RE: A polite way....
You could use the appropriate acronym.
2400 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Apr 2008
Uhhhh!
Note the location of the office:
North Carolina, in the heart of Dixie, aka the South; loser of the War of the Confederacy (also known as the Civil War), and a place where ownership of blacks was legal.
Although it was more than a century and a half since the South lost, that attitude (of racism) is still alive and well. It is demonstrated by bumper stickers or license plate that feature a Confederate soldier and the stars and bars, and bear the phrase: "Forget, Hell"
So the allegations made do not surprise me one bit.
<quote>Is why you have to be very careful about who you hire in the first place.</quote>
Perhaps some of the downvoters might consider this:
"You would not want a convicted embezzler as your company's accountant, now would you???"
or some one who is a drug addict. (For the same reason - easy access to your bank accounts.)
<quote>The light grey on a white background paradigm seems to have spread from Apple</quote>
And the UI designers that implement it ought to be:The light grey on a white background paradigm seems to have spread from Apple
1) tied to a telephone pole, and whipped,
2) beaten with a baseball bat until most/all of their bones are broken,
3) have their eyes put out,
4) boiled in oil, and finally
5) burnt at the stake.
There are many people who need more contrast in a display screen, and those utilizing such a low contrast UI do not appear to take their needs into consideration. Inconsiderate bastards.
<quote>"manglement "
Are you 5?</quote>
NO, add 60 to your suggested number.
In the cited case, manglement is a truly deserved title. Those in charge of the company looked at their jobs as getting paid to FOAD, and let the `peons` do all of the work; running the company into the ground.
They misled the owners, causing the value of owners investment to slowly diminish over time. They made sure they rewarded themselves, and punished the employees by withholding raises.
So, YOU tell me what is a more appropriate label? Manglement fits perfectly!
Sometimes it is.
I have seen evil, wicked, mean and nasty used to drive out executives that can be (charitably) described as "entitled twats" after a change of ownership. The new owners wanted to send out a clear message to the employees: do your job, or else.
For those that showed up every day, did their best despite the laziness, indifference and effects of manglement, they had little to worry about. But manglement, feeling entitled to working from home instead of going in to the office; it was a wake up call.
The general opinion of manglement was that they (manglement) believed it was OK to FOAD[1], and collect a paycheck for doing it. Manglement felt that the previous owners basically "gave them the company to run", and they chose to run it into the ground, instead of doing their jobs.
Meanwhile the other employees busted their asses keeping the company running, and finally, the former owners got tired of the lies and excuses, and sold the company quietly.
Did the shit hit the turbine blades the morning the new owners arrived!!!!
For each executive in the list, the response was the same: "Working from home."
That did NOT sit too well with the new owners. They consulted their lawyers, and then unleashed hell on manglement, which occurred one morning when the asset recovery agents showed up at manglement's homes with court warrants and sheriffs deputies. The warrants were for all company property and documents at that residence. Those agents took their sweet time tearing up the place, looking for everything.
Manglement was told that in no uncertain terms, their work from home privileges were abolished, and manglement better get their lazy asses into the office.
The next morning, they got sacked without severance pay. When word of the sackings reverberated through the company, the morale problems started to disappear. The employees were no longer stuck with stagnant wages while manglement rewarded themselves with raises and bonuses for incompetence and laziness. It took less than a year for things to turn around.
[1] (in this instance) Fuck Off All Day
<quote>OK, hands up. Who here trusts code from Sony (for example)?</quote>
Not me for one.
I played one of their rootkit infected CD's on my personal development computer; and lost everything.
Fortunately, I had a recent backup,
I promised myself - never DO THAT[1] again.
[1] Use a development system for entertainment purposes.
<quote>I see the position of Business Continuity Manager coming available soon.</quote>
You can probably add Executive VP of Operations to that list. (One would expect that PHB to supervise the BCM.)
Icon, because it is appropriate.
I wonder, did they hire anyone from the UK banking industry???
<quote>There is, according to US military research a 16-18% retard ratio in the human population - up to 18% of a given population can't be trained to point a rifle in the correct direction and use it. Yet we have given these people a Brexit vote... I'll let you do the math..
Oh... Right.. Sorry.
If you ever wondered by the way why the Conservative party get in most often - you can thank the retard ratio.</quote>
I think that is also the best explanation for tRump being elected in the USofA.
<quote>Professor Gus Uht, engineering professor-in-residence at the University of Rhode Island, USA, argues that everyone would be safer if those who discover serious vulnerabilities refrain from revealing the details to the public, allowing the flaws to be secretly fixed by vendors and developers, and updates pushed out before anyone crafts suitable exploits to hack victims.</quote>
OK Prof, what do you do about those vendors who just sit on their hands, and ignore the bugs???
My opinion of your position is lower than the bottom of a cesspool!
I gave you an upvote for clearly expressing your dissatisfaction with this intolerable situation.
I had a similar epiphany some 12 years ago, and made the decision to completely rid myself of anything Microsoft. (See icon)
Considering that amount of cheaply1 produced tat flowing out of the Far East, is it a bad idea to allow only higher power levels for products that are certified to comply with the regs?
Cut too many corners, and that waiver can be revoked.
1 As in poorly engineered or manufactured. Current security of IoT tat is a prime example of this shove it out the door quickly and cheaply mentality.
<quote>The reason that one truly is forbidden, is because it let's us know the real truth about managers (who have their sense of humour surgically removed when they sign the contract to become manager).</quote>
The contractual lobotomy, the prime reason why I turned down a promotion to manglement.
Anyway, it is more """fun""" to take cheap shots at them, rather than having ones taken at you.
<quote>We should all hope the cash spigot is left wide open through lack of regulation so executive bonuses can trickle down.</quote>
Trickle down, MY ASS!!!
Do you honestly think the executives are going to share those bonuses???
There will be a giant sink stopper at the drain of the executive level preventing any such "trickle down".
<quote>And you tell me just what management tools he has at his disposal.</quote>
IF it is like a former mangler I had to endure, those tools are:
1) a big mouth, and
2) steel toed work boots.
If the use of tool #1 doesn't achieve the desired result, then judicious use of tool #2 to your ass usually does.
<quote> Does not take long to buy the hardware ... at $156/month.</quote>
You are right, it doesn't.
But.....
In the USofA, no thanks to the Tax Laws, you run into the old debate - CAPEX vs OPEX.
Buy it outright for (let's use a round figure of) $3700. That's $3700 straight out of your pocket (and possibly out of current profits), and you have to depreciate it over its expected lifespan. Assume a residual value of $100 at the end of a 36 month lifespan; you get to 'write down' the value by $100/monthly. Again, assume that you bought it in early January, and your first year writedown is only $1200. You have to carry the remaining $2400 as an asset, and can not depreciate it until year 2 and 3 before it no longer benefits from a depreciation schedule. If that $2400 came from profits, then guess what - you pay taxes on it! Only in year 2 and 3 do you get the benefit of the previous expenditure. That depreciation goes against profits from year 2 and 3.
Contrast that to a lease - leases and a straight expense, written off as a business expense as they are incurred. No taxes paid on those writeoffs.
Now you have some inkling as to why beancounters want to shift as much CAPEX into OPEX as they can get away with.
<quote>Plus, the beancounters prefer spending money on fixing tomorrow than on digging today because digging is more expensive in the short run and nobody knows what the long run is anymore.</quote>
Today's MBA induced mentality is to always think in short term objectives (e.g. next quarter), you will not be around to reap the rewards of any long term thinking, as it is likely you will be gone in 5 years.
Second, there is that good old debate over CAPEX vs OPEX.