede employment standards legislation). That's it. It says they have to give me...NO NOTICE. I have to give them two weeks, plus applicable severence. Them's the rules and everyone knows 'em before the deal is made. I EXPECT my employees to look around and leave if they find something better. I certainly would! It would be nice if they gave me a chance to match or beat whatever offer they get, but I don't expect that - everyone's priorities and needs/wants are different. Employee turnover is part of being in business. My 2c worth. Cheers, Drew.
Drew Stainton wrote: It says they have to give me...NO NOTICE That is interesting, never seen a 0 notice policy. Must be hellish for you as a boss to have that possibility everyday. Good post though. Too many people only see it from the employee perspective and think companies, even small ones, can afford to be nice and hang around while the employee sorts out their next job. It is harsh but companies are not charities and bosses have wives and kids to feed too. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
-
Paul Watson wrote: It is very frustrating trying to be nice to employees who are quitting while trying to keep projects on-track. So don't be nice to them. Be honest with them. Is that really so hard? To say right up front, "if you say you're leaving, we say we're hiring"? I mean, that's just common sense - any employee going into such a discussion would expect that, so what's the advantage of giving them false hope?
You must be careful in the forest Broken glass and rusty nails If you're to bring back something for us I have bullets for sale...
For sure, that is a reasonable request. I hope all bosses try to do that. I assume this chap also got his one month notice period, so he is not in an unfair position right now. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
-
For sure, that is a reasonable request. I hope all bosses try to do that. I assume this chap also got his one month notice period, so he is not in an unfair position right now. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
Paul Watson wrote: I assume this chap also got his one month notice period I didn't get that out of reading the post, but perhaps you're right - it's easy enough to exaggerate wrongs when you're ranting. Hopefully that is the case here. Not trying to imply that employers need to be charities either. But i certainly see a good number of posts on CP and elsewhere telling stories like this, and have seen it at my own place of employment - workers treated shabbily just because they can be. The response is always "dog-eat-dog, be more cynical next time" - great advice i'm sure, but what a way to live! It would be foolish to think that it'll ever be buddy-buddy with you and the person who writes your checks and can stop at any time... but it would be nice to think that two individuals who depend so much on each other could at least agree to treat each other with a minimal amount of respect. :sigh:
You must be careful in the forest Broken glass and rusty nails If you're to bring back something for us I have bullets for sale...
-
Drew Stainton wrote: It says they have to give me...NO NOTICE That is interesting, never seen a 0 notice policy. Must be hellish for you as a boss to have that possibility everyday. Good post though. Too many people only see it from the employee perspective and think companies, even small ones, can afford to be nice and hang around while the employee sorts out their next job. It is harsh but companies are not charities and bosses have wives and kids to feed too. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
Paul Watson wrote: That is interesting, never seen a 0 notice policy. Same here.... We are requested to give 2 weeks, they are required to give 2 weeks (or pay in lieu of -- which is often the case). my last employer matched my offer here (not exceeded, just matched to the penny), and yelled at me for not accepting it. I couldn't put a $$ on the future possibilities here, but I saw they were there, he did not even try. Everyone from employees to bosses sometimes have different preconceptions about how things are supposed to work. I think the true word is there is, you cannot have any guarentees. _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Yup, definitely a rant as your boss did the right and proper thing and you are just bummed they did not play to your schedule. When you first told him it was the same as saying you were no longer committed to the company, right from then. The company would think it is not only useless but also costly to carry on investing in you. Better to find a replacement, which is probably what they were doing for the last 5 months, and invest in him. Your ex-boss is an OK guy, he didn't hand you your notice as you walked out of that first meeting. He has a job to do too remember. The company has a goals to meet. Team-members who are leaving at some unknown but soon date are a liability. How do they plan based on "few" and "several"? And I say all of this having been in the same situation but from the boss' perspective. It is very frustrating trying to be nice to employees who are quitting while trying to keep projects on-track. It is sad to see invested resources leaving your team too. In a nut-shell; It works both ways. Look after yourself just as the company is looking after itself. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
Paul Watson wrote: When you first told him it was the same as saying you were no longer committed to the company, right from then. How do you figure? It's just an assumption that you aren't committed to the company anymore. When an employee gives their two-week notice, do you immediately escort them out of the building? Afterall, that's the same situation, isn't it? Paul Watson wrote: Your ex-boss is an OK guy, he didn't hand you your notice as you walked out of that first meeting. :omg: Paul Watson wrote: The company would think it is not only useless but also costly to carry on investing in you. You make it sound like companies "invest" in employees and get nothing in return. If he was spending those months getting training classes, then I would agree, but if he's doing work, then I don't agree. Afterall, a company "invests" in an employee to get a return on investment (i.e. work). If he's working, then he's producing that "return on investment" for the company. If employees never produced that return on investment, then no companies would have any employees at all. Paul Watson wrote: In a nut-shell; It works both ways. Look after yourself just as the company is looking after itself. I think in a nut-shell the answer is that he (the employee) went out of the way to make life convenient for the company. But the company did not reciprocate that courtesy. (Lack of reciprocity is always a difficult thing for us as humans to accept.) I guess the moral of the story is: employees tend to try too hard to make life easy for the company, but the company isn't necessarily going to reciprocate that courtesy. Thus, either the company needs to change, or the employees need to stop going out of their way for the company (and you as their boss). Pick which one that you, as a boss, want. Just don't expect employees to make your life easy if you won't reciprocate. ----------------------------------------------------- Empires Of Steel[^]
-
Drew Stainton wrote: Telling your employer you "might have to leave" in a few months just handcuffs them: they can't promote you, can't have you as an integral part of a major project, and can't plan for a replacement (because they don't know if or when it will happen). No employer wants that kind of uncertainty. Every employer has that kind of uncertainty, whether they want it or not. Regardless of what an employee plans on doing, there's no assurance they won't get hit by a truck after leaving for the day - you always have risks. A good employer will do the best they can with what they know. In this situation, Richard gave his boss an unexpected advantage, knowledge which could have been used to minimize the cost of his departure. Instead, the employer got scared or angry and made things worse for both of them. Now instead of having several months to integrate a new team-member, they have days. And instead of sending the other employees a message saying "be up-front with us, we'll be up-front with you", they've pretty much ensured no-one else will give notice until they're getting ready to walk out the door. Unless you can put yourself in the place of his employer and admit you'd have done the same (lie to him and then fire him), i can't imagine how you could expect him to have acted differently.
You must be careful in the forest Broken glass and rusty nails If you're to bring back something for us I have bullets for sale...
Shog9 wrote: Every employer has that kind of uncertainty, whether they want it or not Of course. But telling them that it "might happen" does nothing but increase the uncertainty. In other words, the best you could expect as an employee is to be treated worse than normal. If you "might" be leaving soon, why would you get an extra bonus? Why would you get promoted? Why would they send you to Disneyland for the next big conference? The employer got absolutely no advantage here. They can't integrate a new team member because they don't know if or when he will leave. Shog9 wrote: they've pretty much ensured no-one else will give notice until they're getting ready to walk out the door Which is exactly what they, as an employer, would expect in the first place. Shog9 wrote: Unless you can put yourself in the place of his employer and admit you'd have done the same (lie to him and then fire him), I don't see where he lied. He thanked him for telling him - he didn't say that by telling him it assured his position at the company would never be touched. That leaves the company in another precarious position: now that he has told them he "might" leave, they can't lay him off without being accused of using that information as the reason. Maybe they decided to make changes at the company and his job would have been gone regardless. An employee loses by telling his/her employer something like this. If an employee wants to be nice they can give extra notice when they actually WILL be leaving. "Might" doesn't help anyone. Heck, I "might" win the lottery and quit next week. I "might" close my tech. company and start a cattle ranch. I "might" become ruler of the universe. I don't think telling anyone these things is going to help them. On the other hand "I will be closing my company and starting a cattle ranch in three months" gives my employees something concrete they can count on and make decisions with. Consider this 'flip-side' scenario: Employer: "We might move our office from Disneyland to Timbuktu in a few months." Employees: All start looking for, and find, new jobs. Employer: All ticked off because everyone left, even though they haven't even decided if or when they will move the office. I don't really see the difference, but I'm guessing employees would look at this and say "well, what did the employer expect? He said they might move the office." (Sorry for the verbose responses - I'm
-
Drew Stainton wrote: It says they have to give me...NO NOTICE That is interesting, never seen a 0 notice policy. Must be hellish for you as a boss to have that possibility everyday. Good post though. Too many people only see it from the employee perspective and think companies, even small ones, can afford to be nice and hang around while the employee sorts out their next job. It is harsh but companies are not charities and bosses have wives and kids to feed too. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
Paul Watson wrote: Must be hellish for you as a boss to have that possibility everyday Not really. It just means I have coverage in terms of capabilities so that if someone leaves unexpectedly, we can manage until I find someone else. Well, that and I get to work really late many nights :|. It does force diversification amongst employees which is never a bad thing. I think the bigger problem in any sort of relationship is that people inadvertantly make a deal (in their own minds): they do something with an expectation of something in return. Problem is they forget to tell the other person that they expect something in return and then get ticked off when they don't get it. I've found, to date, that ESP is a myth :). I've always thought that working for a company is a trade: employee works, company pays (with money and the agreed to benefits/perks). That's it. Expecting more than that is just asking for a difficult time. Cheers, Drew.
-
Paul Watson wrote: I assume this chap also got his one month notice period I didn't get that out of reading the post, but perhaps you're right - it's easy enough to exaggerate wrongs when you're ranting. Hopefully that is the case here. Not trying to imply that employers need to be charities either. But i certainly see a good number of posts on CP and elsewhere telling stories like this, and have seen it at my own place of employment - workers treated shabbily just because they can be. The response is always "dog-eat-dog, be more cynical next time" - great advice i'm sure, but what a way to live! It would be foolish to think that it'll ever be buddy-buddy with you and the person who writes your checks and can stop at any time... but it would be nice to think that two individuals who depend so much on each other could at least agree to treat each other with a minimal amount of respect. :sigh:
You must be careful in the forest Broken glass and rusty nails If you're to bring back something for us I have bullets for sale...
Shog9 wrote: The response is always "dog-eat-dog, be more cynical next time" - great advice i'm sure, but what a way to live! Sorry, that sincerely was not my intention (you know I am an optimistic even naive chap.) Shog9 wrote: But i certainly see a good number of posts on CP and elsewhere telling stories like this Well... 91.27% of us are employees and not bosses. I often read these rants and wonder what really went down, what the boss would have to say if he was on the forum. Employees can be utter bastards too. I want a more balanced take on the whole employer-employee relationship. Bosses sit in one corner and mutter about employees while employees sit in the other corner and bemoan their lot in life. If you only sit in one of the corners you can be forgiven for thinking the other side is an evil, plotting and heartless lot. Both sides, like you say, need to step up to the plate and improve matters rather than just slagging the other off. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
-
Paul Watson wrote: When you first told him it was the same as saying you were no longer committed to the company, right from then. How do you figure? It's just an assumption that you aren't committed to the company anymore. When an employee gives their two-week notice, do you immediately escort them out of the building? Afterall, that's the same situation, isn't it? Paul Watson wrote: Your ex-boss is an OK guy, he didn't hand you your notice as you walked out of that first meeting. :omg: Paul Watson wrote: The company would think it is not only useless but also costly to carry on investing in you. You make it sound like companies "invest" in employees and get nothing in return. If he was spending those months getting training classes, then I would agree, but if he's doing work, then I don't agree. Afterall, a company "invests" in an employee to get a return on investment (i.e. work). If he's working, then he's producing that "return on investment" for the company. If employees never produced that return on investment, then no companies would have any employees at all. Paul Watson wrote: In a nut-shell; It works both ways. Look after yourself just as the company is looking after itself. I think in a nut-shell the answer is that he (the employee) went out of the way to make life convenient for the company. But the company did not reciprocate that courtesy. (Lack of reciprocity is always a difficult thing for us as humans to accept.) I guess the moral of the story is: employees tend to try too hard to make life easy for the company, but the company isn't necessarily going to reciprocate that courtesy. Thus, either the company needs to change, or the employees need to stop going out of their way for the company (and you as their boss). Pick which one that you, as a boss, want. Just don't expect employees to make your life easy if you won't reciprocate. ----------------------------------------------------- Empires Of Steel[^]
Brit wrote: When an employee gives their two-week notice, do you immediately escort them out of the building? Afterall, that's the same situation, isn't it? It is and a lot of companies do just that. The employee gets their notice pay but they are asked to leave the building ASAP. It can be risky having an on-notice employee around. It is a difficult situation for both sides. Brit wrote: You make it sound like companies "invest" in employees and get nothing in return Not my intention mate. I am just trying to give bosses a bit of a voice in this discussion which is 92.17% employee. Brit wrote: I think in a nut-shell the answer is that he (the employee) went out of the way to make life convenient for the company. But the company did not reciprocate that courtesy I now agree with you though I think the way you put it gives far too much credit to the employee. The boss should/could have told the employee that they were looking for a replacement straight-away. But we don't really know what happened. All we know is that 5 months after telling them he would leave in several/few months he was given his notice. Maybe the company took that long to figure out what to do and only then started looking for a replacement? Maybe they had a replacement a day after his first meeting but that replacement could only start in 6 months time? I just want to hear what this chaps ex-boss has to say on the matter. It is so easy for us to cheer the employee and villify the boss. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
-
Shog9 wrote: Every employer has that kind of uncertainty, whether they want it or not Of course. But telling them that it "might happen" does nothing but increase the uncertainty. In other words, the best you could expect as an employee is to be treated worse than normal. If you "might" be leaving soon, why would you get an extra bonus? Why would you get promoted? Why would they send you to Disneyland for the next big conference? The employer got absolutely no advantage here. They can't integrate a new team member because they don't know if or when he will leave. Shog9 wrote: they've pretty much ensured no-one else will give notice until they're getting ready to walk out the door Which is exactly what they, as an employer, would expect in the first place. Shog9 wrote: Unless you can put yourself in the place of his employer and admit you'd have done the same (lie to him and then fire him), I don't see where he lied. He thanked him for telling him - he didn't say that by telling him it assured his position at the company would never be touched. That leaves the company in another precarious position: now that he has told them he "might" leave, they can't lay him off without being accused of using that information as the reason. Maybe they decided to make changes at the company and his job would have been gone regardless. An employee loses by telling his/her employer something like this. If an employee wants to be nice they can give extra notice when they actually WILL be leaving. "Might" doesn't help anyone. Heck, I "might" win the lottery and quit next week. I "might" close my tech. company and start a cattle ranch. I "might" become ruler of the universe. I don't think telling anyone these things is going to help them. On the other hand "I will be closing my company and starting a cattle ranch in three months" gives my employees something concrete they can count on and make decisions with. Consider this 'flip-side' scenario: Employer: "We might move our office from Disneyland to Timbuktu in a few months." Employees: All start looking for, and find, new jobs. Employer: All ticked off because everyone left, even though they haven't even decided if or when they will move the office. I don't really see the difference, but I'm guessing employees would look at this and say "well, what did the employer expect? He said they might move the office." (Sorry for the verbose responses - I'm
Drew Stainton wrote: But telling them that it "might happen" does nothing but increase the uncertainty. In other words, the best you could expect as an employee is to be treated worse than normal. If you "might" be leaving soon, why would you get an extra bonus? Why would you get promoted? Why would they send you to Disneyland for the next big conference? Well, yeah, i can understand not paying the guy extra or sending him on vacation. Shouldn't be any reason he can't do his work though. Drew Stainton wrote: An employee loses by telling his/her employer something like this. In Richard's case, absolutely. In my case, not at all. That was my point - it depends on who you're working for. Obviously, if your employer does not value you, then they will ditch you at the first sign of trouble. Of course, employers who don't value their programers often get shitty, late, expensive software as a result... Nothing like bringing in a new team to work on a half-finished project to completely run it into the ground. Drew Stainton wrote: Consider this 'flip-side' scenario: Well, what's the alternative: Employer (who might be moving to Timbuktu): "Nothing is happening, there are no plans to relocate." Employees: "Great! Let's all buy houses!" Employer: "Ok, we're relocating to Timbuktu - anyone care to move?" Employees: "No, you bastard, we can't move, and now we have to sell our kidneys to make house payments!" :rolleyes: Drew Stainton wrote: (Sorry for the verbose responses - I'm on a bit of a roll today) Why does this feel like a Friday... :)
You must be careful in the forest Broken glass and rusty nails If you're to bring back something for us I have bullets for sale...
-
Shog9 wrote: The response is always "dog-eat-dog, be more cynical next time" - great advice i'm sure, but what a way to live! Sorry, that sincerely was not my intention (you know I am an optimistic even naive chap.) Shog9 wrote: But i certainly see a good number of posts on CP and elsewhere telling stories like this Well... 91.27% of us are employees and not bosses. I often read these rants and wonder what really went down, what the boss would have to say if he was on the forum. Employees can be utter bastards too. I want a more balanced take on the whole employer-employee relationship. Bosses sit in one corner and mutter about employees while employees sit in the other corner and bemoan their lot in life. If you only sit in one of the corners you can be forgiven for thinking the other side is an evil, plotting and heartless lot. Both sides, like you say, need to step up to the plate and improve matters rather than just slagging the other off. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
Paul Watson wrote: I want a more balanced take on the whole employer-employee relationship. I would never want to be an employer. I forget where I was reading, but there was some comment about who could work their entire life as an employee and never want to move up to management? Well that is me. I might if requested to, but I would have to seriously consider it. I have been a manager for a very short time, too young, too naive. I had to hire someone who took too many advantages of the company, and I had to fire him. Although I can run over my mind that it had to be done, I still hated doing it. And know my failure in not seeing it. Although I can blame that on my youth, or my employer for giving me the responsibility (though he had little choice, we had to fire the DP manager for "creative accounting" -- I was the only person in the whole company who know how the software worked). Still, I have no desire even almost 17 years later, give me state of the art graphics tasks and I am happy. _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Yup, definitely a rant as your boss did the right and proper thing and you are just bummed they did not play to your schedule. When you first told him it was the same as saying you were no longer committed to the company, right from then. The company would think it is not only useless but also costly to carry on investing in you. Better to find a replacement, which is probably what they were doing for the last 5 months, and invest in him. Your ex-boss is an OK guy, he didn't hand you your notice as you walked out of that first meeting. He has a job to do too remember. The company has a goals to meet. Team-members who are leaving at some unknown but soon date are a liability. How do they plan based on "few" and "several"? And I say all of this having been in the same situation but from the boss' perspective. It is very frustrating trying to be nice to employees who are quitting while trying to keep projects on-track. It is sad to see invested resources leaving your team too. In a nut-shell; It works both ways. Look after yourself just as the company is looking after itself. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
I was however not abandoning the project I was in. My commitment to the project is what has kept me working there until Monday. My boss also knew that I was planning on staying until the end of the project. Now that I am gone they have no one to complete the project, which, is now impossible to complete seeing as I was the only developer on it and was correcting his design mistakes as I went. -Richard
-
For sure, that is a reasonable request. I hope all bosses try to do that. I assume this chap also got his one month notice period, so he is not in an unfair position right now. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
Nope, I didn't get a one month or two week notice, I was ask to leave the building and they told me they would mail my personal effects to my house. -Richard
-
Drew Stainton wrote: But telling them that it "might happen" does nothing but increase the uncertainty. In other words, the best you could expect as an employee is to be treated worse than normal. If you "might" be leaving soon, why would you get an extra bonus? Why would you get promoted? Why would they send you to Disneyland for the next big conference? Well, yeah, i can understand not paying the guy extra or sending him on vacation. Shouldn't be any reason he can't do his work though. Drew Stainton wrote: An employee loses by telling his/her employer something like this. In Richard's case, absolutely. In my case, not at all. That was my point - it depends on who you're working for. Obviously, if your employer does not value you, then they will ditch you at the first sign of trouble. Of course, employers who don't value their programers often get shitty, late, expensive software as a result... Nothing like bringing in a new team to work on a half-finished project to completely run it into the ground. Drew Stainton wrote: Consider this 'flip-side' scenario: Well, what's the alternative: Employer (who might be moving to Timbuktu): "Nothing is happening, there are no plans to relocate." Employees: "Great! Let's all buy houses!" Employer: "Ok, we're relocating to Timbuktu - anyone care to move?" Employees: "No, you bastard, we can't move, and now we have to sell our kidneys to make house payments!" :rolleyes: Drew Stainton wrote: (Sorry for the verbose responses - I'm on a bit of a roll today) Why does this feel like a Friday... :)
You must be careful in the forest Broken glass and rusty nails If you're to bring back something for us I have bullets for sale...
Shog9 wrote: Shouldn't be any reason he can't do his work though. I agree. That's what I mean by he loses. Even if he didn't get laid off his work environment would suffer for having told them. Shog9 wrote: it depends on who you're working for I guess, but assuming your employer will be extra nice to you just because you did something you 'thought' was nice is a mistake: they may not think it was nice at all - that's his assumption. Shog9 wrote: Employer (who might be moving to Timbuktu): "Nothing is happening, there are no plans to relocate." Life sucks sometimes, don't it? I went through a similar scenario myself 3 years ago. We were told, after many rumours, that the impending lay-offs wouldn't impact our office. Several employees bought houses, cars etc. during the next several months and then we found out that all but 12 (out of 59) got the boot (including me). That was after moving the office from what was a 15 minute commute to a 45 minute commute for most of the employees (which is why they bought new houses). The remaining employees were moved back close to the original location - so it sucked whether they were laid off or not. Anyway, the end result is that anytime you get the heave-ho it just plain sucks. I don't think anything really helps except finding a new job. Shog9 wrote: Why does this feel like a Friday... No kidding. I haven't gotten anything done today at all... Cheers, Drew.
-
I was however not abandoning the project I was in. My commitment to the project is what has kept me working there until Monday. My boss also knew that I was planning on staying until the end of the project. Now that I am gone they have no one to complete the project, which, is now impossible to complete seeing as I was the only developer on it and was correcting his design mistakes as I went. -Richard
Richard Parsons wrote: Now that I am gone they have no one to complete the project, which, is now impossible to complete seeing as I was the only developer on it and was correcting his design mistakes as I went. I can't obviously comment on your specific situation. What I do know though is that this is what I think of as another 'fatal flaw' of a lot of employees: they think they're irreplaceable. Fact is most employees will be replaced and their projects figured out within a very short period of time. A bit depressing and a shock to the ol' ego, perhaps, but that's the way it is. On a side note, sorry to hear about your situation. My comments here are really a generalization of your situation. I don't mean to imply that you did anything wrong. Nobody knows what happened, or what it feels like except you. Regardless of viewpoint, it must suck to be told you are being laid off after thinking you were helping them out. Hope things go well for you! Cheers, Drew.
-
Yup, definitely a rant as your boss did the right and proper thing and you are just bummed they did not play to your schedule. When you first told him it was the same as saying you were no longer committed to the company, right from then. The company would think it is not only useless but also costly to carry on investing in you. Better to find a replacement, which is probably what they were doing for the last 5 months, and invest in him. Your ex-boss is an OK guy, he didn't hand you your notice as you walked out of that first meeting. He has a job to do too remember. The company has a goals to meet. Team-members who are leaving at some unknown but soon date are a liability. How do they plan based on "few" and "several"? And I say all of this having been in the same situation but from the boss' perspective. It is very frustrating trying to be nice to employees who are quitting while trying to keep projects on-track. It is sad to see invested resources leaving your team too. In a nut-shell; It works both ways. Look after yourself just as the company is looking after itself. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
Agreed Paul, I've been on both sides of this. Elaine :rose: PS Can't stay away can you ? ;) The tigress is here :-D
-
Yup, definitely a rant as your boss did the right and proper thing and you are just bummed they did not play to your schedule. When you first told him it was the same as saying you were no longer committed to the company, right from then. The company would think it is not only useless but also costly to carry on investing in you. Better to find a replacement, which is probably what they were doing for the last 5 months, and invest in him. Your ex-boss is an OK guy, he didn't hand you your notice as you walked out of that first meeting. He has a job to do too remember. The company has a goals to meet. Team-members who are leaving at some unknown but soon date are a liability. How do they plan based on "few" and "several"? And I say all of this having been in the same situation but from the boss' perspective. It is very frustrating trying to be nice to employees who are quitting while trying to keep projects on-track. It is sad to see invested resources leaving your team too. In a nut-shell; It works both ways. Look after yourself just as the company is looking after itself. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
having been on both sides of this situation myself I have to agree. As a boss, you want to feel like you are investing in the people who will make you and them successful. If someone is leaving, then it's really hard to invest anything in them. I'm not just losing the investment I've already made in them, I'm losing the institutional knowledge that they have in what we've been working on. Expecting a manager to be ok with that is just not realistic. You have to see it from both sides.
-
Well I use to think my boss was an ok guy. He even took the news well when I told him I might have to leave in a few months back in December. He thanked me for letting him know and told me to give him some warning if I decided I would have to go. I told him I would give him several months notice before any decision was made but apparently he went and wined to the HR Lady and Monday they told me they no longer needed my assistance. So like I said I use to think he was an ok guy until he went and did that, he could have at least shown me the courtesy of giving me some warning... Anyway, that's my rant for the day. -Richard
Richard Parsons wrote: He even took the news well when I told him I might have to leave in a few months back in December. Well, it's now May - 6 months - so they did give you enough time (though they didn't explicitly tell you, they must have started looking for an alternative employee the moment you told them you'd leave in a few months). Nish p.s. Most bosses are just that - bosses - it's risky trying to treat them as friends. There are some exceptions though :-)
-
Nope, I didn't get a one month or two week notice, I was ask to leave the building and they told me they would mail my personal effects to my house. -Richard
But you are getting paid for two weeks or one month still, yes? regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Wheeler wrote: It's people like you that keep me heading for my big debut on CNN...
-
Well I use to think my boss was an ok guy. He even took the news well when I told him I might have to leave in a few months back in December. He thanked me for letting him know and told me to give him some warning if I decided I would have to go. I told him I would give him several months notice before any decision was made but apparently he went and wined to the HR Lady and Monday they told me they no longer needed my assistance. So like I said I use to think he was an ok guy until he went and did that, he could have at least shown me the courtesy of giving me some warning... Anyway, that's my rant for the day. -Richard
In the UK there are laws against that assuming you have worked for your employer for 2 years, I think it is now 1 year. He has to have grounds to dismiss you. I believe the compensation you can get is unlimmited by going to an Empoyment Tribunal.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't." - Anatole France