Yeah, it's a real shame that some companies actually pay their employees what they're owed. Maybe after that, they can do away with having to pay the employees at all.
Nothing you've said is relevant to his post. It doesn't fucking matter if "margins are narrowed". Fuck you, pay me. This attempt to squeeze free work out of employees is nothing short of abuse, and any employer that would condone it doesn't deserve to be in business.
Agreed, that's my problem too. The bigger problem is that, because of "economic difficulties", they forced us all to take a week of vacation at Thanksgiving, and a week at Christmas. No option; if you didn't enter it in, they'd just take it. Unfortunately, that completely fucks those of us over who didn't want to use our vacation then, and instead wanted to use it at another time.
Yeah, you can go fuck yourself. So what if the Chinese would love to have our shitty working conditions? That doesn't change a fucking thing, you troll.
We don't live in China for a reason. Most of us actually like living in a country where human rights are respected. Don't you dare try to drag us down to their level with your corporate ass kissing.
I would hazard to guess that being punished for actually using that vacation time would be a breech of contract.
The problem is, most companies won't actually say they're punishing you for using the vacation time. They'll say they're doing it because you're, "Not a team player". Now it's up to you to prove that it was actually because of the vacation time.
Because your example right there IS NOT COMMON. It's not the majority.
If every single company in existence, including low paying ones not only offered adequate vacation time, but encouraged their employees to use it, then it wouldn't be a problem. There also wouldn't be stories like this.
Seriously, how can you idiots read articles like this one, and still determine that the lack of regulation actually works?
It's because the government has a bunch of the retarded asshats that believe "Companies will regulate themselves!" and think that the majority of companies will not only offer vacation time out of the goodness of their hearts, but that they'll actually let employees take it.
Business doesn't really see it that way, though. They'll see they laid off a bunch of people, and yet, the department is still producing the same with who's left. Even though the workers themselves might be exhausted, management keeps pushing them.
Further, absolutely nothing in this story, nor your post had anything to do with "government living within their means". You just decided to tag that on to try and deflect blame from those who truly deserve it: Company Management.
It's that attitude that's the biggest problem here. The enablers, like you, who allow this shit to happen, and even give the boss a smile when they are fucked over.
The problem is, given the economy, they can easily go out and find 10 people who'd be willing to do his job under those conditions. Well.... "willing" is a bit of a stretch. More like, "prefer that to starving".
It does mean that those stupid "household" analogies don't apply, though. The laws of economics are vastly different for governments than they are for households.
I do try to stay alert, because I don't want to come back to know that I forgot something important. So I'll check some e-mail just to keep me informed, and if I'm within reach and able to do so. I enjoy my vacations, but I'm not irresponsible you know?
Why would not checking email on your vacation be seen as "irresponsible"?
The only reason the NDA is necessary is that Microsoft doesn't want what patents were involved to get out, so they can be debunked. That is not a valid reason to me.
You're not talking logic at all. You used nothing logical in your post. You said that signing the deals was evidence that MS's patents are valid, when, without knowing the patents in question, you cannot make that conclusion at all.
The only logical conclusion you can come to is that the companies felt that the costs for paying the MS license fee was less than fighting it out in court. That's it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, it's a real shame that some companies actually pay their employees what they're owed. Maybe after that, they can do away with having to pay the employees at all.
Nothing you've said is relevant to his post. It doesn't fucking matter if "margins are narrowed". Fuck you, pay me. This attempt to squeeze free work out of employees is nothing short of abuse, and any employer that would condone it doesn't deserve to be in business.
Agreed, that's my problem too. The bigger problem is that, because of "economic difficulties", they forced us all to take a week of vacation at Thanksgiving, and a week at Christmas. No option; if you didn't enter it in, they'd just take it. Unfortunately, that completely fucks those of us over who didn't want to use our vacation then, and instead wanted to use it at another time.
Yeah, you can go fuck yourself. So what if the Chinese would love to have our shitty working conditions? That doesn't change a fucking thing, you troll.
We don't live in China for a reason. Most of us actually like living in a country where human rights are respected. Don't you dare try to drag us down to their level with your corporate ass kissing.
Should I *force* my over-dedicated employees to go home at 5 or to take vacations without bringing the iPhone?
Yes.
I would hazard to guess that being punished for actually using that vacation time would be a breech of contract.
The problem is, most companies won't actually say they're punishing you for using the vacation time. They'll say they're doing it because you're, "Not a team player". Now it's up to you to prove that it was actually because of the vacation time.
No, this is why we need the law to state that such actions are illegal, and we need the authorities to actually pursue cases against them.
Why does the law have to meddle in this?
Because your example right there IS NOT COMMON. It's not the majority.
If every single company in existence, including low paying ones not only offered adequate vacation time, but encouraged their employees to use it, then it wouldn't be a problem. There also wouldn't be stories like this.
Seriously, how can you idiots read articles like this one, and still determine that the lack of regulation actually works?
It's because the government has a bunch of the retarded asshats that believe "Companies will regulate themselves!" and think that the majority of companies will not only offer vacation time out of the goodness of their hearts, but that they'll actually let employees take it.
This is the attitude right here that's causing the problem.
Your entire position is god damned retarded. "Well, we can't stop them from fucking us, so rather than try, we might as well bend over!"
You know how you stop companies from going overseas? You tax the ever living fuck out of them, that's how.
Business doesn't really see it that way, though. They'll see they laid off a bunch of people, and yet, the department is still producing the same with who's left. Even though the workers themselves might be exhausted, management keeps pushing them.
Further, absolutely nothing in this story, nor your post had anything to do with "government living within their means". You just decided to tag that on to try and deflect blame from those who truly deserve it: Company Management.
It's that attitude that's the biggest problem here. The enablers, like you, who allow this shit to happen, and even give the boss a smile when they are fucked over.
The problem is, given the economy, they can easily go out and find 10 people who'd be willing to do his job under those conditions. Well.... "willing" is a bit of a stretch. More like, "prefer that to starving".
Ron Paul hates all kinds of government "intervention", including employee protection laws. He would see those gutted, or outright removed.
it doesn't mean the laws of economics don't apply
It does mean that those stupid "household" analogies don't apply, though. The laws of economics are vastly different for governments than they are for households.
but statistics also show that productivity for a group actually goes up if you fire a bad team member.
Except now you're implying that someone who does use their vacation time and doesn't work themselves to the bone is a "bad team member".
I do try to stay alert, because I don't want to come back to know that I forgot something important. So I'll check some e-mail just to keep me informed, and if I'm within reach and able to do so. I enjoy my vacations, but I'm not irresponsible you know?
Why would not checking email on your vacation be seen as "irresponsible"?
Even if he had the right job, I doubt he'd be thinking that.
There's far, far, far more to life than work. Especially when you work for someone else.
Even if you enjoy your job, I highly doubt you'll be thinking you wish you had more time to work.
Still doesn't change the fact that you're not purely beholden to what is on the Android market.
Actually, there is, given that Microsoft is a bigger company than most of the others.
The only reason the NDA is necessary is that Microsoft doesn't want what patents were involved to get out, so they can be debunked. That is not a valid reason to me.
You're not talking logic at all. You used nothing logical in your post. You said that signing the deals was evidence that MS's patents are valid, when, without knowing the patents in question, you cannot make that conclusion at all.
The only logical conclusion you can come to is that the companies felt that the costs for paying the MS license fee was less than fighting it out in court. That's it.