You cannot just chill and work a 9-5. The lower your Income, the higher Management's expectations of you, the less respect you get, the more closely you are managed, the higher your hours worked, the higher your stress level, and the more expendable you are.
Human organizations are structured so as to be caste-like. No one questions any decision that makes an organisation more of a caste system. People would be shocked if an in-house Lawyer who chills, poasts, and makes $380k were reproached in any manner. Whereas, if Bellhops who make $380 a week were given a paid lunch, the CEO of J.W. Marriott would be raked over the coals at the next shareholder meeting.
They are never the first to go. They can and do go, but OFTEN, steps are taken to preserve their dignity that would not be taken with lower-level employees.
But you know what really happens, to the extent that what you're saying occurs? The spurned redundant management pricks can easily job-hop into similar roles at other companies. HR/management will look at its worker bees and see nothing but losers incapable of being developed into any sort of "management" or ever receiving compensation greater than their current salary + a modest cost of living increase. Outside hires with similar pedigrees are afforded greater consideration and respect than ass-busting internal candidates YEARNING for a chance at the good life. By the time the internal candidate has licked enough boots to even be considered for any "promotion," everyone is disgusted with him and has lost any respect they once had.
I have contributed to a lengthy outline on the Clique System, which is basically the same thing as the Caste System. I have poasted it in its entirety and it is available in word document form. Many of the concepts overlap, however Clique is a broader concept that has implications both in and out of the workplace.
Date: April 14th, 2017 3:28 PM Author: avocado space
Yeah, that is completely true.
"They can and do go, but OFTEN, steps are taken to preserve their dignity that would not be taken with lower-level employees."
Bingo. They get severance and they get great references.
"Time to write your memoirs", for a biglaw partner, means "we're actually setting you up with a $250k advance", not "we're kicking you to the curb."
"Outside hires with similar pedigrees are afforded greater consideration and respect than ass-busting internal candidates YEARNING for a chance at the good life. By the time the internal candidate has licked enough boots to even be considered for any "promotion," everyone is disgusted with him and has lost any respect they once had."
Right. Very true. Tech is definitely this way. Startups tell early employees that they'll be executives, but the fact is that these startups always want "better" people as they grow. The early employees get fucked over.
What do you think happens to the pugnacious people who just tell the system to go fuck itself? Obviously, they get fired more often. Do they get some kind of grudging respect that eventually makes the case for them? Or do they just get thrown to the bottom and ignored? What if you're a Pensive type whose intellectual Betterness is obvious but who can't help himself from showing it off and drawing fire?
Every time I job hop, expectations decrease while Income increases. If you are a low-level person, you are presumed to be LOW LEVEL. Everything you do is scrutinised, and presumed to be bad. Showing up to a job wherein you make <30k is like DWB. Guilty until proven innocent. You are presumed to be devoid of virtue, and not to be trusted. You will never advance because you are not worthy.
In any unsophisticated system/archetype, for instance, feudalism, or the antebellum south, caste systems proliferate. When all we're talking about is cotton/potatoes, any association with Labour reduces one's status to such an extent that he is No One, and lives to be beaten down and oppressed by his betters.
The remuneration itself is representative of one's caste. It is the tribute that the caste system owes to each of its members for maintaining it. This is why it's impossible to get more than some pathetic 5% raise anywhere no matter what - to receive more is an affront to the caste system.
If the company you work for provides a commodity, like french fries, or cleaning shit out of septic tanks, or groceries, then you are a slave who exists only to enrich his betters, because that's how it has to be. Every bit of dignity afforded to the worker comes at the expense of management and its bureaucracy, and they will fight tooth and nail to preserve the status quo. The Civil War was an example of this.
Date: April 14th, 2017 2:56 PM Author: hideous tanning salon
Cr. As I've grown more senior I get to work fewer hours with a lot less micromanaging to put up with, and very little accountability overall. The world isn't fair.
Date: March 28th, 2019 9:44 AM Author: Bateful vermilion hall striped hyena
Great thread. Cowgod rules. Accountability in-house at a megacorp is non existent at the VP level and above. Your job as an executive is to spin stories to your bosses that justify whatever took place recently as all part of some broader plan that they announced and/or in service of some grand scheme that you know they want to sell to their peers and up the chain to their bosses. It’s hilarious how fluffy it all is. The trendy thing that our CEO has been into this year is “introducing ‘agile values’ into the broader organization” so this entire year has been essentially a test of how well our execs can memorize buzz words and bullshit with a new vocabulary about whatever their team fucked up and/or whatever dumbass “projects” they wasted their time doing. It’s preposterous. The only good thing about it is that it can often function as a legal form of age discrimination bc boomers decaying brains don’t learn new tricks as well as Gen X and Millennials do, and even when they can remember the buzzwords they look ridiculous trying to be hip to the latest corporate fad.
THE HIGHER UP YOU GO: THE MORE PEOPLE YOU HAVE UNDER YOUR BUS
As I "move up" in my company, and also as I stay longer and get "years" ahead of new hires on my level, I have more and more people to throw under the bus. Or if we hire someone and there's a task I hate, I can slowly move it to the "new guy" because it is a "good fit for their new role and I am over-burdened". It's great.
They did it to me. I survived. You move to a new job. It repeats.
I'm not having new people clean poop, dude. I'm having them shuffle paper A instead of B. It's not keeping them in the office late on a Friday, that's for sure.
I got thrown under the bus this week infront of a client for something that I had followed up with from my boss in multiple emails that she ignored. That type of shit is spineless and whatever you might get by but your colleagues will hate you and it will undermine any desire they have to do good work for you in the future. That's not how I want to get by in life
My old boss used to give me all of the work and just sit on his ass and review it. He gave me no credit for anything, didn't let me speak to clients and they tell me in meetings that I should talk more and I'd just immediately look at him and he would scramble like a little CUCK. Again, that's not the type of boss I want to be
TBF, I am not the boss. Let's make that clear. As a boss I think I'd be great.
Your problem is with a hierarchy. I am not "on top" of the people as their boss. It's just seniority brings advantages. These "people" have no fucking clue I suggested to anyone that they shuffle papers B and C instead of me. And TBF, that's because I am now shuffling papers D and E which were not previously in my job.
I'm legit sorry about your boss. I've had those, too.
You don't need to have tenure to do that. Job-hopping bosspricks can do it too. I had it done to me so bad once it was literally 100% of his workload pushed off. The prick was free to engage in e-mail battles and attend meetings superciliously, and engage with me in arguments about the quality of my work that he Lost which just made him angrier and caused him to lose even more hair before badmouthing me to other bosspricks. You are no one if you do a "job."
how am I supposed to push back in the above situations? Im not about to get into a blame game infront of a client - I might get shitcanned for that. I let them know I didn't appreciate it afterwards. I'm just putting in my time and shifting to another company and having the equivalent of their job
You're supposed to prevent it from ever happening to begin with with panache, virility, or not being in a shitty job to begin with. Why shitconsulting? Why not MBB?
Date: April 14th, 2017 3:14 PM Author: avocado space
This is true. Compensation just ratifies the social status hierarchy. It has little to do with talent.
There are exceptions. If you change industries, you can see higher pay but worse conditions or vice versa. For example, I'd rather be a $120k professor than a $150k lawyer.
Date: April 14th, 2017 3:24 PM Author: avocado space
Prestigious employers often treat people like garbage but that's because you can go down the prestige gradient but never up. It's just how prestige works. The people who set the system up (and it should be legal to beat the smegma out of them, because it could solve our country's morale issues) made it that way.
So, BigLaw sucks but it puts you high on the prestige gradient and that means more options later. If you don't capitalize on those options, you're just fucked, but the likelihood is that most people will be better off having done BL than if they hadn't.
Duly credited, friend. This is why the notion that one deserves a certain increase in income because he is "taking on more responsibility" or whatever is such an affront to The System. It is only by convincing others of your Betterness that one may increase his income potential.
Date: April 14th, 2017 3:21 PM Author: avocado space
Exactly! You have to be careful about it, though.
Like, take someone like Pensive. Everyone knows that he's smarter than all those fucks, but he pisses people off. The Betterness has to be an imperious Brahmin coolness, not the hot indignation of someone whose brain runs 300 percent faster than everyone else's and gets a chip on his shoulder.
This "Betterness" isn't about being smarter or harder working. It's just about a sense of intrinsic genetic superiority that people accept because they're not even aware that they got out-framed.
Yeah you either have it or you don't. I have a juxtaposition of two bosspricks that is relevant to this subthread.
One has the thinnest job description I've ever seen yet overcommits and gets yelled at by his betters every time he does anything, although by my reckoning his work is of the highest quality I have ever seen. I think his father was an SSDI bro so upbringing was shot. Chip on his shoulder, unmanly, always talking about how he is amazing and others suck, and that he could do a better job than them.
One has the second thinnest job description I've ever seen. Chip on his shoulder, unmanly, always talking about he is amazing and others suck, but there is a SUBTLE difference that implies that the betterness is derived from others' inherent inferiority. He never implied he would do a better job, rather, he subtly implies that even doing ANY job at the task at hand is a mark of inferiority, and he has but no shame about doing nothing whatsoever, like Richie Rich badmouthing his servants or something.
Date: April 14th, 2017 3:40 PM Author: avocado space
Huh. Interesting. Are you familiar with the Loser/Clueless/Sociopath theory?
I think your first bossprick is a Clueless. He generates recurring commitments and overperforms and that's why his bosses don't like him.
Your second one is a true-blue Sociopath. He wears hate on his sleeve but he hates people in a way that is subtle enough that, rather than reacting violently, they just accept it.
BTW I'm reading your 2015 post. It's more right than wrong, but you're completely off the mark about startup founder as a Nerd job. You have Jocks who are used for their 100-hour work ethic and you have Preps running the show.
You could cast some of this in RPG terms. Jocks are meat shields who take damage. Nerds are mages who need to be protected but are massively powerful with support.
What do you think of Pensive/MOC? Seems like an interesting case study, an obvious 150+ who combines the true-blue nerd believer mentality with a touch of troll sociopathy. He's like a combination of every clique. The arrogance of a Jock and Prep, the cerebralness of a Nerd, the bitterness of a Loser and Scumbag, etc.
I'd need a link to Pensive, I'm not some old timer.
The Clique identifiers are readily apparent on phenotypic terms. A Jock is one who looks like a Jock, i.e. good at sports and lost his virginity before he got his driver's licence. I don't have any experience in tech but I can't imagine there are a ton of non-technical Jocks telling Nerds what to do, although I may be too optimistic.
Date: April 14th, 2017 3:57 PM Author: avocado space
I sent you an email. You check the hatefultoad address, right?
I'd be curious to hear what you think of my RPG character class taxonomy.
Prep = Thief, but using social agility rather than dexterity.
Jock = Fighter. Meat shield. You hire him as a grunt and make him work 100 hours per week.
Nerd = Wizard. Extremely fragile but, if supported by a good party, incredibly fucking powerful.
Woman = Healer. Of course, some women are bitches and heal the enemies. Women have a different brand of wizardry. Women can be all of the other classes, but the effect of a beautiful woman is to heal.
Scumbag = Enemy Mook, like a goblin. Low stats, easy to kill. Can be fun to beat up on but pointless because they never stop coming.
I have never seen someone receive a "linear" promotion, i.e. receiving their newly-departed boss's job, that went well. The FEW times that I've seen it, the promoted employee drew fire instantaneously from multiple angles. First of all, their "raise," if they get one, puts them at least 50% behind the old boss. Second - a new boss, suspicious of their abilities. Embittered subordinates. Everyone else, sensing their weakness and happy to exploit it. Anything they try to do to assert themselves will be seen as overplaying their hand. Everyone sees them as the insignificant prick that were 2 weeks ago.
More often than not, in an overwhelming majority of cases, the promotion does. not. happen. If you ever get a true promotion, and encounter even the slightest resistance from the organisation, you should polish your resume and leave the Firm after "2 years, 1 month," or whatever. This is not the start of your career at the Firm, it is the end of it.
Date: April 14th, 2017 4:00 PM Author: avocado space
This is so on-point that it hurts.
You never want to be seen as a boss-killer because no one trusts boss-killers. The person who benefits from (or is perceived to benefit from) a dead body is assumed to be the murderer, regardless of what's true.
Ha, wasn't even getting into that. I meant if the fellow were to retire, or receive a promotion himself, GOOD LUCK on receiving any kind of "promotion," you worthless internal candidate. If you were worth anything, you wouldn't be in such a lame position. And god help you if some other hapless manager's sinecure was just rendered redundant, because it's all too convenient to fill your old boss's job with just that sort of fellow, because, well, they couldn't just *lay off* someone at that level when they're rendered worthless, because you see, they're too... valuable!
Younger people, especially Millenials, are brainwashed to accept the idea of "Unpaid Internships" almost without question in numerous fields that have some sort of prestige attached to them. Advertising, Art, Creative work, Publishing but increasingly professional stuff like Law and Finance. This is symptomatic of a disconnect between what it means to "Work" and to derive "Meaningful Economic Benefit," otherwise known as "Getting Ahead" in society at large.
The reenfoeffment and Neo-Feudalism that has been created by Boomers is largely due to a period of absolute zero interest rates that has never occurred in the millennia when previous economic history has been written.
It has proven to be without a doubt is extremely corrosive to Private (and possibly Public) sector institutions that once were reliable and efficient in addition to providing good jobs for a larger swath of the population. Interest rates at near zero levels essentially mean that human labor (i.e condensed, commoditized units of labor known as money) is valued at "Zero," which provides fuel for Mass Migration/Globalization (i.e a race to the bottom in Labor input costs either through mass migration or intensive Automation)
As time has gone on, the Boomers who inherited their positions before the financial crisis have developed a sort of Neo-Noblesse Oblige about extending employment and work offers to younger people in the working world in the aftermath of the financial crisis.
These boomers inherited a world that they did nothing to create but will now fight with everything they have to preserve their positions for as long as possible in. I think what is most telling is that they have also grown increasingly aware of how irrelevant they are in the work environment now due to being helpless in front of most technology and they have also inverted the pyramid to the point where there are less and less underlings remaining they can use to prop them up. This is of course due to their desire to wring more money and power out of their failing institutions, as they have done little or anything to invest in the coming generations as their for-bearers did.
The boomers in power at these institutions basically exist to simply remain in power, and have long ago abandoned the hope of advancing their Firm or Company's future because in many industries it has become abundantly clear that most boomer dominated firms will eventually cease to exist, either through obsolescence or a revolt of their oppressed underlings. I think that if one were to look at the current 20-40 year old age demographic in most professions affected by Boomerism, there has not been a time when the ones who are responsible for creating and maintaining economic value have been so disproportionately compensated relative to the nominal figureheads since the Russian Revolution.
I think that as time and technological forces inevitably displace boomers once and for all, this will be hastened by the successive generations abandoning larger institutions in favor of smaller and more partnership/equitable labor arrangements and compensation structures in Law and Finance (as had existed before the 1980's or so)
Date: April 14th, 2017 6:06 PM Author: Nudist Swashbuckling Crackhouse
I dunno if I buy this. XOXO really gets biglaw in a lot of ways, but in my experience partners are desperate for people who they can hand discrete shit to and not worry about it anymore because that person will just take care of it. That's what they really want from associates. People who are good at just getting shit done tend to do pretty well, i.e. not necessarily make partner, but can stick around for 8 years and exit softly.
I know this is against prevailing wisdom, but so many people are incompetent that competent help is usually pretty valued in my experience. I do agree that doesn't translate to $ and internal people are going to get treated like shit as compared to external hires on salary.
Date: April 14th, 2017 6:24 PM Author: Nudist Swashbuckling Crackhouse
I get that. There are two main counterpoints to this screed/manifesto.
One, the central premise is that good work is not valued. In my experience it is, because it's rare. Particularly when the task involves some amount of judgment in determining the best way to get to a (sometimes ill-defined) end goal. Some people, even competent people, need a lot of hand holding and some people you can just say, please get from point A to point B and they'll more or less take care of it. People love working with the latter.
Two, is whether there are tangible benefits to being valued. I think there are in terms of better work, job security, treatment and investment by mentors etc. I grant that they don't get paid more and it's not an obvious line as to how they wind up with better life outcomes, but in my experience, they do.
I get this comes off as very pollyannaish and obviously the correlation between competence and good outcomes is rough, but does anyone not think it's there?
And I'm talking about a job where everyone is at least passably smart. The bar to stand out is much lower in a variety of other professions/jobs.
I don't disagree with your point in the least bit, but allow me to elucidate. You are looking at the microcosm of a law firm, but the point being made is at the macro level. Still, you can see how an associate exists to be run roughshod, and a partner exists to profit off of his labours. Any good liberal artist versed in Marxism understands that dynamic. But what many seem to miss is that because shitboomers kick everything downhill indiscriminately and with such self-righteousness and insipidity, the higher one climbs up the ladder, and the more he is paid, the easier and more joyous *everything* gets. Labour is valued microecomically, but not macroeconomically. It is also valued asymetrically - for instance, a Law Firm has less hierarchy than a traditional corporation, where an Engineer's work may filter its way through several levels of management, none of which are empowered to influence his career favourably. To borrow a turn of phrase from a poaster upthread, remuneration ratifies the social status hierarchy. It is a tribute that the System pays towards a certain number of fortunate individuals who comprise a bureaucracy that helps BossPricks maintain power. But it's more than that. In many situations, those who labour are looked down upon. Manual labour is looked down upon universally (except when it's being glorified by poasters). Any form of labour is something to be manipulated and exploited by BossPricks. But again, this is somewhat common knowledge. What eludes many, again, is that with more status, comes more compensation, comes more respect... and with more respect, comes fewer people who dare reproach you, and thus less being asked of you. You'll see that people who maek it like this can often suck at most things in their jobs/lives because they CAN. And why does status and respect have such a relationship with remuneration/wealth? Because it DOES.... because we're human, and it's the status quo since time immemorial. Steve Jobs, shitboomer CEO? Amazing! The Engineers that did everything? Outsource those entitled motherfuckers! Caucasoids labouring and performing technical feats is an anachronism. Join the bureaucracy and aide in the advancement thereofof as it tighten its grip on society - or, if your GPA/SAT is insufficient, become one of its ever-expanding base of NEET wards.
Generally, the less money a job pays, the more shitty it is.
This is counter intuitive. You would expect that the less money something pays the easier it would be. Or perhaps it's less stressful. I have not found this to be always true, though it is true sometimes. Like take IT for instance. It allows me time to surf, poast, etc. Can you do that as a dollar general cashier?
This is true also btw for colleges. The more upper tier you are, the less cut throat it is. For instance the t14 I attended did not even have proper A,B,C grades. It was understood that once you were there, you were golden. Grades schmades. You'd get biglaw or something similar. Across town was a school that was ranked maybe in the top 50. Cut throat as hell.
I think what happens is that once you are accepted as having a certain IQ level via testing or interviewing, people generally leave you the fuck alone. On the other hand, once you have signaled to the world that you are low iq (by accepting a job at McD etc) or attending Cooley, people just shit on you more and more. The idea being that you are too low iq to even know that you are being excessively shat on.
180. I make 4x what I did right out of college and that job, while "easier" and perhaps even less stressful, was much more difficult because I was watched every second on the clock.
Date: September 29th, 2018 8:55 PM Author: rough-skinned vibrant parlor
Just spam your resume on LinkedIn whenever you've had enough..Tell the potential new employer you'll leave your current position for $xxx. Just did this last week
Date: February 7th, 2019 8:22 AM Author: histrionic abode
true except in tech
the skillset isn't that hard at top levels so when ur paying $500k to developers there is immense stress so they don't farm ur job away to some $200k 22 year old kid who is way faster and better.
meanwhile the loser IT type guy who can barely use SQL making $100k flat has almost no expectations and can hand in shitty code.
Date: December 21st, 2022 11:57 AM Author: Bearded Rusted Digit Ratio Mood
super credited post. there may be a few edge case exceptions. but there's a truth here that applies pretty universally and posters would be wise to understand the gist of it
Date: January 20th, 2024 10:28 AM Author: Tripping magenta center circlehead
Waffle House short order cooks have the worst job in creation but they make $300 a day in cash, pay no taxes, get food stamps and Section 8 and have nothing to complain about in life cause they fuck the waitresses
In short — blue collar fucks have it better than half the white collar clean job havers who are W2’d like sheep.