u/vCentered

Your problem is you don't even recognize what the problem is.

The problem isn't that this guy does all these things. The problem is that nobody else does.

You're holding him accountable for their laziness or inability because you know, even if only subconsciously, there's a better chance of getting something out of him than the rest of them.

Instead of holding them accountable and expecting them to be good at their own jobs, you're adding to his workload and making him responsible for making them useful.

It blows my mind that this is getting downvoted

Kudos was my first thought.

My second thought was actually he didn't come clean at all, he knew he was caught and it was the only card left to play.

So here's the thing. We've hired a few guys over the last few years for highly paid senior roles who were great on paper and interviewed really well.

After being hired it was all downhill. They dragged out tasks that were designed to ease them into the role and should have been easy wins. Disappeared frequently when WFH. Struggled with basic concepts. Frequently needed screen share sessions to accomplish anything. Constantly pawning work off on junior staff. All in the first six months.

They were either lazy shit birds or lied about their skills and experience.

I would say most guys probably embellish experience or project contributions to some degree but with what we've dealt with if I contract-to-hire'd you and found out you lied on your resume as far as completely fabricating an employer it would be an immediate thanks but no thanks.

What the heck is this?

https://preview.redd.it/wivhqpwfv7uh1.png?width=1008&format=png&auto=webp&s=543131c2723a7bfa8d5aa52c29caeb79d370069e

I'm in a mood to be jaded and pessimistic.

Considering A&M is probably still mad over that nothing burger Brady quote about practice speakers and we're probably going to be real high on ourselves after beating Florida?

I think we swagger out onto the field Saturday like we've already got it, A&M will score early and decisively which will tear us down to earth, and we'll be real sad about it.

They'll chirp, we'll do some dumb shit and get caught out. We'll do something good and offset it immediately with something dumb. Probably three times.

A&M will hold us off most of the game before a late rally where we remember we're half decent if we actually focus on football and not what our tuddy celebration is going to be, but it will be too little too late.

The podcasts will all pat themselves on the back and be reassured that all is right in the world now that Missouri lost to a "real" SEC team.

He needs more money, a more fuel efficient vehicle, or less driving.

Less driving means more WFH or a look at traffic patterns to understand if starting or stopping later or earlier substantially reduces the commute time.

A more fuel efficient vehicle because if he is driving an hour a day in a 7 MPG gas guzzler that he isn't actually using for work, that is a personal choice that he has some responsibility for. I understand most people can't just run out and buy a different vehicle, but it doesn't change the reality.

Then there's the hardest of all corporate problems to solve - money. He needs leverage for this. That means showing that he's underpaid or that his wages haven't kept up with inflation or the industry or a competing offer. And still none of that guarantees anything.

Something I struggle to get my younger staff to understand is that the company is not responsible for offsetting their personal financial decisions. Car gets terrible mileage? Your problem. Took the job knowing the commute would suck? Your problem. "Can't afford to X" but you very openly told me about your $1300/mo car note and you're always talking about all the expensive things you do outside of work? Your problem. Yes I have had people try to argue with me that they need a substantial raise because they can't afford their lifestyle.

It would be great if we could pay people more "just because" but that's not how it works.

We do our best to make things happen for standout employees but it's not because we're saints, it's because they've demonstrated that value and whatever we're trying to get for them balances against the cost of them potentially leaving and needing to be replaced.

I am irrationally happy that our kU hate has made it into another fucking school's Reddit.

No we replaced all the base and added beadboard and chair rail. It wasn't easy and there are spots where you can definitely tell we messed up/are DIYers.

It's still way better than this though and here's the thing. I didn't sell it to anyone like I was a professional

I'm an IT guy with no carpentry experience and we just redid our nursery ourselves and my corners are better than that.

It's going there one way or another

As far as I'm concerned the official score is 45-10.

Im not sure if the rules of superstition allow you to know

Buddy

Monitors are cheap. Replacement hires are expensive.

Same. I'm counting the days with 20 years to go

My experience with manufacturing and industry is that they are very status quo and stability oriented when it comes to technology. Very "if it's not broke, don't fix it".

I don't know you from the next guy on here, so some of this is going to be general advice and not meant personally.

You're the young guy coming in wanting to change everything. Even if you approach all these things tactfully and professionally, it can still be hard for the old hats not to take it as personal criticism of what they've done, built, or what they know.

It could also be something of a trauma response from someone coming and wanting to change what "works" and is "stable". I'll happily admit to being a little triggered when I first hear that someone new is angling to change something before I understand why and it's usually because I had to fight a three sided war between the business, the technology, and my personal time just to get it to where it's been for the last three years.

The only real advice I have for you there is to be cognizant and considerate of these possibilities. You see it as modernization and making things better and based on what you've described you're probably right, they might see it as a lot of change that they'll have to be accountable for if it rocks the boat.

You can stick it out and see if you can to a mutual understanding with your manager to get their support and modernize things.

If you can't get that, I would leave. The only thing worse than your current situation is spending a prolonged amount of time in it and not being able to show that you were able to improve it. Otherwise it just looks like you don't have any current/relevant experience that future employers will want.

Well for starters you are asking questions that my security team would usually be asking me

In my experience as a former overachiever most managers are like this although I think the idea that they are "rewarding" high achievers with more work, and more complex work, is self serving.

What they're doing is reaching for the best tool in their belt. Because it's easier for them as the manager. Not because they are rewarding the employee.

They'll find things to do with the other staff because in the back of their minds they know it's their job but the reality is they don't get used as much, they don't get the hard work or the stress of performing with visibility.

The average/under performers get enough work that the manager can convince themselves that they're keeping them productive while they push Ole Reliable to the edge of human capacity.

They're not actually managing the people, they're managing the work.

Eventually your high achievers will wear down or realize their peers are making the same money and being fed light busywork because they've shown no ambition or initiative.

When the high achiever asks for help, the manager will pile on even more by telling them if they want their life to get any easier they need to also take on the responsibility for developing the rest of the team and making them more useful before they can expect anyone else to take on more work.

The answer is always for the person who does more to do more.

Yeah it's not even in my top 50 and I don't know what any of those are.

Yeah this is what I came here to say. They are not even remotely in the same realm.

Can they force you? Like make the police come to your house and hold you at gunpoint?

No.

Can they make it mandatory/a requirement for employment and terminate you if you refuse? Probably.

What's more likely, in my opinion, or at least more reasonable, is that they would make a snowflake policy for you and provide you with a $30 passkey. You would annoy and inconvenience a number of people and probably develop a reputation for being difficult but firing you is much more expensive and much more risky from a company's perspective.

They'd have to fire you, maybe provide unemployment, severance, pay out accrued vacation, you might sue, they'd have to train your replacement. All of which is much much more expensive than providing you with a FIDO2 key.

As others have said there are options available to companies besides requiring people to use phones. It obviously require the company to spend money and manage the inventory and lifecycle of those devices to provide those options.

I get the argument but it's always been a weird hill to die on, to me.

The apps occupy very little space. You are probably using them or something similar in your personal life or engaging in behaviors or activities that put your data or privacy at much greater risk than simply installing a well known authenticator app.

In this day and age of information security where 99% of people have flagship smartphones, I kind of feel like people should just suck it up. Many people spend half their workday on their phone scrolling social media anyway so it's a bit rich to be offended when asked to just use it for MFA once or twice a day, or less.

For those who don't have smartphones it makes a little more sense - it's asking a lot more of someone to take on an extra $50-$80/mo that they aren't already spending.

For companies requiring actual work from phone - like email and chat/meeting apps, yeah, I think they should provide a stipend or reimbursement.

That game was a slap fight I'd prefer to forget about.

Our helpdesk managed to convince leadership that them receiving calls was bad and that SSPR would drastically reduce their call volume.

Before we got married my wife's realtor convinced her that a house's long history and disclosed recent foundation issues had been fixed and could never become a problem again. Despite the previous seller doing nothing.

She also convinced my wife to use her preferred home inspector who did not look at the disclosures or anything to do with the foundation.

So anyway I'm about to spend $20k on yard grading and foundation repair.