Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It would make sense for companies to hire a little extra in anticipation of turnover, but do you think it's ever out of the goodness of their heart and to help the community and economy?
The OP doesn't seem to know very much about running a large corporation.
OP, once your business has grown to the size of Apple or Microsoft or Google, you can hire as many extra workers as you want (out of the goodness of your heart). When you get to that point, please come back and let us know how it works out for you.
For the time being, I hope the companies you named don't go that route as it would be a good way to reduce profits and dividends, and I own stock in those companies.
But what do I know? It could work. Someone should try it. You go first.
I'm asking to get a fuller understanding of what's going through a competent hiring manager's mind when hiring someone or a group of people to do a job. What if someone quits unexpectedly? Should they hire 2 or 3 extra people so they won't be left high and dry?
A manager should maintain crossfunctional team members so that if one quits, they have the knowledge to pass on to a temp hire or contractor. Often, projects will get delayed wen someone quits. That's okay. It's a manager's job to keep things going without needing the overhead of two extra people.
In a lot of corporations, company politics gives you an incentive to have more people working under you. You don't hire them from the goodness of your heart, but from a desire to advance in the company. The more people working under you, the higher your position in the corporate hierarchy. But an even more significant effect of that is not actually the total number of people you hire, but which people you hire. The most important characteristic of your subordinates is that they will help you advance. You will often reject more productive candidates in favor of those with better skills at helping their bosses advance. People with more diplomacy etc., instead of people with more creativity, etc. That's why the companies with the most output per worker tend to be those where the big boss is the only real productive worker. Because, in a lot of companies, the big boss is the really creative one. The rest of the employees are really just to support that creativity. That kind of company tends to be more successful per number of people because they tend not to have departments competing against each other for advancement based on things like how many employees they have.
In most due respects there are some charitable parts of major corporations. Some might argue this is PR or marketing. Pepsi refresh was a bit different but it wasn't a major bulk of their spending.
Do you think that companies hire more than they need in order to help the community and economy, or do you believe that they absolutely need the people that they're on boarding? It would make sense for companies to hire a little extra in anticipation of turnover, but do you think it's ever out of the goodness of their heart and to help the community and economy?
No--they hire less than what they need and make the others do more work for less pay.
So from what I understand, the general consensus is that if anything, companies hire less than they need in hopes of having an understaffed workplace and and overworked workforce? (Even the bigger companies with the exception of the government). Do you think the higher ups and the guys at the very top of these companies care at all how their employees feel? When someone is overworked and underpaid, do you think it phases the CEO and the people he reports to one bit? It has to at least cross their minds.
Not in this day and age! The only purpose of a company is to make money. It's rare for an owner to care beyond that, except perhaps to keep the local community thinking positive of them for tax purposes and to have a ready pool of potential employees. I don't think any of it is pure altruism even though it may have a win-win for both the company and the community.
Having read through this thread I can only say "Does not compute".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Right??
