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 06-03-2019, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Dallas TX
15,024 posts, read 21,732,170 times
Reputation: 22196

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WMak70 View Post
I work retail, and the company I work for was at one time a really good company to work for. They had people in various departments who knew what they were doing, mostly adults who got 40 hours per week, and who provided great customer service. We had a staff of about 25 people. Customers got great service.

Over the years, our company discovered the term "downsizing", and one by one, they kept eliminating positions and shifting the work to the people who remained. 1 person ended up doing the work of 4 people, and either did it, or they lost their job too.

Today, all the older people are gone, and the store is staffed primarily by high school kids, and managed by guys who are not much older. None of them know what the Hell they are doing, and customers have no one of experience there to guide them and help them make purchase decisions. The kids are happy to get whatever hours a week they can get, unlike seasoned , adult employees, who need to earn a decent living.

When I mentioned this to our district manager, he, of course, gave the corporate line that "We really do not need experienced people (aka as people who make more money than minimum wage) our inexperienced employees are capable of looking up answers on Google and helping the customers that way." He also feels we should not have to provide information on how to use our products as it is the customer's responsibility to do their own research and know what they want when they come in.

So now, what customers get when they walk in is one kid on the register, a manager who is not much older, and maybe one other kid who is working on the floor. And companies wonder why more and more people don't go to brick and mortar stores any more, and simply order off the internet.
Although convenience is so true, the bold statement is another huge fact. One of my favorite stores is White House Black Market, because you actually get service. You walk in, they help you choose the outfit, make great suggestions etc. It feels like I have my own personal shopper. I rarely shop online for them, and buy most of my clothing from WHBM for this reason. Makes you wonder a bit..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-03-2019, 04:32 PM
 
Location: Tempe, AZ
4,552 posts, read 3,639,169 times
Reputation: 3625
I work for the government and for a long time we could not keep enough people, and so we actually had to legislate our workload down to manage all of our permits. Now things have stabilized a bit more but we still lose a lot of people and hire a lot of people. The benefits to government work is staying long-term, and not too many people want to be in the same government department for long-term. It's just not the work culture of this country anymore. And especially for entry-level employees, who won't really see the benefits of government until 40 years down the road. Public sector (local governments) needs more immediate benefits for entry-level to hook them in, and then offer some of the longer term benefits (outside of the pension) a bit sooner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2019, 09:03 PM
 
6,839 posts, read 3,714,977 times
Reputation: 18078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabrrita View Post
As a business owner, when I hear things like "there was a reduction from 6 to 2 with the workload staying the same", I'm always curious if technological improvements mean the 2 can do the work of 6 without any additional work on those remaining.
Mostly it's this: Workforce + Workload = Results If Workforce goes down and Workload remains the same, then Results must go down. Only management is so busy focused on their paperwork processes they never notice the Results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by veuvegirl View Post
In the case of our company, there have been no improvements. We went through a re-org 18 months ago. Where we had 20 account managers, they divided them up into two teams doing different jobs.

Then they decided to slim down departments and lay-off three more account managers. People that were supposed to have 20 accounts now have 60. People that were supposed to have 100 accounts now have 200.

We get complaints from clients daily, cancellations due to lack of service. I have escalated these over and over again to leadership and they turn a deaf ear.

We can't get contracts back to bring in revenue. Heck, we can't even get pricing for a product because they have make our support team so lean.

It's astonishing when I present leadership with a spreadsheet showing we have lost a half million in sales because we are too lean. It's just going to get worse as time goes on.
Consider the 4 quadrants of the urgency vs importance scale. You should be spending effort on the urgent/important and important/not urgent quadrants (IE focus is on importance of work being done). What really happens is urgency drives everything, and a lot of time spent on the urgent/unimportant things. So what doesn't get done is the most critical for long term success -- important/not urgent items. Management doesn't make this decision explicitly. Instead they let it happen. Customers don't get served. Long range projects get postponed. Basically anything that isn't "in their face today" just doesn't get done.

So yes the workload stays the same, but the results drop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 03:50 AM
bUU
 
Location: Georgia
11,881 posts, read 8,658,776 times
Reputation: 8401
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff View Post
Only management is so busy focused on their paperwork processes they never notice the Results.
I wouldn't be so sure. I am in my last year of work, and ready to walk out on a moment's notice now. That's given me the freedom to push management in skip level meetings more than when I was worried about keeping my job or getting my next job. By hitting management with hard charges, I'm learning a lot about this utterly dysfunctional cesspool they run, complete with utterly counter-productive replacement of skilled experience with fresh-from-college staff, and with utterly counter-productive replacement of co-location with splitting project teams across two or three countries. Management feels absolutely powerless, apparently all the way up the chain to the C-level. The things we're discussing are being driven by investors - not managers, not directors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 05:06 AM
 
Location: Western North Carolina
4,948 posts, read 7,876,691 times
Reputation: 10420
Quote:
Originally Posted by WMak70 View Post
I work retail, and the company I work for was at one time a really good company to work for. They had people in various departments who knew what they were doing, mostly adults who got 40 hours per week, and who provided great customer service. We had a staff of about 25 people. Customers got great service.

Over the years, our company discovered the term "downsizing", and one by one, they kept eliminating positions and shifting the work to the people who remained. 1 person ended up doing the work of 4 people, and either did it, or they lost their job too.

Today, all the older people are gone, and the store is staffed primarily by high school kids, and managed by guys who are not much older. None of them know what the Hell they are doing, and customers have no one of experience there to guide them and help them make purchase decisions. The kids are happy to get whatever hours a week they can get, unlike seasoned , adult employees, who need to earn a decent living.

When I mentioned this to our district manager, he, of course, gave the corporate line that "We really do not need experienced people (aka as people who make more money than minimum wage) our inexperienced employees are capable of looking up answers on Google and helping the customers that way." He also feels we should not have to provide information on how to use our products as it is the customer's responsibility to do their own research and know what they want when they come in.

So now, what customers get when they walk in is one kid on the register, a manager who is not much older, and maybe one other kid who is working on the floor. And companies wonder why more and more people don't go to brick and mortar stores any more, and simply order off the internet.
This is what happened to Sears. Whenever I read that Sears problem was competition from online sales, etc. I cringe, because that is not at all what happened. They cost-cut and down sized their way out of existence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 05:51 AM
 
6,273 posts, read 3,460,061 times
Reputation: 5711
Quote:
Originally Posted by pretty but odd View Post
Four years ago we had six employees in the Office Operations Division at my company. Effective next month only two of us will be left. The workload has stayed the same but in July two people will be doing the work that six people used to do. I am told that staffing has been dropped at many companies where a small staff is doing the same amount of work that a large team used to do.

(The only reason there is low unemployment now is there are more companies-- but staffing is down per company.)
While it’s definitely tough I have to wonder about the workload for 6 people if 2 or 3 can get the job done.

Not speaking to your specific situation but I’ve seen over the years that you get less productivity out of overstaffed divisions vs. properly-staffed ones where people actually work efficiently because they have to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 06:58 AM
 
4,076 posts, read 2,941,307 times
Reputation: 7047
Quote:
Originally Posted by BusinessManIT View Post
Yes, the last IT company that I worked for also did this in replacing virtually all of its highly paid workforce with cheap newbies with no experience. ERPs, layoffs, offshore, no more remote workers, been there, done that. I guess it is the "in thing" to do nowadays. As to the long term survival of the company, well, umm... that's another matter.
Yes, this same game plan has played out in the last 2 places I've worked. They won't have to pay UE benefits to folks if they can make it so miserable that they're quitting voluntarily (even though asking people to pack up and move across country with your families in less than a few months is hardly voluntary).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 07:32 AM
 
3,756 posts, read 2,123,163 times
Reputation: 10268
Defies any logic and common sense. You’re only saving the company money for the current financial quarter but doing long irreparable damage long term to the company. So this mindset only costs the company money. Doesn’t save them anything.

My current company went lay-off crazy a few years ago and ditched all the experienced, “expensive employees”. Fast forward 3-4 years later it’s heading to bankruptcy due to constant loss of business and employee turnover problems which has lied to operation problems. Yea.... great money save
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 08:58 AM
 
6,273 posts, read 3,460,061 times
Reputation: 5711
Quote:
Originally Posted by DorianRo View Post
Defies any logic and common sense. You’re only saving the company money for the current financial quarter but doing long irreparable damage long term to the company. So this mindset only costs the company money. Doesn’t save them anything.

My current company went lay-off crazy a few years ago and ditched all the experienced, “expensive employees”. Fast forward 3-4 years later it’s heading to bankruptcy due to constant loss of business and employee turnover problems which has lied to operation problems. Yea.... great money save
Yes, but the executives who did this no doubt received big bonuses and have already moved on.

incentives are usually tied to short term goals and gains in stock price as opposed to longer term benefits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2019, 08:59 AM
 
2,173 posts, read 531,207 times
Reputation: 3785
Quote:
Originally Posted by pretty but odd View Post
Four years ago we had six employees in the Office Operations Division at my company. Effective next month only two of us will be left. The workload has stayed the same but in July two people will be doing the work that six people used to do.
It sounds like six people used to do the work that two people will do.
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
Similar Threads
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