U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-25-2019, 01:04 PM
 
73 posts, read 14,549 times
Reputation: 333

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicahgoChicahgo View Post
I am in a background check process with a new company and waiting for the go ahead that everything is clear and it's ok to give my two weeks notice. I have an insane micromanaging supervisor, which is a big part of why I'm leaving. I have a feeling she is going to ask me to put together a manual before I leave detailing step by step everything I do and my schedule. She's done it in the past to a colleague. Have you ever been asked to do this? Did you actually do it? Do you think you owe it to an employer to do this for them? Heck, at this point they're lucky I even give them two weeks notice.

I've done something like this for every employer I've ever worked for. Not that there have been many - I tend to stay with a job for quite a while. But every place I've worked, I have left behind a comprehensive manual of how to do every single task I was involved with.


Now, this is partly due to the fact that I write up and maintain comprehensive process manuals as I go wherever I work just because that's the way I operate. I have been burned more times than I can count by coming into a new task or assignment with absolutely no documentation, training or manuals, basically reinventing the entire process from the ground up, and I work very hard to make sure I don't pass that experience on to whoever follows me. It is a lot easier to leave a complete process manual behind when most or all of it is already written.



As a side note, I still hear regularly from my former boss at the company I left two decades ago, who has been a professional reference for me on multiple occasions, so at least for me, it has paid off well to leave that kind of legacy behind whenever I leave an employer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-25-2019, 04:38 PM
 
1,857 posts, read 714,087 times
Reputation: 3965
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl View Post
Iíve never had any employer get angry that I left. I always gave notice, wrapped up my loose ends, and was respectful thanking them for the opportunity to work with them (whether I meant it or not). There was only one job where I really hated the person above me and he was the reason I left...even then I did not unload on him on my way out and I gave notice etc. Not too long after, they fired him, and I went back for another three years.
I also was respectful and acted like I enjoyed the experience (of course I did not) and thanked each of my employers when I left. I was a good actor. It felt great just to leave and there was no need for me to berate anyone. During my exit interviews I was polite and merely said that a better opportunity arose for me. I only put my foot down when that company that I described in a previous post on this thread wanted me to practically work nonstop in creating that user manual. I was worn out and tired, and simply didn't want to work around the clock. I was perfectly fine with putting in an honest day's work for the time that I had left, but regular 8 hour days. I didn't berate them when I told them that I would put in only 8 hour days, just that I would leave if they tried to force me to just about live in the office. I still left on good terms. The fact that my management allowed me to be a consultant for about half a year says it all, although I have to admit they were a captive audience.

The problem was that three of the four IT companies that I worked for had the attitudes that if you quit, even if you were a good worker for them, gave appropriate notice, were respectful and tied up loose ends properly, you were still lower than dirt because you dared to leave the company. Even if you were a polite top performer that never complained, the moment that you gave your notice you became a piece of smelly garbage to them. They would tolerate you during the two week notice period, but after you left the mud slinging would begin. The departed employee would be blamed for many things, deserved or not, in front of the remaining employees and made out to be an incompetent traitor. It was very unwise to mention the departed employee's name by the remaining employees. If you had to refer to work that had been completed or modified by the departed employee, it was best to say "a certain programmer" rather than mention that employee's name. We used to joke in private about "the dearly departed" as though they were dead. We kept in contact with some of the "dead" and used to laugh about it with them.

So it didn't make any difference if an employee left on good terms or bad. Most left on good terms. I knew of some that screamed at their managers as they quit and walked out. But every one of those employees, good or bad, were "traitors" and could not be given anything but bad references. Traitors are not respected. They are turncoats thinking only about their own greedy selves. That was the way those companies thought, each with their own flavor and twists to keep things entertaining. Disgruntled employers providing inaccurate information about their former employees, and probably enjoying it as they twist the knife in "revenge".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2019, 08:02 AM
 
6,839 posts, read 3,710,891 times
Reputation: 18078
Quote:
Originally Posted by BusinessManIT View Post
Ö
So it didn't make any difference if an employee left on good terms or bad. Most left on good terms. I knew of some that screamed at their managers as they quit and walked out. But every one of those employees, good or bad, were "traitors" and could not be given anything but bad references. Traitors are not respected. They are turncoats thinking only about their own greedy selves. That was the way those companies thought, each with their own flavor and twists to keep things entertaining. Disgruntled employers providing inaccurate information about their former employees, and probably enjoying it as they twist the knife in "revenge".
Have to say I don't understand that type of management. I'm not saying it doesn't happen because I've seen it first hand. I just don't understand it. It doesn't gain the company anything and just makes for a disgruntled workforce more likely to leave and less likely to put in extra effort. I know some managers do it, but it's completely irrational.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2019, 09:24 AM
 
10,058 posts, read 4,651,831 times
Reputation: 15280
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff View Post
Have to say I don't understand that type of management. I'm not saying it doesn't happen because I've seen it first hand. I just don't understand it. It doesn't gain the company anything and just makes for a disgruntled workforce more likely to leave and less likely to put in extra effort. I know some managers do it, but it's completely irrational.
It sounds like he couldn't differentiate company policy from management. He blamed the company stance on managers but he said it was the entire company that did it so it wasn't only one or two managers

What's worse is he even joined in and contributed his own spitefulness
Quote:
We used to joke in private about "the dearly departed" as though they were dead. We kept in contact with some of the "dead" and used to laugh about it with them.
Sure, company may have been bad to former employees, but he is burning his colleagues because he thinks they are responsible for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2019, 04:13 PM
 
1,857 posts, read 714,087 times
Reputation: 3965
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff View Post
Have to say I don't understand that type of management. I'm not saying it doesn't happen because I've seen it first hand. I just don't understand it. It doesn't gain the company anything and just makes for a disgruntled workforce more likely to leave and less likely to put in extra effort. I know some managers do it, but it's completely irrational.
Yes, it is disturbing and irrational. The managements were run on anger and rage. It came from the top and vented down on us. My take on this is that the managements felt that their employees should be quaking in their boots before them. That employees were NOTHING, and that management was EVERYTHING. At one of my employer's there was a "study" put up on the bulletin board that said that the better employees were treated, the lower the productivity. Of course it was rubbish. We laughed behind management's back about it. They simply did not care about their credibility and self-respect. Anger and rage is all they knew. If you didn't like it or couldn't take it, you could leave, but then you were condemned for leaving their outstanding company, as they saw it.

What was amazing was that management simply did not care about angering their workforce and watching many of them leave. You bet productivity could have been much better and retention as well. A lot of expertise was walking out the door. They just didn't care. They were the masters and they would not budge to change one inch for the employee's benefit. My colleagues and I kept track of the turnover rate. One of us had a seating chart and marked on it when someone left. The turnover was approaching 50% when I left. It was becoming unsustainable yet management didn't care.

Unfortunately, when I left for another company, I had to endure the same rubbish again, but with a different flavor. I guess I just was unlucky in ending up in these dysfunctional places.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2019, 04:24 PM
 
1,857 posts, read 714,087 times
Reputation: 3965
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLSFan View Post
It sounds like he couldn't differentiate company policy from management. He blamed the company stance on managers but he said it was the entire company that did it so it wasn't only one or two managers

What's worse is he even joined in and contributed his own spitefulness


Sure, company may have been bad to former employees, but he is burning his colleagues because he thinks they are responsible for it.
I'm sorry, but your analysis doesn't make sense. The top management of the company was responsible for the dysfunction not one or two managers. Where is the differentiation? I never said that it was only some of the management.

And the spitefulness? My colleagues and I were laughing about it and not spiteful. If you are treated in a wacky manner you could laugh about it or cry. We chose to laugh.

And where am I burning my colleagues? They are not responsible for the mistreatment, management is. Management is the ones who are burning their employees for making them into despicable ghosts who don't deserve a good reference. I suggest that you reread my posts and try again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top