this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
726 points (98.9% liked)
Greentext
4390 readers
2206 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't know if they have much of a case to sue you, if you fall through the cracks on their own negligence. Fire you, yes. Sue, I am doubtful most larger businesses would even try. They'd rather solve the problem and sweep it under the carpet in my experience. Not USA experience of course, but still the attitude would be similar I expect.
I would worry a bit about whether they're allowed to give negative references though. Because if so, it might not be so easy to get another job after.
Best move would be to line up another job to start like a month before the review, and never reach the review stage. Even if discovered, most people that would "know" wouldn't really be driven to report anything if they're leaving anyway. The "not my problem, and this will make it my problem" attitude in big companies is real.
I think in Spain there was a legal case, but that person was paid for decades without any work. And it was also public funds, as the employer was some municipality iirk
I looked at that. Actually I would argue that was even more negligence by the management there. I mean they couldn't even say how long he'd not been working for.
But in reality he was paid for at least 6 years of work (and they suspected more) and only fined for 1 year of pay. So, he's still a winner I think. And yes, public funds likely did help in bringing that case forward.
Most larger private businesses tend to avoid going to a court for such things unless they need to in my experience.
I mean it's kinda embarrassing for the company to pay people to do nothing. It makes them seem a bit incompetent. I worked in a military branch where the three biggest fish of the branch got fired (maybe sued) because they hardly did anything. They would go to work, and then go on hunting trips together or shit like that. They did that for years, but they didn't really know how long. So now people obviously began to wonder what else they are doing with their money, and why no one realised that there were 3 people making an absurd amount of money for a job that is already super chill and overpaid, that didn't even do the work of one competent employee. I remember they had trouble finding replacements, so no one did their job until i left like a year or two later.
I would love to hear someone leverage this negative review as cleverness in an interview though