Stephen wrote:
> Doctor John <joh### [at] homecom> wrote:
> 
>> <snip>
>> Look at it this way, Andrew,
> 
> Hi John,
> 
> Are you back in the land of the living? ;)
> 
> Stephen
> 
> 
Yup, large as life and twice as nasty :-D
Will email you soon and try to arrange belated Birthday, Christmas and
New Year beer sampling session.

BTW Uxbridge?! WTF?

John
-- 
"Eppur si muove" - Galileo Galilei

Post a reply to this message

Doctor John <joh### [at] homecom> wrote:
> Yup, large as life and twice as nasty :-D
> Will email you soon and try to arrange belated Birthday, Christmas and
> New Year beer sampling session.
>

:-)

> BTW Uxbridge?! WTF?
>


WTF indeed!


term.

Stephen

Post a reply to this message

And so, the hour draws near.

This time last week, everything was fine. Then on Monday, this calamity 
was unleashed on us. There have been rumous and wild speculation. There 
have been two-on-one interviews. There have been talks about pay cuts or 
redundancies. What new twists will unfold today? Only time will tell.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> What new twists will unfold today? Only time will tell.

Hmm...

Just seen somebody walk past my office in tears. Somebody else is 
sitting outside in the reception area staring blankly into space, not 
even blinking. Another person just walked past my office and said 
something like "it's been nice knowing you".

Some seriously ****ed-up **** happening here today. And the appointed 
hour has not even arrived yet! o_O

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> What new twists will unfold today? Only time will tell.

Well, well... Four people no longer work here. Two of them are brand 
new, two of them have been here longer than I have. None were especially 
crucial. (Two were part-time, one was a trainee project manager who, 
quite frankly, was rubbish anyway, and the last was just another lab bod.)

I am *kind* of annoyed at having spent an entire day fixing a PC for a 
guy who no longer works here. :-P

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 22 May 2009 15:30:54 +0100, Invisible wrote:

> Invisible wrote:
>> What new twists will unfold today? Only time will tell.
> 
> Well, well... Four people no longer work here. Two of them are brand
> new, two of them have been here longer than I have. None were especially
> crucial. (Two were part-time, one was a trainee project manager who,
> quite frankly, was rubbish anyway, and the last was just another lab
> bod.)
> 
> I am *kind* of annoyed at having spent an entire day fixing a PC for a
> guy who no longer works here. :-P

Well, it's better than being idle and having management think that 
because you're idle, you're not needed. :-)

Seriously, layoffs are never fun, not for those who are let go, nor for 
those who are left behind.  I've been through far too many over the years 
and seen some very good people let go (and some not so good people kept 
for some bizarre reason).

Jim

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> I am *kind* of annoyed at having spent an entire day fixing a PC for a
>> guy who no longer works here. :-P
> 
> Well, it's better than being idle and having management think that 
> because you're idle, you're not needed. :-)
> 
> Seriously, layoffs are never fun, not for those who are let go, nor for 
> those who are left behind.  I've been through far too many over the years 
> and seen some very good people let go (and some not so good people kept 
> for some bizarre reason).

Apparently numerous people made the suggestion that we let Fathead go... 
but unsurprisingly, that didn't happen. (I imagine is salary alone would 
bring us back to break-even. :-P But he's good at all the management 
power-speak, so that's that.)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 23 May 2009 09:01:40 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> Apparently numerous people made the suggestion that we let Fathead go...
> but unsurprisingly, that didn't happen. (I imagine is salary alone would
> bring us back to break-even. :-P But he's good at all the management
> power-speak, so that's that.)

That's a shame.  While it's possible to empathize with the boss if let 
go, that doesn't mean that such a move can't be a good thing for those 
left behind when the boss is a poor leader..

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> Apparently numerous people made the suggestion that we let Fathead go...
>> but unsurprisingly, that didn't happen. (I imagine is salary alone would
>> bring us back to break-even. :-P But he's good at all the management
>> power-speak, so that's that.)
> 
> That's a shame.  While it's possible to empathize with the boss if let 
> go, that doesn't mean that such a move can't be a good thing for those 
> left behind when the boss is a poor leader..

As far as we can tell, Fathead doesn't give a fig what happens to the 
company. Being the "site manager" looks good on his CV, and he gets a 
big fat pay cheque. Beyond that... he doesn't give a damn.

I find it particularly inappropriate to be walking round the building 
whistling cheerfully while people are breaking down in tears because 
they just lost their income.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 23 May 2009 21:25:42 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> As far as we can tell, Fathead doesn't give a fig what happens to the
> company. Being the "site manager" looks good on his CV, and he gets a
> big fat pay cheque. Beyond that... he doesn't give a damn.

I know people like that.  Tends to be very corrosive indeed.

> I find it particularly inappropriate to be walking round the building
> whistling cheerfully while people are breaking down in tears because
> they just lost their income.

You and me alike.  It shows a lot about the guy's character, that's for 
sure.

Jim

Post a reply to this message