|
Sefal posted:I took an counteroffer and so far its good. I even got a perm contract with the counteroffer.
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 22:05 |
|
|
Sefal posted:Key things were i think; I've posted this before but I think I'm more of a fringe case; after two crappy appraisals I sought out and accepted another offer, when I handed in my resignation one of the managers came to me to ask what would it take to keep me. I explained I didn't really want to leave but wasn't being paid nowhere near what I should, manager fought my cause to the top and I got my required salary adjusted in writing, so I rescinded my resignation and awkwardly declined my job offer which I accepted. Shortly after the manager who carried out my appraisals and who I reported to were fired (she made a lot more mismanagement than just me). I was quite fortunate as it was kind of a bluff on my end, I did have a job lined up to cross over to, but it was only for £1000 extra per year. Super Slash fucked around with this message at 15:41 on Jun 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
Vulture Culture posted:A lot of it is fearmongering garbage oversold by HR think tanks because if one person figures out how to get the raise they've been denied, so will everyone else. Whether or not to ask for or accept a counteroffer is highly, highly circumstantial. The top question I would ask: is whether or not you get a raise entirely within your boss's control? If yes, coming to them for a counteroffer is insulting. If no, coming to them for a counteroffer is potentially giving them leverage to get you what they've been asking for on your behalf. My boss has no control over salary. He had to get permission for what he offered me. I'll take a wait and see approach.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
In Windows 7/10, is there a way to block access to USB ports, but make it so that it could be "authorized" UAC-style by an Administrator, on a case-by-case basis? I know that I can block the USB ports through GPO, but it'd be a lot of fuckery to address if someone with a legitimate need actually needed to use the USB ports.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
Alfajor posted:In Windows 7/10, is there a way to block access to USB ports, but make it so that it could be "authorized" UAC-style by an Administrator, on a case-by-case basis?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
If they're bringing you on as an FTE that's a good and shows the companies investing in your continued employement but this falls into an exception of "Don't take counter-offers".
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
The company I left a few months ago is now laying off over 10k people. My wife still works there but won't hear if she gets fired or if she can stay, for another month or 2. she's hoping she gets fired so she can get severence pay for the 20 years she's worked there. It's gonna be the size of an above average mortgage. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
Why do so many people equate firing with layoffs? These are two entirely separate things...
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Why do so many people equate firing with layoffs? These are two entirely separate things... In one, you are fired. In the other, you are fired to make the execs look good on paper. Six of one, Tab8715, this isn't the 60s, anymore, where firms make actual strategic decisions. The decisions are all around what will make an imaginary number better for the next ten quarters while the CEO prepares for an exit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Why do so many people equate firing with layoffs? These are two entirely separate things...
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
In one case you can get about 60% of what you were making for a whole 3 months, in the other you're still financially screwed unless you have a lot of savings.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Vulture Culture posted:In the first one, you don't do good enough work for the company to pay you. In the second, the work you do isn't good enough for the company to pay you. See? What if the work isn't good enough for the company because people aren't doing it good enough?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:In one case you can get about 60% of what you were making for a whole 3 months, in the other you're still financially screwed unless you have a lot of savings. Exactly, Employment termination or "getting fired" is due to insufficient performance. Those that are fired do not collect unemployment and it's unlikely you're going to get a recommendation from your employer. Layoffs are due to a lack of work where not only do you qualify for unemployment but you may also get a severance package and positive reference from your previous employer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Exactly, You can still collect unemployment if you are fired. And a severance is by no means guaranteed during layoffs, nor is a good recommendation. The difference is largely semantic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:You can still collect unemployment if you are fired. And a severance is by no means guaranteed during layoffs, nor is a good recommendation. The difference is largely semantic. Yeah, the only time you're denied unemployment is if you're fired "with cause" which needs some hefty documentation on the employer's part. You would have to do something so bad that they immediately dump you or have a binder full of formal complaints: like no-shows, stealing from the company, safety violations etc. Also references aren't very valuable when the company referenced doesn't exist anymore. Make sure to network with your bosses so that you have their direct personal contact as a reference going forward.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:
*cough* LinkedIn *cough* Seriously, this is half the reason to have an account even if you do get spammed by pesky recruiters. vvv 1-2 months notice?! 2 weeks drags on long enough when you're excited about a new gig. I can't imagine how much that sucks... vvv Dark Helmut fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Jun 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:You can still collect unemployment if you are fired. And a severance is by no means guaranteed during layoffs, nor is a good recommendation. The difference is largely semantic. Luckily, where I live the law mandates that you have to give an employee severence pay unless he/she gives their 1-2 months notice (depending on contract type, but similar to the US 2 weeks notice) or if you have reasons for immediate termination (sexual harrasment which can be proven in court, evidence of stealing, etc). Otherwise its half a months salary for every year you've worked for them (not linited to your current contract). But this is by law. Large companies usually have better severance pay for layoffs, negotiated by unions. The company in question pays 1 month per year you worked there. :v
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
LochNessMonster posted:Luckily, where I live the law mandates that you have to give an employee severence pay unless he/she gives their 1-2 months notice (depending on contract type, but similar to the US 2 weeks notice) or if you have reasons for immediate termination (sexual harrasment which can be proven in court, evidence of stealing, etc). Yea, my post was in the context of the worker's paradise that is the US, where severance is a gift generously bestowed by your employer if they deign to do so. And more often than not, in my experience, they won't do so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Dark Helmut posted:*cough* LinkedIn *cough* My wife was denied employment at a hospital because her references either didn't work at the company anymore, or the company wasn't around anymore. They seriously expected the references to not have moved on. She got a better job anyways but gently caress that and gently caress HR.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
Fiendish Dr. Wu posted:My wife was denied employment at a hospital because her references either didn't work at the company anymore, or the company wasn't around anymore. They seriously expected the references to not have moved on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:You can still collect unemployment if you are fired. And a severance is by no means guaranteed during layoffs, nor is a good recommendation. It’s accurate to say that you could collect unemployment however if you’re involuntarily terminated or “fired” the vast majority of companies even those with the most mediocre HR Departments will have been wise enough to document your poor performance. You will not be able claim unemployment and/or will lose upon fighting against. Remember, It’s costlier for a company to lay off employees than it is for an ought right termination. Severance and recommendations aren’t by any means going to be guaranteed however you’ll find that it’s common to see Early Retirement Packages delivered during  corporate restructuring or layoffs. Hell, I’ve seen layoffs where the company has hired personal recruiters for the staff that’s been let go because management while had to make tough decisions but at same time recognized this deeply affected the lives of actual people.Now, if you're fired I doubt you'll be getting any of the above. NippleFloss posted:The difference is largely semantic. There’s a important distinction between leaving a job due to lack of work instead of not meeting employment standards which is semantics. Not something you’d want to gloss over or dismiss as nitpicky. CrazyLittle posted:Yeah, the only time you're denied unemployment is if you're fired "with cause" which needs some hefty documentation on the employer's part. You would have to do something so bad that they immediately dump you or have a binder full of formal complaints: like no-shows, stealing from the company, safety violations etc. Hefty? Granted, it's dependent from State-to-State however you do not need a binder of grievances. All you need is written documentation at least one or two pages double-spaced briefly summarizing inadequate performance from their direct manager(s), written confirmation from their fellow co-workers echoing management's claims and possibly a willingness of all parties to potentially testify. CrazyLittle posted:Also references aren't very valuable when the company referenced doesn't exist anymore. Make sure to network with your bosses so that you have their direct personal contact as a reference going forward. How so? If you're using your past supervisor or co-worker as a reference you should obviously have their personal contact information as people change employers and positions throughout their careers. If someone's so focused on having a reference that still works at said company it's safe to say their idiots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Hefty? Generally you have to be fired for intentional misconduct to be ineligible for unemployment, and inadequate performance does not qualify. You usually have to have failed a drug test, sexually harassed a coworker, threatened someone, etc...
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:Generally you have to be fired for intentional misconduct to be ineligible for unemployment, and inadequate performance does not qualify. You usually have to have failed a drug test, sexually harassed a coworker, threatened someone, etc... In NY if you get fired you're not eligible for unemployment, full stop. However, your employer would have to fight your claim for the labor office to know that you actually got fired and not just "dismissed."
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:Generally you have to be fired for intentional misconduct to be ineligible for unemployment, and inadequate performance does not qualify. You usually have to have failed a drug test, sexually harassed a coworker, threatened someone, etc...
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
I'd probably say that even if you get fired for doing drugs at work, after getting a written warning, twice, you should still file for unemployment. If it gets disputed, utilize your state's referral program to get a free consultation. If your lawyer says you don't have a case, you don't have a case.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
you will get unemployment unless you really hosed up. Gross negligence, gross incompetence, breaking the law, etc.. If you just suck at your job, you'll probably get paid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:Generally you have to be fired for intentional misconduct to be ineligible for unemployment, and inadequate performance does not qualify. You usually have to have failed a drug test, sexually harassed a coworker, threatened someone, etc...
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Hefty? This is wrong. I will grant two caveats: IANAL and that my employer experience is limited to three states, but all three of those states are "at will" states, which are the most lenient to the employers. A "for-cause" termination is a direct and reasonable detriment to the employer. Documented "poor performance" (three write ups for "being bad" in general terms doesn't count. I've been directly ruled against for this) does not mean jack to the labor board or unemployment bureaus if you apply for unemployment and the company attempts to reject unemployment payments for you. For reference, examples of "for cause" are: Theft with actionable evidence - e.g. terminating you because a case of coke went missing in the 5 minutes you are alone with it doesn't mean your termination was "for cause". Video of you walking the case of coke out the door without stopping at a register, however, IS "for cause". Detrimental performance with actionable evidence. This is almost always sabotage. You threw sabot into your There are a few items that aren't terribly high on the "actionable evidence" level needed: Multiple people filing complaints of physical threats, multiple people filing complaints of sexual harassment, and/or multiple witnesses to terroristic utterances tend to make the UE bureau rule towards the company.Inspector_666 posted:In NY if you get fired you're not eligible for unemployment, full stop. However, your employer would have to fight your claim for the labor office to know that you actually got fired and not just "dismissed." Most terminations are "dismissals." "Being fired" refers to the entire gamut - from "I have a poo poo boss who just wanted me gone." to "I am a poo poo employee and my boss just wanted me gone." And NY has one of the most employer-hostile unemployment bureaus in the US - but it is true that they are one of the states that stops all unemployment payments while they figure out any objections. A lot of people go "Maaaaan. I'm not getting any money!" and then get another job before the unemployment would get investigated out and start up payments. Detail that most people don't know: You can usually file for back-unemployment for the period you were eligible for unemployment payments and get a lump sum in cases like these (variances by state, both in claimable amount and time to file a claim for back unemployment). anthonypants posted:When people believe things like this, have they ever actually held a job? Having been a direct employer, a manager, an executive level manager, and a peon across multiple companies and corporations, this is true. Just because the law says "bad performance!" doesn't mean "He sucks at his job." It means "After exhaustive training and remediation, all attempts to increase his performance to that of his coworkers has failed." Not only do you have to demonstrate the training and remediation, you also have to document that he knew he was going to get fired for that poor performance for a while, determined by each state (rule of thumb for me: six months). In addition, a friend of mine fought unemployment for her only sys admin (company of ~100), and since there were no other sys admins in the company, she was ruled against because she couldn't claim that sysadmin's performance was bad since there was no apples to apples comparison - even after documenting all of the training and remediation, as well as the multiple notices that were signed by the sys admin saying that he sucked and needed to get better. When terminated for any reason, file for unemployment. If challenged by your previous company, speak with a UE lawyer about your chances to win - and be honest with the UE lawyer. It'll cost you less in the long run. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:When people believe things like this, have they ever actually held a job? Its shameful how few people know their rights.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
Vulture Culture posted:Even a drug test is a dubious disqualification in many states. California, for example, has an "irresistible compulsion"/"inability to abstain" clause for addicts. You're more likely to be denied unemployment if you refuse to take the test. And if you're in a treatment program, they're messing with fire.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Its shameful how few people know their rights. Having laws written so that the lay person could understand them would help. I've found a lot of people flounder between the legal definitions in the law and then the regulatory definitions in the regulations written after the law being different, followed by case law ruling which parts of each can and cannot be enforced, as well as how much legal leeway the regulatory agency has under the law for determining the outcomes of its' bailiwick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
Arsten posted:Having laws written so that the lay person could understand them would help. I've found a lot of people flounder between the legal definitions in the law and then the regulatory definitions in the regulations written after the law being different, followed by case law ruling which parts of each can and cannot be enforced, as well as how much legal leeway the regulatory agency has under the law for determining the outcomes of its' bailiwick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:I can't afford to get a raise, I'll move into the next tax bracket and owe thousands more in income tax!!!
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
You lose benefits when you get a raise?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Methanar posted:You lose benefits when you get a raise?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
I thought this was America. Apparently government cheese is no longer a thing. I tried applying while I'm collecting my sweet free government unemployment from redacted till I start my next job. Silly redacted. I was already out the door when you ra'd me but I'll take that severance and unemployment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 05:06
|
|
|
Methanar posted:You lose benefits when you get a raise?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:I can't afford to get a raise, I'll move into the next tax bracket and owe thousands more in income tax!!! You are a bad man, and you make me cry.  There are two main instances where the government takes a larger share of your paycheck (you CAN get into a situation where you get less money, but it's fairly limited): You work overtime. Overtime for weekly-paid employees gets a larger portion of taxes withheld. There is a sweet spot of something like 1.5 or 2.5 hours of overtime where you take home less (or, at the least, work for free). Note that if you work this little bit of overtime, you get it all back at tax time - assuming you have a simple tax situation. Vulture Culture posted:A lot of government benefits are determined based on your income bracket. For example, a small raise may bump you above 400% of the federal poverty level so you no longer qualify for ACA insurance subsidies. This is the second instance. But, so far, this instance is theoretical as they are currently only truing this up twice a year. The first time each year is to make sure the detail you submitted last year for this year is true (Hey, this guy DOESN'T have sixty-eight children!) and then at tax time to see if you were given more subsidy than your income would allow for in the previous tax year. There is a third instance dealing with low income benefits. Some states have a monthly income check. If you make above the (FPL+250% / 12) you get your benefits reduced. Depending on the state, this can range from medicaid (the low income free health care) termination, rent assistance reduction/termination, and SNAP ineligibility.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:I can't afford to get a raise, I'll move into the next tax bracket and owe thousands more in income tax!!! Not because of tax brackets but this is becoming more of a reality than a lot of people think. Not for those making 60k+, but those at the 30 - 40k range qualify for a lot of state benefits and insurance discounts and school grants / loan payment deferrals. Bumping up from 40k to 50k with a family of 4 can easily be a wash in monthly usable income, and there's some tipping point in there where a small raise can cost more than the raise earns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 13:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 22:05 |
|
|
So I'm sure a lot of this is old hat for many of you, and I also know that Powershell in a Month of Lunches is pretty much the gold standard for learning Powershell, but yesterday was pretty slow and I watched a few sessions of Microsoft's MVA course "Getting Started with PowerShell 3.0 Jump Start" and was really impressed. The actual creator of Powershell is one of the guys doing the course and it's not dry at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 14:08
|
|
