This above all is why every trumper dipshit can F right off with their “pedos!” attack line. They go right to that and being so concerned for their daughters if you call them out on book banning, and they’ve got MAGA TRUMP2024 all over them. Like really?
“I’ve known Jeff [Epstein] for 15 years. Terrific guy, He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”
Oh it’s been very damaging and a major reason for high staff turnover. Since COVID I have worked in transactional finance roles where the staff turnover rate has been has high as 95% - meaning that for every 20 hires, only one would stay with the company beyond twelve months.
A trend I noticed is that companies which refuse to embrace remote working will greatly struggle to hire staff.
It’s more baffling how a lot of companies respond to these issues not by raising wages to market levels or improving working conditions/workloads, but by buying the team pizzas every month or two, pushing tighter RTO mandates and adding lengthier notice periods into new contracts.
COVID-19 had one saving grace and that was proving that many roles could be performed remotely. The pandemic has made remote working an expectation of today’s workforce that corporations have either embraced or fought long and hard to reverse. It’s the companies that embrace remote work which are going to thrive.
Who knows, that may be a good thing in the long run. We don’t need ludicrously expensive luxury office space, which my city is full of. But you know what my city desperately needs? Homes. Bristol has the second-highest property prices in all of the UK behind London. Our rents are quickly approaching London levels because all the Londoners are fleeing the capital to clog up our housing market.
I can’t even imagine accepting an employment offer that requires a notice period; it’d be a pretty good indicator that the employer’s attrition rates are high.
In Germany 3 months are standard, from both sides. It is a good thing, because they cannot just put you on the street by tomorrow, but have to pay for another three months. This goes vice versa. Is that any different in the states?
Can’t speak for the whole country but my employment is at-will, meaning it can be terminated by either side at any moment with no notice.
It is considered polite and relatively standard to give two weeks’ notice prior to leaving your job, but there’s no requirement in any of the jobs I’ve had.
Of course, employers don’t have that same “polite standard” of two weeks, it’s not unheard of for people to be fired on the spot. Though it’s definitely unusual. For broader layoffs, it’s pretty common to get several weeks of notice and pay.
In the united states, it is customary for a leaving employee to give 2 weeks notice, but a firing employer does not usually give any notice at all. They do just put you out on the street tomorrow.
I’m in Canada, and typically an employee will give two weeks as a minimum, more in some circumstances. Employer’s requirements vary by province, and may require notice or severance pay.
California has the warn act which is supposed to mandate an employer to either provide notice or give 90 days compensation. It’s not always followed and not always applicable, but it’s similar to what you’re talking about.
In our case it’s slightly better for the employee though, because nobody can force you to continue working here. It’s customary to give two weeks though, and that’s generally followed so that you can use previous employers as a reference.
Yeah, I think those go hand in hand. The kind of leadership that would push RTO is the kind that frequently would also do other bad things (or let their managers).
While J6 did factor into it, the rating is on the governments ability to pay back its debt, aka to not default.
The bigger issue, in this context, that I’ve seen is the republicans playing with the debt ceiling and threatening to not raise it. This directly makes it more likely the US government can’t/won’t pay its debt off.
With a half-hour commute, you're dropping at least $250/mo on gas (more if you use proper mileage calculations and include car insurance costs) and spending an additional 32 hours of your time in unpaid travel for work. If your hourly rate is $15/hr, that means another potential $380 in earnings a month out the door.
Since that $15/hr brings you in $2600 before taxes, that means in this scenario you're spending roughly 10% of your gross income on travel expenses, and losing out on a potential income increase of 14%.
This is why, despite the fact they were a great company I had thought about joining for years, last year I turned down an offer that was a 50% raise from my previously held position.
I got the same amount in an offer from a separate company that enabled work from home, and when I did the math, the value between the two was striking - it was the clear winner, despite the fact that the first company only wanted me to travel across town.
I don’t think this is even the full picture, though. The cost savings from working remotely for me have been largely unnoticed (but objectively there).
The real value, for me, has been increased autonomy and freedom from the office culture and overbearing bosses. It was amazing how my managers were suddenly ambivalent about my work performance once they weren’t able to constantly observe me at my desk.
Definitely - the personal benefits go far beyond the cost savings. Just pointing out that at the end of the day, what they're doing when they ask you to return to the office is asking you to take a very real pay cut and add unpaid hours to your daily schedule.
Also more of you count in car maintenance and potential babysitting for slightly older children who can be alone for a couple hours after school, but are too young to truly be alone.
I also feel like people just get back a lot of time to themselves by not having to commute. My husband gets another hour at least with me and our children every day, maybe an hour and a half. Instead of only seeing them for a quick dinner and getting them ready for bed, they actually have that time to hang out and play. It’s things like that, that are invaluable.
The only way they win this battle is if they cover travel expenses per mile. I’m supposed to spend money to keep your stupid shitbird company afloat? Yeah, get fucked.
Traveling has become rather cost-effective. It’s alright if it gets covered but what really should get covered is the time it takes to travel. I live relatively close to work, but if I went to office that’s an extra 1-2 hours a day I spend specifically for work purposes. The cost of time, at least for me, is significantly higher than the actual cost of travel.
It seems like some people are finally starting to wise up to the fact that work begins not when you arrive at the workplace, but the moment you stop doing what you want to do and start doing what you have to do in order to perform the job. That means it starts before you walk out the door, as soon as you start ‘getting ready for work’.
The simplest metric is this: would you be doing it if you were on vacation/weren’t working? If yes, then it’s not work. If no, then it’s work.
My company is 8 to 5 and on the days I go in office i just spend so much more time doing the unpaid mandatory things that it’s just not worth it even for much more pay. Not to mention it’s far more exhausting and worse for my mental health to be in an open office surveillance ward rather than a home office
Just an example number for the math. And actually my company has a bunch of customer service reps that work from home at that rate when they start. It's more common than you may think.
Steve in support would like you to know that he wishes to make 15 an hour after a few promotions. And that if you just think about it, getting 50 bucks worth of more services is smarter than cancelling your account.
My first guess was something like a brain tumor making him hear voices and changing his behavior, but:
two other suitcases were found, also with human remains, nearby along the intracoastal
and
police searched the apartment where they found evidence of a grisly crime: blood spatter throughout the home, cleaning products with blood on it, drag marks and a large amount of blood in the living room, dining room and master bathroom
I’m no criminal psychologist, but that doesn’t seem like the behavior of someone mentally unsound (well, aside from the serial killing, anyway).
This is because most healthcare professionals know that abortion is a critical component OF maternity care, so they're fleeing these areas. Pregnancies go bad. A LOT. The only way to fix that very often is the exact same medical procedures used to provide elective abortions.
You can't selectively outlaw certain medical procedures and expect good outcomes.
You trying to tell me that the same people denying abortion access because “think of the children” are the same people who don’t care about the children? Say it isn’t so!
I don’t want to listen to an imperialism apologist and genocide apologist about anything. Maybe Chomsky has a point, maybe not, but he isn’t educated in economics beyond the undergrad level, and has had completely idiotic opinions on world events, so
He has the political/economic mind of a 14 year old edgelord. He’s not an expert at all (in these subjects. He is a fantastic linguist) - he’s just a minor commie celebrity
Both claims against Chomsky reek of CIA/neo-liberal propaganda, imo.
As to your comments seeking to discredit Chomsky’s expertise in this area, he’s an intellectual who has been following, protesting, and speaking out against Western Imperialism since the Vietnam war.
Neo-Liberalism (the Democrats) and Fascism (the modern GOP) aren’t the only choices and being critical of neo-liberalism =~ tankie or Russian apologist.
That’s CIA propaganda and I’m sorry to see it follow posters from reddit.
“everything I don’t like is CIA propaganda: a child’s guide to political discussion”
And yes, he has been running interference for Putin and used to run interference for the fucking Khmer Rouge. I don’t need his opinion like I don’t need Henry Kissingers. Although at least Kissinger would know what he is talking about, as a very competent ghoul.
I’m a skeptical and distrustful person by nature and not afraid to kill my heros because of this. So, when I started seeing this stuff circulating on reddit, I checked it out.
I go into detail as to why I believe what I do in my other responses to this comment and cite my sources. If you want to make an actual argument instead of name calling feel free to make one there.
Dude the man is so anti American that he was willing to enthusiastically enforce Khmer Rouge propaganda. He’s just the lefty mirror to Henry Kissinger, except ignorant and less evil.
Nuanced arguments about how the West must be lying about the genocide in Cambodia.
Dude, I am okay with people generally critical of the West. Especially within the context of the Cold War. Chomsky goes beyond that. His initial assumption is that everything the West is doing is bad.
That means his thoughts aren’t useful or insightful. They don’t change based on the situation. It’s just a better sounding version of your typical anti-west screed from anyone ranging from edgy 14 year old Marxists trying to piss off their parents or some aging hippie.
And it isn’t propaganda, it’s what he wrote, praising the regime of brutal murderers and discarding the accounts of survivors and escapees as propaganda.
Gov'ts singularly listening to economists on the cause of our current recession is what's causing our current recession.
Economists aren't always the best judge of much these days, and not being one shouldn't disqualify anyone from having an opinion on the current shit storm we face.
I don’t think our government should be solely listening to economists, but I don’t think that this means the government should be listening to an arrogant linguistics professor who has his head up his own ass and cannot critically examine his own intellectual failings.
I used to compare them to Tarot Card readers but it then occurred to me that at least Tarot Card readers can do cold reading. So my advice to economists is try to get to the accuracy of Tarot for now.
Surprisingly, there is a whole slew of exempt special-purpose bulbs that will continue to be manufactured, according to the Energy Department. Here’s what manufacturers can still build and stores can continue selling:
Appliance lamps, including fridge and oven lights
Black lights
Bug lamps
Colored lamps
Infrared lamps
Left-handed thread lamps
Plant lights
Floodlights
Reflector lamps
Showcase lamps
Traffic signals
Some other specialty lights, including marine lamps and some odd-sized bulbs
They got a bad rap up here in the North where we get snow. Blowing snow would often coat the lenses of traffic signals. Incandescents generated enough heat to just melt the snow, but LED replacement lamps would not and people could no longer see some of the signals. They now have thermostat-controlled heaters to solve the problem, but it made many cities gunshy.
I also live somewhere with a lot of snow and cold winters and yeah, the first ones that went in had issues with snow but now they all have heaters built in. That’s why I really don’t see the point of incandescent street lights now days.
People that write specs for government are quite conservative (not politically, necessarily, but more slow to change). That and the early issues with them is plenty to keep some cities specifying incandescent bulbs.
The only time I’ve seen that happen is when they used the full-circle hoods. Almost every one I’ve seen has a cutout at the bottom to prevent snow from accumulating.
They probably have heaters too though. I am not a traffic signal engineer.
Judging by the exemption list, the ban is basically just for regular household lightbulbs. Headlights are halogens, not incandescent, and the rest are speciality bulbs - though if it's legal, swapping all of those to LEDs is a pretty good upgrade.
Stock up for what? Even if they were banned, there would be LED replacements available, I’m sure. Usually parts like that have enough compatibility between models to make it worth a production run.
If Russia sinks a vessel, they are going to get a big pile of missiles sinking their Black Sea Fleet. It will be up to Russia if they wish to actually start WWIII or just take their lumps for something they chose to start.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.