|
I work in the QA department of a company that processes payroll. The company is small-ish (about 50 employees) and there are 11 members of the IT team - 6 developers, 1 DBA, 3 QA people, and the director. My more senior co-worker took all of last week and the first half of this week off. My boss took Tues - Fri of last week off. On the Monday before his break he told me that over the break he'd like me to monitor the database logs. I had never really monitored the logs before so I asked him to show me what I was looking for. He said just look for one error popping up like 50 times in a row, otherwise it's probably fine. Over the break I skimmed through the logs maybe a little but I didn't see a bunch of recurring errors so I figured it was all good. Came in Monday to find panic. The Friday direct deposits did not run like they were supposed to and consequently many clients' employees didn't get paid. A huge fuckup. Client service's phones were ringing off the hook from angry employees. All the top management was freaking out. The IT director had to initiate the direct deposit to occur onTuesday instead. I immediately got that pit-in-your-stomach feeling, like, did I miss something huge? I was worried my boss was going to be mad since he often gets pissed off at people for things that don't warrant that much rage but when I asked him to show me where I went wrong he didn't seem angry with me at all. There was one log entry generated on the day payroll was supposed to run that mentioned the payroll process ran for 0 employees. (Normally the number is in the tens of thousands.) If I had actually read the logs I would have caught it. My guess though is that my boss wasn't mad at me because he knew that he could have explained what to look for better and it was the first time I'd been asked to watch the logs. Cause of the issue was that my boss's boss, the director of IT, had hard coded payroll to only run on 12/20/2014 and only on that date in order to work around some other issue and then forgot to change the code back to run payroll as usual. So the fuckup was on multiple levels - the director dicked up the code, I didn't catch the fuckup, and my boss didn't catch or prevent my fuckup. Today the head director of the company called all of IT into a meeting wherein she berated us repeatedly for loving up the payroll, repeating again and again that we hosed up and that if we can't run payroll then we're all hosed. She was really mad and semi-incoherent. "it's all our responsibility to make sure payroll runs and yet not one of you thought to check that it actually had run" and how IT is careless and not fully aware of the company's purpose. It was an uncomfortable moment because it is specifically and deliberately not the responsibility of the entire IT team to monitor financial transactions. It is the job of QA. The payroll disaster was a fuckup by 3 people, (a director, a manager, and a peon) not 11, yet they all got dressed down the same. It would have been more appropriate for the director to have sat down with the three of us alone to unleash the ranting. I can only conclude then that either she wasn't aware of who exactly was responsible for the issue or wanted to do some sort of weird group punishment thing. After she was done chastising the team, she left. Then one of the dev managers asked, "so what exactly happened with payroll?" Xibanya fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Dec 30, 2014 |
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 07:30 |
|
|
Xibanya posted:It was an uncomfortable moment because it is specifically and deliberately not the responsibility of the entire IT team to monitor financial transactions. Ah see, that's where you're wrong. Anything that involves computers, runs on computers, doesn't run on computers but people think should run on computers, or can be tangentially related to computers, is IT's responsibility. At least, that's how your upper management sees it.  It's your job to keep everything running perfectly all the time, and when it isn't you need to be scolded.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
That's a huge loving mistake that could lose the company a bunch of clients, so I get why she's upset, but yeah not really on you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Sydin posted:Ah see, that's where you're wrong. Anything that involves computers, runs on computers, doesn't run on computers but people think should run on computers, or can be tangentially related to computers, is IT's responsibility. At least, that's how your upper management sees it. ugh UGH "Hey Renegret I bought a new Smart TV but I have some questions can you answer them for me?" "Sure let me tell you everything I know. It's a TV you can go on Facebook with. I hope that answered your questions."
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:My more senior co-worker took all of last week and the first half of this week off. My boss took Tues - Fri of last week off. On the Monday before his break he told me that over the break he'd like me to monitor the database logs. I had never really monitored the logs before so I asked him to show me what I was looking for. He said just look for one error popping up like 50 times in a row, otherwise it's probably fine. Does your boss know that there are tools that will monitor logs for you, alert you when there are things like 50 errors in a row or when it says there were 0 employees processed? Manually scanning logs to make sure things are good seems sub-optimal, I would have automated that a long time ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
At least they have someone watching logs. At my old company, when I was hired on, no one knew there were logs to watch. I found them one day on accident and there were like 1,000 disk write errors along with other issues. That was a fun month.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
ObsidianBeast posted:Does your boss know that there are tools that will monitor logs for you, alert you when there are things like 50 errors in a row or when it says there were 0 employees processed? Manually scanning logs to make sure things are good seems sub-optimal, I would have automated that a long time ago. We do get email alerts for really bad things, it's that nobody had dicked up payroll in precisely this way before so we didn't get one. (For example, if there's a deadlock in an ACH transfer, I, my boss, and my coworker get an automated email with red text about it.) The log alerts are getting updated to include "nobody getting paid" as an email-alert worthy item.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:We do get email alerts for really bad things, it's that nobody had dicked up payroll in precisely this way before so we didn't get one. Even if it was your guys' fault that kind of "leadership" is just plain poor form and typical for people that have trouble doing anything other than the naive, typical pointy hair boss kind of way (it's ineffective, outdated, and shows you're not very serious about management as a skill rather than a lifestyle of privilege).
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
Renegret posted:ugh (two AM) (RING RING RING) "Hey renegret that smart TV thing how do i get it to go on the facebook?"
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:That really should have been caught earlier the instant that it was setup as a one-time event earlier because future payments would be cancelled, and if you acknowledge it that should mean that there's going to be follow-up by someone. Ha ha, the director of IT often changes stuff in the DB or in the code without telling us and without documenting it (even though all the dev peons have to go through layers of check-in and code review.) In other words, if anyone else had made the change there would have been follow-up, it's just that the director doesn't have to hold himself to the same standards as he holds his underlings. He also has a bad habit of throwing in "new features" without telling anyone or documenting it anywhere -- and would never tolerate this from one of his subordinates. On one release we had to have a patch (and a patch means QA is in the doghouse) and he got all mad at the QA team during a meeting but then we pointed out the patch was to fix a change the director made without telling anybody and he did have to concede it's hard to test something you have no idea exists. Xibanya fucked around with this message at 07:57 on Dec 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
It sounds like your director was once a developer and wishes he still was. Guy needs to choose whether he's a director or a developer, I've seen that kind of poo poo before and it generates exactly the kind of messes you're describing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 09:00
|
|
|
rolleyes posted:It sounds like your director was once a developer and wishes he still was. Guy needs to choose whether he's a director or a developer, I've seen that kind of poo poo before and it generates exactly the kind of messes you're describing. I bet he would like to be a developer again but he wouldn't like the pay cut. Too bad the only real way to get a raise is to get promoted or jump to another company.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 09:47
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:Ha ha, the director of IT often changes stuff in the DB or in the code without telling us and without documenting it (even though all the dev peons have to go through layers of check-in and code review.)  If you can deploy code to production that isn't in source control, your environment is the gently caress up. This place sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Edit: actually, I suppose there are many disasters happening. Good QA people are in short supply, move to a coast and get a good job please. Volmarias fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Dec 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 13:57
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:Today the head director of the company called all of IT into a meeting wherein she berated us repeatedly for loving up the payroll, repeating again and again that we hosed up and that if we can't run payroll then we're all hosed. She was really mad and semi-incoherent. "it's all our responsibility to make sure payroll runs and yet not one of you thought to check that it actually had run" and how IT is careless and not fully aware of the company's purpose. Hate this poo poo. My old boss used to send passive-aggressive emails to the entire department after someone (one person) came in late, saying things like punctuality is important and we all have a responsibility to blah blah blah blah. I would ask him why he sent the letter to me, and if I had hosed up, and of course I hadn't, he just wanted to wave his Alpha Penis around and remind everyone who was in charge. He couldn't say that, so he'd just be vague and generic and say things like "everybody on the same page" and other manager-speak. Nice way to lose the respect of your best people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Che Delilas posted:Hate this poo poo. My old boss used to send passive-aggressive emails to the entire department after someone (one person) came in late, saying things like punctuality is important and we all have a responsibility to blah blah blah blah. I would ask him why he sent the letter to me, and if I had hosed up, and of course I hadn't, he just wanted to wave his Alpha Penis around and remind everyone who was in charge. He couldn't say that, so he'd just be vague and generic and say things like "everybody on the same page" and other manager-speak. In my experience this tends to happen because the person doesn't like confronting individuals rather than because they want to project their awesome powers. I don't know your old boss though, so maybe he was both confrontational and passive-aggressive - bonus!
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
That's a pretty colossal gently caress up on many levels. I'm not surprised the director had a meltdown over it. I'm sure several of your clients are looking at other options right now as well. I'm a little surprised though the that he didn't tell you to look for the line that said how many peoples payrolls were being processed. Seems like a pretty easy check.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
rolleyes posted:In my experience this tends to happen because the person doesn't like confronting individuals rather than because they want to project their awesome powers. I don't know your old boss though, so maybe he was both confrontational and passive-aggressive - bonus! I don't think that was the case with this guy; he's chewed out people directly before (I know this because he bragged about it to some of us: "I really handed Tom's rear end to him yesterday!"). Very professional. And he wasn't otherwise passive-aggressive, only those letters were, because you can justify sending "We all have a responsibility to blah blah blah" to the whole department, but doing the same with "Joseph was late, Joseph don't be late again it's not good" is really inappropriate. No, I think for him it was all about taking another opportunity to flex his managerial muscle and remind everyone that he was in charge. He was an egomaniac through and through, and this was just another way of stroking his ego.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
Harry posted:I'm a little surprised though the that he didn't tell you to look for the line that said how many peoples payrolls were being processed. Seems like a pretty easy check. It's probably because of that I'm not actually in any trouble. I think the higher ups at the parent company have been iffy on the IT director for some time so I'm a little nervous they'll try something crazy like lay off our entire IT dept and replace it with people from the parent company. That doesn't happen, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:It's probably because of that I'm not actually in any trouble. Yeah, keep telling yourself that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
That kind of bro managerial culture is so toxic it's not even funny. It bothers me partly because their worldview of management is only validated by their companies growing and them making money hand over fist that I've had an incredible aversion. Despite half the time being sports fanatics, they haven't read anything about Coach Wooden and his approach to consistent success as well. People being in managerial positions with such little talent or skill for management is bothersome because if I was lovely at my job, I'd normally have been fired or something. For managers, the only consistent criteria in most organizations seems to be "make sure your budget looks fine and your people don't piss off other bros."
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:It's probably because of that I'm not actually in any trouble. It really depends. If they catch him directly doing something pants-on-head ridiculous, they might realize that the problem is him. Otherwise, it's totally possible that they'll just decide to outsource you to India, since it sounds like it can't get any worse anyway. Edit: directly modifying prod, without telling anyone, AND AS A REGULAR OCCURRENCE should really qualify as pants-on-head ridiculous, but since he's who management talks to good luck getting them to realize that. Volmarias fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Jan 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
Free at last! 11 days off, then I start at the new gig!
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
I currently work at a medium-large company, that everyone in the company thinks it small. It's managed like a small company, and in conversation they always are utterly convinced it's tiny. It has a presence in multiple cities and hundreds of employees. The company has multiple subsidiaries that do different things, but the main thing is running chemical analyses of things like food, coal, LPG, diesel, etc. - if something enters the country, or is manufactured locally, it has to meet certain norms. The CEO was given the role by his dad, who is the majority owner. No way he is ever getting fired. He's running the company into the ground so well, some employees are actually convinced he is doing it on purpose to spite his dad. I doubt that's true and I wager that's just incompetence, but it says a lot about the company if employees think that. The CEO is both a micromanager and paranoid. How paranoid? No one other than him is allowed to speak to the IT department. Not even if they see each other in the corridor. Something as simple as a bug report has to go through the CEO. As you might imagine, that means no one ever bothers because the CEO has a habit of finding the person who has a complaint and shouting at them for being incompetent. Features are added and removed without anyone being told anything. Icons are not labelled. If a new icon pops up somewhere in the software, you are expected to just know what it does. The software is used to run the lab from start to finish, everything from logging samples to generating reports for clients. It's actually surprisingly good as a whole, except for the bits that are clusterfucks no one knows how to use, mysterious error messages and small usability functions that would be easy to implement but haven't been. Employees get paid a pittance, because "there is no money". The company operates several labs (7 or 8 in just the building I work in) - the salary costs are a tiny fraction of the fixed costs. As a result, lots of people over the years have left to work at the main competitor. Oh, and there are far too few people for the workload, so the company is actually losing far more money on not being able to deal with things than it is saving on not hiring people. I was basically hired on the sly. When asked about something recently, the head of finance told managers "we have to pay people and then see how much money is left over". It does not occur to the head of finance that you can count money. I'm not sure what the finance department even does, as the laboratory is expected to do its own accounting. There haven't been any new clients in ages, because the CEO firmly believes that the only effective way is word of mouth. Whenever it's suggested that perhaps there should be someone in the company whose job it is to find new clients, or that maybe a marketing department should exist - "It's a waste of money." There was recently, however, an ad on the radio. The CEO thinks big logistics companies are looking for companies to run chemical analyses for them by listening to radio ads. The CEO's favourite phrase is "Cemeteries are filled with graves of irreplaceable people." No, really, he says that to people, all the time, whenever someone has a complaint or suggestion. Two new labs were recently built and fully outfitted - microbiology and veterinary, at great expense as you might imagine. Currently, one person works in microbiology, no one works in veterinary. The labs were built for one person. Having the labs built was a prerequisite of the person joining the company. The CEO was obsessed with her, talking all the time how amazing she is. She proceeds to only work nights, in order to get the nightly rate. Finance tells her to knock that poo poo off. She breaks down crying, puts in a resignation notice, is summarily fired. Oh, and some years back the commercial department (they're called that, but they mostly just relay customer orders and send back reports) was literally stealing from the company. Not subtly either. They were sending the reports for completed analyses to the clients, not logging the analyses as having happened and pocketing the money. The only reason anyone found out was when a pissed off CEO came to the lab, angrily demanding to know why the lab isn't running any analyses, and was shown all the reports of finished ones. I only accepted the job as a temporary thing, until I can find something better. I'm sure other companies won't be much better, especially after reading this thread, but at least they'll pay more. Interestingly, the previous CEO, current's dad and majority owner, who basically built the company - everyone loved him. He didn't pay much either, but he visited employees all the time, talked to them and listened to their concerns. And the company was doing very well. I hope one of these days he is going to get sick of his son running it into the ground. I am currently in a weird situation. A while ago, a there was a job posting from the trade department of a subsidiary. I studied business, not chemistry, so although that's not entirely up my alley it's far more so than "lab assistant". Of course I applied, talked to people, was met with a very evasive response. The guy looking to fill the position even said "We've never had a male employee in the department", which is also literally not true. The old CEO came in recently to give everyone Christmas wishes, I was introduced. He asked what I studied, I said, he was surprised and asked me why I didn't apply to that position. I said I did, told the story of the response I got, and the old boss got pretty pissed off. Gave a whole speech about how you don't do an external job posting unless no one on the inside is interested, because "you always take care of family first", then told me "starting in the New Year, you have a new job". I doubt anything will happen, but I do think it's hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 09:19
|
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:I currently work at a medium-large company, that everyone in the company thinks it small. It's managed like a small company, and in conversation they always are utterly convinced it's tiny. It has a presence in multiple cities and hundreds of employees. The company has multiple subsidiaries that do different things, but the main thing is running chemical analyses of things like food, coal, LPG, diesel, etc. - if something enters the country, or is manufactured locally, it has to meet certain norms. How in the hell does your lab maintain their accreditation?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
That's what I wonder when Sundae posts one of his stories. The lab itself is managed quite well. The company is not, but it was until a couple years ago when the new guy took over. I am only speaking about the one lab I work in, I would guess the one two recently built and do not have anyone in it are probably not accredited. The accreditation is maintained, because we do stick to procedure and we do have very accurate results, at least going by what I've been shown of international lab proficiency contests. The chemists are all good. I'm not a chemist, I was hired just to help out with admin work and odd things around the lab. It's the business side that's a massive, massive fuckup. Oh, I forgot to mention that the CEO has these wacky "innovative" ideas from time to time. A couple of times he has decided that the company is going to develop a new method to do something. It seems that he sits on wikipedia, gets an idea, and wants it to happen. Everyone tells him it's impossible, he insists, is ignored then eventually gets bored and moves on. He wants the company to be the first in the world to come up with a way to do something so bad, that often times he does not check if someone else is actually doing it already. The last bright idea he had was determining if a patient has lung cancer by breath sample. He just decided that the company is going to do that, and asked the labs to come up with a way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 16:16
|
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:Oh, I forgot to mention that the CEO has these wacky "innovative" ideas from time to time. A couple of times he has decided that the company is going to develop a new method to do something. It seems that he sits on wikipedia, gets an idea, and wants it to happen. Everyone tells him it's impossible, he insists, is ignored then eventually gets bored and moves on. He wants the company to be the first in the world to come up with a way to do something so bad, that often times he does not check if someone else is actually doing it already. The last bright idea he had was determining if a patient has lung cancer by breath sample. He just decided that the company is going to do that, and asked the labs to come up with a way. Yep, this is why I insist Feudalism isn't over, it just got reskinned. I bet he's a total just-world believer too, like "I must be the CEO because I'm smart! I must be smart because I'm the CEO!" For some levity, here's an anecdote from a few months ago. I was walking past my manager and the director of marketing in a hallway when I overheard the following exchange in hushed tones: MANAGER: I am really mismanaging my team. DIRECTOR: Me too. Probably the worst team at [COMPANY]. MANAGER: No, mine is worse. My guys are terrible! I slinked away thinking"Aw...we're not that bad!"  Later that day one I saw of my coworkers was checking ESPN and talking about how his team was awesome and that he was currently in the lead and I realized that the earlier conversation was about the company fantasy football league.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Any of you guys ever do any kind of work for a law firm?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:That kind of bro managerial culture is so toxic it's not even funny. It bothers me partly because their worldview of management is only validated by their companies growing and them making money hand over fist that I've had an incredible aversion. Despite half the time being sports fanatics, they haven't read anything about Coach Wooden and his approach to consistent success as well. People being in managerial positions with such little talent or skill for management is bothersome because if I was lovely at my job, I'd normally have been fired or something. For managers, the only consistent criteria in most organizations seems to be "make sure your budget looks fine and your people don't piss off other bros." Nothing re-enforces a lovely management style then short term profits. I'm absolutely convinced my department is about 3 months away from falling apart because 12 months ago my new manager was brought on and proceeded to approve everything. After 15 months a new sale comes up for renewal, and we've had a "record" sales year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
BigDave posted:Any of you guys ever do any kind of work for a law firm? Sure do! [Ask] me about working for cheapskate millionaires
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
 While I was out on semi-vacation (AKA took vacation days, left town, but still got called into conference calls for multiple hours every single day), our HR department screwed the pooch on contractor relations and lost literally 100% of my department's contractors, plus two of our FTEs. Net loss: 13 employees out of 16. Long story short, some dickbag in HR decided that they wanted to force a mid-contract pay reduction on a certain contract agency they work with, with a "take it or GTFO" sort of stance. The agency told HR to drop dead and recalled all their contractors, costing me 100% of my department's temp scientists because they were all through that organization. Not sure what the gently caress happened with the FTEs, but they're gone too. I now have 3 employees (myself included) to do the work of 16, no budget for new contractor requisitions, and am expecting a further increase in workload for 2015 on top of all that. July cannot come quickly enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Sundae posted:
Ahahahahhahahahaha. Sorry. Sounds like HR isn't in a good position to push back on you billing them for the conference call time instead of burning PTO.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Sundae posted:
I assume said dickbag has another contractor that can provide suitable replacements? If not you can direct her/him to the negotiations thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Hugbot posted:Sure do! [Ask] me about working for cheapskate millionaires If I get the job (fingers crossed!) I'll be running the internal help desk for a mid-sized law firm. Is there any hope that the end users won't be raging assholes, or should I start drinking now?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Sundae posted:
 Countdown to this somehow all being construed as your fault.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Boot and Rally posted:I assume said dickbag has another contractor that can provide suitable replacements? If not you can direct her/him to the negotiations thread. The problem, as I understand it, is that we didn't put in contractor requisitions for 2015 because we weren't supposed to lose every last one of ours, so there's no allocated budget for it. My boss is busy slamming her head against the bureaucracy and trying to get us some employees, but she's having no better luck than I've been having. (If you want someone even more jaded than I am, my boss would probably make for one hell of a story. She's been at this company for over fifteen years.) I'm sure we'll end up getting people to replace them, but mother of god what a clusterfuck. I hate the contractor model for high-level positions even under the best of conditions because of the knowledge loss at the end of the contract, but this is such a gently caress-up that I hardly know what to say. "Oh, all your people are gone. Whoopsie, hope they didn't weren't working on anything." quote:Sounds like HR isn't in a good position to push back on you billing them for the conference call time instead of burning PTO. EXACTLY. I'm grabbing all sorts of comp days in January for the lost vacation time. What're they going to do, fire me and leave only my boss and the newly hired entry-level scientist running the department? quote:Countdown to this somehow all being construed as your fault. I think I'm in the clear on this one, but I won't be surprised if you're right. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Sundae posted:I think I'm in the clear on this one, but I won't be surprised if you're right. Well, it's not HR's fault for trying to save the company money! And it certainly can't be your boss's fault, look how loyal she is to the company and how hard she's working to fix this problem! And you can't expect us to blame a newly hired scientist for this, they have no input in the process! Only leaves one person, Sundae.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
I hope that you guys are doing exactly as much work as reasonable for 3 people, and bouncing anything new/else back with instructions for people to take up the concern with whatever dickbag in HR created the situation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Sundae posted:
I"m guessing someone in HR finally figured out that high-level contractors cost more then real employees and tried to fix it. For your own sanity don't go look at what that agency was charging per person as it will make you sad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
Honestly, I'm just imagining you and the other two people in your department jumping the guy in some dark alley and beating the poo poo out of him. But seriously, if that dude fucks up so badly that he manages to delete an entire department via pure incompetence, that's got to be grounds for terminahahahahaa never mind this is Sundae's company, he's getting a raise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 07:30 |
|
|
Sundae posted:I'm sure we'll end up getting people to replace them, but mother of god what a clusterfuck. I hate the contractor model for high-level positions even under the best of conditions because of the knowledge loss at the end of the contract, but this is such a gently caress-up that I hardly know what to say. "Oh, all your people are gone. Whoopsie, hope they didn't weren't working on anything." The scenario: New contractors are hired and yet, oddly enough, need a period of time to come up to speed. Sundae is called into his boss's boss's office and the conversation begins, "Even with these replacements, we're missing our established deadlines..."
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:34
|
|
