Rumoured and Confirmed Signings - XXV

[Gazzamatta]

I was a manager many years ago with a major retailer, and it was almost impossible to sack poorly performing staff. The process was so lengthy that most managers just put up shit employees.

My experience was that the Managers were usually not capable of following a set process to achieve the desired result. The process is designed to improve performance which should be the the main focus. If the process is managed correctly yet fails to improve performance then termination follows as a consequence. Even in summary dismissal, employees must be allowed an opportunity to provide an explanation for their actions. Lazy manangers are generally the cause for poor performing employees remaining employed.

 

[Kornstar]

Sure. But this isn't about getting away with it. This is about abiding by the contract you agree to (either explicitly or implicitly) when you hire someone. And the general vibe of the thing....both sides of a relationship should have the opportunity to state their case.

How would you feel if you got to work Monday, and the bosses said, 'we've been shown some pictures of you acting inappropriately. We don't want to hear your side of it. You're fired.' ? You should be given the chance to respond 'Yeh, but the hamster was asking for it.' And then get fired.

If they sacked me because of photos they had I'd know I can't our sue them because I am the most boring f**k in the world and if me walking, going to the footy or just sitting at home was evidence for sacking me then they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

I know what you are getting at but surely in this case Todd knew straight away when they said "we've seen photos" he would not be surprised about the action taken.

Seriously though, I'd love to be sacked then I would have no choice but to sell my house and buy a house outright up past Newcastle and just get a part time job and live the easy life. I love my job but I love not working even more.

I was a manager many years ago with a major retailer, and it was almost impossible to sack poorly performing staff. The process was so lengthy that most managers just put up shit employees.

Yep, I work in HR/Payroll and now am a manager of sorts in the IT side and I can't believe how hard it is to sack someone! I know the rules etc. but I don't agree with them.

You are right as well, where I work in the payroll department they legitimately need to sack 90% of the staff but they can't and it is extremely detrimental to the business.

 

[Joshuatheeel]

My experience was that the Managers were usually not capable of following a set process to achieve the desired result. The process is designed to improve performance which should be the the main focus. If the process is managed correctly yet fails to improve performance then termination follows as a consequence. Even in summary dismissal, employees must be allowed an opportunity to provide an explanation for their actions. Lazy manangers are generally the cause for poor performing employees remaining employed.

Yeah sounds about right. Not sure if managers at this major retailer were lazy, more like the retailer expected a huge amount of work from managers that they really didn't have the time to manager the performance process correctly. Losing an hr or two a day meant having no lunch break and working back, for a fairly shitty wage.

 

[Gazzamatta]

Yeah sounds about right. Not sure if managers at this major retailer were lazy, more like the retailer expected a huge amount of work from managers that they really didn't have the time to manager the performance process correctly. Losing an hr or two a day meant having no lunch break and working back, for a fairly shitty wage.

Cant disagree. Or possibly poor training or a lack of understanding at all levels as to how involved the process is. "I just want him or her outta here". Weak HR is also a strong factor. Ive defended many unfair and unlawful dismissal cases. If you have all your ducks in a row its generally a sayisfying result. Employers dont employ with a view to termination. Its the employees responsibility to adhere to Company policys and procedures or have genuine reasons why they aren't. If employees choose not to adhere then they are making the decision to cease employment not the employer.

 

[Gronk]

Well thank f**k for our IR laws. As much as there may be situations whereby the termination of a douche may be a frustrating process, by and large it's good system. In contrast, imagine working in the US where IIRC your only rights are if termination is based on race or discrimination of some sort.

EDIT: Well at least if your jerk boss sacks you for no reason, you can go to walmart and buy a gun and sort him out. :crazy:

 

[Obscene Assassin]

And what legal theory do you base this on?

The same one that Jake thinks that the club will lose.

 

[Joshuatheeel]

Another interesting unfair dismissal case about the SBS reporter sacked earlier this year:

http://m.smh.com.au/federal-politic...tervention-court-to-hear-20151012-gk71hd.html

No process was followed

 

[lingard]

Sure. But this isn't about getting away with it. This is about abiding by the contract you agree to (either explicitly or implicitly) when you hire someone. And the general vibe of the thing....both sides of a relationship should have the opportunity to state their case.

How would you feel if you got to work Monday, and the bosses said, 'we've been shown some pictures of you acting inappropriately. We don't want to hear your side of it. You're fired.' ? You should be given the chance to respond 'Yeh, but the hamster was asking for it.' And then get fired.

On any given Monday, if my boss said that to me, I'd just think: "Oh well, he's got me fair and square".

 

[Bigfella]

Or possibly "What took so long?"

 

[Fanbase]

Another interesting unfair dismissal case about the SBS reporter sacked earlier this year:

http://m.smh.com.au/federal-politic...tervention-court-to-hear-20151012-gk71hd.html

No process was followed

I have no problem with his sacking. What a f#$%k head he is. Bloody disrespectful ass. What he said about our Australian soldiers is no better than that bloody muslim cleric or whatever he is who sent letters to familys of Australian soldiers killed where he said they deserved to die. No sympathy for either of them. They can get stuffed.

 

[Eelogical]

I have no problem with his sacking. What a f#$%k head he is. Bloody disrespectful ass. What he said about our Australian soldiers is no better than that bloody muslim cleric or whatever he is who sent letters to familys of Australian soldiers killed where he said they deserved to die. No sympathy for either of them. They can get stuffed.

Man Monis already is.

 

[yy_cheng]

[/B]
Man Monis already is.

Probably the opposite

More like his innards are decaying away

 

[Twizzle]

James O'Connor released from the Reds

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-13/james-o27connor-released-by-queensland-reds/6851186

Worth a punt ?

I like the guy although a bit small for a winger in our game.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Michael O'Connor released from the Reds

He'd be 55. ;-)

 

[Twizzle]

haha, just before I went back and edited it

geez you gotta be quick

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

You'd imagine some French or UK team would be happy to pay J O'C a lot more than an NRL club would be prepared to risk. Unless he has some burning need to live in Syd/Bris.

 

[Twizzle]

Yeah the money in French Rugby is pretty big.

 

[Gronk]

JOC is a massive knob.

 

[Twizzle]

not exactly massive

He learned his trade under former St George and Queensland hooker John Dowling at Burleigh and was a standout in the 13-man game. Brisbane and Parramatta both had chances to sign him but dismissed him due to his lack of size.

http://www.sportal.com.au/league/nr...nor-fare-in-the-nrl/6lnqangymngk1ex11c9t0sgmr

 

[not graham olling]

JOC is a massive knob.

Yes I heard that too but if a coach can turn him around he'd be a massive signing. He just needs to sort his off field stuff and get his head right to play footy. Reckon he'll go to France