What your boss is thinking. by Fremdfirma

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

What your boss is thinking.

POSTED BY: FREMDFIRMA
UPDATED: Sunday, November 22, 2009 07:44
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1126
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, November 20, 2009 2:06 AM

Just in case you ever wondered what goes through your bosses head while he's back in his office with that distant stare, I figured I would share a sample of that kind of thinking, given that the holiday season is coming up and one or more of you is bound to fall victim to it at least once.

And yes, I am basing this on real events from a couple years ago, having watched a certain member of Cameron and Barkleys management do exactly this to someone, and that it drove him to drugs and suicide never even registered on the boss in question - and yeah, he DID get the girl, much good it did him when he found out she was a psycho, and then he turned his ire on the (then) Fremgirl, which caused me to "put my thumb upon him"... hilarity ensued.

But yes, the corporate management mind DOES think like this, and comprehending it is the first step to exploiting it, so I figured I would share.

I am also reminded of an IWW maxim, which states, in short.
"The working class has NOTHING in common with the employing class."

Think I jest ?
Read on.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 2:06 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Dammit.

Why did Bob have to go and get married?
His productivity has gone to shit now, with that whole family time issue, not to mention that goddamn kid, just hire somebodys brat to watch it for christs sake, instead of haring off when I need you...

Of course, he's already making disloyal noises over the increased hours, does he think we pay him a salary for nothing ?

Hmm, I know, maybe I can hold off that inventory problem Jackie spotted earlier till friday, that's his anniversary, and calling him in on it should show that ungrateful bastard where HIS loyalties lie, show that bitch too.

Of course, that means I gotta keep him from talking to Jackie, nice, single, obedient Jackie, who doesn't even date cause I keep her too goddamn busy to, nice *pretty* Jackie, who's ambition might just be the hook I need - still, it wouldn't do for Bob to know anyone was aware of this problem before I call him off on an "emergency" late in the evening on his anniversary, would it now ?

"Hey Bob ?"
"Yeah"
"Man, go HOME already, we got it handled here, go spend some time with your kid!"
(While your marriage lasts, which won't be for long..)
"Hey thanks!"

And now, to contrive another "problem" for Thanksgiving...

If I can make that fall apart before the fiscal year, maybe I'll get lucky and he'll throw himself into his work, gotta get that bonus, and don't I love the sad little looks on their faces when I tell them the economy is bad, and they won't be getting one - it's all I can do to keep a straight face till I leave the room, seriously!

Nothing but work work work around here, damn personnel problems, still, he might just quit, but if so, better to have him out of here if he can't get it in gear, lazy bastard, what does he think we pay him for ?
At least the hint of a christmas bonus will keep him hanging on a while, heh heh heh, as if I'd cut into MINE for it, ha!
And even if he does quit, hell with him, we can find someone else just barely qualified who we can underpay, so it's all win-win.

"Hey Jackie ?"
"Yes ?"
"Shove that inventory problem over to me, will you, I'll take that one for you, cause I will need returns done before six."
"Okies !"

Good bitch, and someday, maybe, MY bitch, I get lucky.
I'll make sure to be around to watch her reaction when Bob gets to blaming her for not solving the inventory problem, and his when I pull rank and tell him it was me working on it, and remind that ingrate what side HIS bread is buttered on for once, and won't that be fun.

It's a thankless job, but someone has to do it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 2:07 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Now.

Still think they're anything like us working stiffs ?

-Frem

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 4:31 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello Frem,

Most of my bosses over the years have not been Machiavellian masterminds. Just yes-men who hold the company line in hopes of a pat on the head, a raise, or a promotion.

Occasionally, I even worked for people who had my back. A remarkable sensation.

Not everyone is the same, Frem. Not all police, not all bosses, not all anyone.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 5:12 AM

DREAMTROVE

That pastiche was pretty on target, still, Tony has a point

As an employer, you should know this. When I employ people which is rarely, the results are mixed. My only requirement is that people work on what I want done, and not what they want done, and after that, they can set their own hours, pace whatever, and I'm not generally there when they do it.

Actually, I hate being there, because the situation makes me uncomfortable, so I disappear. I don't want to be lord and master of someone, but I sometimes have more work than I have time to do myself, and people will work for money.

That said, I think I can break it down into sub-types. I had one job where I had four bosses:

Boss 1 was the company founder. He was the "Boss who works." he sometimes lost it over work not done, but usually blames himself for lack of oversight. Oversight is why he hired boss 2.

Boss 2 had a fair amount of what you describe. He definitely wanted to know everything about your personal life, and wanted you not to have any life outside of the company, or that came before the company, and if you were cute and female you could meet him ins hi office. I think he'd manipulate the situation, but he wasn't on your case all the time, because being a taskmaster meant relating to workers, and he wanted to keep that heir of aristocracy. He couldn't spend his time harassing workers or workers would develop a less than devotional image of him. That's why he in turn hired boss 3.

Boss 3 was a taskmaster. He was on everyone's case all the time. He was personable and a hard worker, and so you couldn't dislike him, you just wished he'd back off. He kept the stress level high, which is why Boss 1 hired a psychologist. But during all of this, the company was losing money.

Boss 4 was hired to make the company make money. He would go through and tell employees to not do what they were doing and to work on something else that would make the company more money. This was a fairly often in direct contradiction of what the Boss 1, the employer who was actually paying the worker "wanted done." This concept was bizarre to Boss 4, who thought that completing some project to result in some product was pointless if there was something else people could do that made more money.

Well, all of this got so bad that one day, my entire 8 hour work day consisted of 4 two hour lectures.

First, Boss 1 came in, and told me that I was to work only on Task A, and I was to do it the New Way. Task one was most important, and that everything else had to go on the back burner, but it was essential that it was done the New Way.

Boss 2 came in and told me that I had to put task A aside, because Task B needed to be done. If we wanted bonuses the company had to make money, and task B was going to make that money, but it had to do it the New Way.

Boss 3 came in to tell me that I was *not* to do task B, because Task A was under deadline, and Task B could wait, but there was a problem: The New Way of Task A didn't work. There were some glitches in it, and he didn't want a glitchy product on deadline day, so I was most definitely to do it the Old Way, but the Task A Old Way.

Boss 4 came down as if they were standing in line. Each time no sooner had I sat down then in the next one came. Well, Boss 4 told me I absolutely had to drop Task A, because it wasn't as profitable as B, so there could be no argument. There was a problem however: The New Way of Task B was too slow, and so would take more man-hours, and therefore cost more money, and maybe delay the completion of Task B. So Task B had to be done the Old Way, because this would get it out the door sooner, get the company money faster, and cost less to produce, but be just as saleable as if it were done the New Way.

So, that was my working day, I told Boss 1 on my way out what I had accomplished (see above) and the following day I saw none of them. But I could hear them, upstairs, arguing. All day.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 6:49 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Most of my bosses over the years have not been Machiavellian masterminds. Just yes-men who hold the company line in hopes of a pat on the head, a raise, or a promotion.

Yeah, but in many case, that above *IS* the company line, most human resources people in the Detroit area aren't even shy about telling you, so long as they don't suspect your taping them.

Quote:
Not everyone is the same, Frem. Not all police, not all bosses, not all anyone.

Oh I am well aware of that, Anthony.

I just wanted to make it perfectly clear that in the corporate world, some things are prevalent enough to be almost bettable.

No, they DON'T give a shit about your family, your wife and kids, your social contacts or your hobbies (unless they negatively impact the company or make it money) - they only throw a pretense in order to appease you.

In fact they see these things as a hindrance to the almighty productivity.

Nowhere is this more blatantly apparent than in the auto industry and their suppliers, since getting married or pregnant is a fast track to the first layoff they can manage - with of course, predictable results, which amount to one more nail in the coffin because eventually they get judged on their conduct rather than their words.

I just wanted to demonstrate the mindset of such all-too-common creatures so that perhaps a few folk will be wise enough to tell em to piss off this holiday season, or have the sense to put a dead battery in their phone.

Quote:
Occasionally, I even worked for people who had my back. A remarkable sensation.

Same here, although about half of those, most notoriously Eagle-A1 Services LTD, went bankrupt for it when less moral companies raked it in.
(Damn you, Executive Outcomes!)

As an employee, I'm the guy you hand the massive or impossible job and then leave the hell alone - it'll get done, but if you hover and nitpick, you'll be finding someone else to do it.

As a boss, I make sure to hire folk with ethics and brains to begin with, and then when I set them to a task I hand out a lot of leeway, cause security work involves the development of instinct which hovering or nitpicking will prevent from ever happening.

I do have a few knuckle draggers, but they have a little book of waterproof IF-THEN flowcharts, and if it goes past that, a cellphone with one button speed dial, and they're good folk.

As for those little emergencies, I handle THOSE myself, and should there ever be more than one (never happened yet) Wendy will be quite happy to cover it in exchange for strawberry cake, as I am not above culinary bribery as a fair repayment for interruption of someone elses life, plus hourly rate.

Anyhows, I'd lay odds everyone here has had at LEAST one boss like that, and wanted to plant a firm reminder to folk what the game might be behind that "emergency" call from work, which odds are, one or more of you might receive.

-Frem

There always has to be a price.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 20, 2009 7:07 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

To provide an example of the flip side of things, if only to provide the exception that proves Frem's rule? ;-)

The bank where I work has a lot of people in it who are married to each other. Perhaps 5% of the workforce.

There were more layoffs than I could count in the past year and a half. It was during this series of layoffs that I became aware of a bank policy that surprised me.

They keep track of employees who are married to each other. They do this for two reasons. First, they don't want married people working in the same department, or one being the boss of the other. (A good policy.)

But more importantly, they have a strict policy of not laying off both married people. They realize this would destroy a family, and so they will either lay off one or the other, but never both.

Maybe you can see some Machiavellian evil mastermind ploy in that, but I don't. And this is the official policy of a huge national bank.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 8:22 AM

SAVEWASH

Now I am learning about scary.

Here's the other side of it.

What my co-worker is thinking:

How DARE they expect me to work today when I'm so tired from that party and that other important stuff I did last night? I mean, isn't it obvious that I can't function so I should just be allowed to sit at my desk and stare vacantly into space?

Meanwhile, I might as well get some of my personal texting done because it's very important that I let my friends know how I feel, what I did last night and what I'm planning to do tonight.

Oh, and don't forget the e-mail. I need to send out that three-page e-mail detailing my personal opinions about the last movie I saw, the way management always rides me here and what I'd rather be doing right now. And I have other crucial e-mails to send, too.

When I'm not doing that, I must program my MP3 player and catch up on some personal hygiene.

Why on earth can't my co-worker get all that work done? Can't anyone see how tired I am? You'd think they expected me to work each hour I'm here instead of only when I feel like it.

And why is my paycheck so small???

"We need to keep our heads so we can ... keep our heads."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 10:28 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Hoo lordy, that *IS* funny, cause it's a pretty accurate description of a certain current subordinate of my ex - who she has not the authority to fire and no one to replace her with anyways, but yeah, you get that.

And they wonder why nothin gets done in corporate america.

Oh, and don't forget the four hour meeting on how to improve efficiency and the two hour meeting after that on assigning responsibilities within the department (i.e. Blamestorming session)...

Some days I am surprised them folk get any work done at all.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 12:49 PM

DREAMTROVE

Frem,

I think it's curious the psychology of the boss, or more, the multiple psychology of boss psyche, which a boss may have, and boss archetypes.

I certainly think there is a difference between those who would purposefully seek to move up to a management position withing a firm to gain power over others, and people like you or myself.

Both you and I have employees because we have projects that we started that eventually got too big to be done by just us. My boss 1 above was in a similar situation, hi company had just morphed into something of moderate size, but he had never sought promotion or maneuvering himself into a position of higher power over others, he simply ran out of hands for what he was doing.

In addition to the "self advancement" bosses, there area head-hunter bosses. Boss four above was a head hunter boss, and just moved from boss position to boss position.

I think you're onto something of the boss mentality, but the picture is undoubtedly more complex. Similarly, the psychologies that push someone into a police form, political offfice, elected or not, etc. are curious. I've actually known people who wanted to join the military because they wanted to kill people, but they didn't want to pay for their crimes. They failed the psych test.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 1:06 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I once spent a lot of time with a coworker who volunteered for service in Vietnam. He did so specifically with the hope of entering a combat zone.

I never considered this person to be especially 'right' in the head, because of his unusual preferences. But he was never really 'wrong' either, and tended to make sound decisions (more reasonably than many other people) and also tended to be polite and hospitable.

Sometimes, when it would rain, he would hike out into the mountains with his gun while the rest of us huddled under our easy-ups. He'd be away for quite a while sometimes, returning when the rain had stopped. Old guy could run circles around me, always made me feel somewhat pathetic by comparison.

I was never able to square his apparent love of combat conditions or rugged individualism with his demeanor and behavior in other areas of his life.

Some people will always be an enigma to me, not fitting neatly into any of my pre-cut pigeonholes. I often suspect he'd have been happier in some imagined ancient society, perhaps as depicted on the fictionalized TV series Rome, where the idea of a man who enjoys going to war and butchering his enemies could be expected to co-exist with the idea of a nice guy, even tempered, reliable citizen, loving father, husband, and friend.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 4:53 PM

FREMDFIRMA

No time for extended comment, but Anthony?
This.
https://notes.utk.edu/bio/greenberg.nsf/0/bd7eed04567bfe2b85256e3b002f
29c1?OpenDocument

There was a REASON they let me have a belt-fed, normally crew-served squad support weapon, and yes, I *DID* join the army in part out of pure misanthropy.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 21, 2009 9:55 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

Interesting article. It does explain a lot. I find the concept that a person can have a natural predisposition or talent for killing and still be a valuable member of an organization interesting and at odds with the normal current views of our culture.

I must admit I sometimes felt a bit jealous about my friend's competence and ease in certain situations. I can't claim to be a natural killer myself, though I do hope I could do what was necessary to protect the people around me if push came to shove.

-Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 22, 2009 7:44 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Most people can "do the necessary" Anthony, but PTSD is a direct result of that happening, which is natures way of preventing us from annihilating ourselves - I don't feel all that much sympathy for someone who knew what they were getting into, but the poor dumb, ignorant sods who thought they were going to go kick ass for home and hearth getting both the hard realization of the purposes they were really fighting for are ignoble, and PTSD on top of it?

All I can say to that is "Those poor bastards".
Which has been, prettymuch the lot of infantry since before history.

And the article covers the more common ESTP-NBK personality, but misses an even rarer one, the ISTP-NBK personality, which is less noticeable but just as effective.

ISTP crafter-artisans are masters of tools, and strip the rhetoric off, a weapon is essentially, a tool.
"One tool especially attractive to the ISTP is the weapon. The hit man of today, the gunslinger of the American West, and the duelist of the 18th Century Europe, may be seen as virtuosos of precision homicide. They all took pride in their prowness."
http://www.davidmarkley.com/personality/istp.htm

In between the time I signed the papers, and actually shipped out, that being nearly a year - I saw damn near everyone I ever cared at all about die, some of them horribly, or stupidly, and not having the breadth of wisdom at the time to fully comprehend the social mechanics which made those deaths inevitable, adopted a very nihilistic outlook and philosophy.

All I wanted from the Army was a loaded weapon, a set of targets and permission to vent the tremendous rage I felt at all mankind, which wasn't going to happen cause the last conflict was so distasteful and the cold war was drying up.

Needless to say, I wasn't too pleased when I wound up wielding a mop or paintbrush more often than a weapon, if I had wanted to do THAT I woulda hired on with a hotel, and it woulda paid better...

And of course trouble came of it - and a compromise was reached, they gave me a truck and a mission outline uniquely suited to my nature, which conveniently kept me *away* from other humans for much of the time, and allowed me to act in any fashion I desired so long as the job got done - up to and including elimination of enemy sentries, watchposts, etc.

It was only later when I began to understand just how badly at odds our society was with what our nature truly is, and just how great the lies holding that fabric in place were, that I even started to question the idea of slaying folk I did not know, who I had no personal beef with.

And asking THOSE questions lead quickly to my break with the military.
My CO never let it bother him, cause he knew damn well that while I wouldn't fire FIRST, once someone *has* shot at me, imma be the one to fire LAST, between my M60A1 and my loaders M79 flushing them like quail, what was going to happen to the poor sods who gave me cause wouldn't be pretty...
But the rest of command couldn't tolerate the idea of someone questioning WHY they should kill someone, and eventually that break came to a parting when they failed to hold up their end of the contract, which gave me cause to dislike THEM more than the "enemy".

All that said, even NBKs are not fully immune to the consequences of such actions, simply more resistant, especially if they happen to be misanthropic in the first place, as I am, and it sounds like the person you are speaking of also was - again, no matter how much tougher the hammer is than the nails, eventually the hammer takes a beating too.

-Frem

Note: I do not use the term "misanthropy" in a perjorative fashion, as much as to describe someone with a limited tolerance for other human beings and/or their government/society/structure - which is directly and more closely related to some forms of hikkikomori than most folk realize.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE