Must apologies first, as I've had a couple of Saturday arvo chuckle medicines. Reading another thread and it seems the council has thought up another revenue making venture, at the cost of boats, most likely to help cover the annual cost of running the council infrastructure.

Worked in a mine out side of Oz for too long and one day the management decided to give the local guys a chance for career advancement so they created another level of management. I was a foreman at the time, so they changed my title to superintendent (what crock of $hit) and created 2 new foreman's positions. Next day I came to work and did exactly the same stuff.

The biggest difference was, it was now even harder to find out what the guys on the work face were doing due to being a another level away from them. But the amazing thing was that myself and the foremen seemed to keep ourselves busy all day doing the same work that was done by me by prior to this managerial proclamation. It was like magic. But in reality it was more pricks in an office shuffling paper.

Poor share holders. This same company was making money in 2006 when gold was around US$400 but had operation cost climbing above US$900 in 2013. (we won't mention Work Health and Safety, I think these cu%ts think they're there reason mines are opened up and f%ck the share holders. The word profit is not of any interest to them)

My sister is in an accountancy firm that deals in insolvency. The first thing they do to try and save bankrupt companies or companies heading that way, is get rid of all the management and run the business themselves. I think there is a lesson to be learned here. As she's says, people in managerial positions don't make money and are usually a huge financial burden to a business, it's the people at the work face who generate the income.

Yes, they actually do manage to save some companies, but not many.

As I mentioned, I've had a few.

Yes yes hear ye hear ye.....

Three things ive learnt.

The people that get paid the least generally make the most for the buisness.....

H&S used to be done by a guy ir lady missing fingers or who had broke their back ,,, they actually cared generally were tradespeople understood the job and what the day to day activities and risks entailed....now its a person from uni who wants to climb the ladder and throw people inder the bus

Try working in a government department with more chiefs than indians

Ive worked for several private companies that had more chiefs than indians .
Reality bites hard when the place goes pear shaped & all the petty little tyrants who did nothing but make everyones life more difficult just to look like they were busy get fired 1st .

Yes, seen it, actually experienced it myself. It happens when a company is getting too big for its own good, or potentially on its way to a downward spiral, leading to a take-over by mobs which are leaner and hungrier.

Yes, I used to work in the mining industry, and I have seen the way to ruins when it begins to play around with titles and management bull-crap.

I recall a funny but painful story about the OHS department. I know it very well because I developed software to run the bloody shop. Charts, reports, that kind of things. Obviously you have the bread and butter charts like bars, lines, pie, etc., and they were in colours too ! Anyway, it was all good for about a year until a huge management upheaval occurred in the head office in Melbourne. That was when the HR mobsters called the shots.

My mate "xxx" who did the monthly OHS reports to the head office came in one late evening, and was visibly distressed. Apparently he has until the next day to produce a new set of charts because there was a new boss in Melbourne asking for them. Being ever a good bloke, I said "No worries, mate, lets do it". Then it occurred to me that the charts the prick in the head office wanted were actually the same as what we already had. But with one difference....He wanted them to be in different colours !

So that is how pricks wasted workers' time doing f-all to help with productivity. As a footnote, the once mighty mining company was taken over but another mighty mining company.

Yep i agree with a lot of that and in relation to safety well that begins with insurance premiums and then flows down the chain. Insurance companies will do all they can to avoid payout. And to reduce premiums companies have to demonstrate that can reduce risk, therefore introduce another control, system or procedure that in the long term cost time. Time cost money and resources.
Safety is becoming so fargin retarded. I agree with Razzonater. The safety personnel of yesterday were passionate, like me. I got into safety because of my various industry experiences. Yep i'm a safety dude and have been one for 17 years. I was going to be a paramedic but though why patch people when i could prevent the ****e from happening in the first place. But over the last few years my passion is fading because safety is becoming too far removed from reality and i no longer have the energy to fight it. Management are under pressure to perform for their bonus. Some can lead well but others are just wankers and really have no idea. Safety has a place but needs to return to reality. And yes i see loads of uni grads who come from the text books believing they know everything but have no life or trade experience. They just look like knobs and get no respect. It make my job harder. It's a shame you can't punch people in the face from time to time anymore. And weed out the ****wits who are a waste of space, don't fit in or who are just ass licking carnts.

wow that was a rant... i need a rum...but sadly i'm only allocated 4 mid/day and that tastes crap

Select to expand quote

Vince68 said..
Yep i agree with a lot of that and in relation to safety well that begins with insurance premiums and then flows down the chain. Insurance companies will do all they can to avoid payout. And to reduce premiums companies have to demonstrate that can reduce risk, therefore introduce another control, system or procedure that in the long term cost time. Time cost money and resources.
Safety is becoming so fargin retarded. I agree with Razzonater. The safety personnel of yesterday were passionate, like me. I got into safety because of my various industry experiences. Yep i'm a safety dude and have been one for 17 years. I was going to be a paramedic but though why patch people when i could prevent the ****e from happening in the first place. But over the last few years my passion is fading because safety is becoming too far removed from reality and i no longer have the energy to fight it. Management are under pressure to perform for their bonus. Some can lead well but others are just wankers and really have no idea. Safety has a place but needs to return to reality. And yes i see loads of uni grads who come from the text books believing they know everything but have no life or trade experience. They just look like knobs and get no respect. It make my job harder. It's a shame you can't punch people in the face from time to time anymore. And weed out the ****wits who are a waste of space, don't fit in or who are just ass licking carnts.

wow that was a rant... i need a rum...but sadly i'm only allocated 4 mid/day and that tastes crap

I think the OHS expansion (explosion) is probably due to "Multi Skilling". What's multi Skilling, it's where you get someone who doesn't know anything, give them a procedure to read, "Hey Presto" they're qualified. Call an ambulance now!!!!

I'm working with a 4th year electrical apprentice who doesn't even know what a diode does, can't sharpen a blunt drill (and never been shown) and doesn't have the first idea about electrical fault finding. I think the system has failed him. And who was his employer for the last 3 and a half years -A Group Training organisation. Now that would have be a misleading name to call these types of businesses. Maybe they should be called "The Cheap Labour Company". Another problem is when they get to their 3rd or 4th year, their hire out rate is above employing a tradesperson.

Just starting to wonder what these guys learn when they go to Tech College.

Unless this $hit attitude to training changes, OHS is going to continually get bigger and uglier. (not saying your ugly Vince)

Select to expand quote

Crusoe said..

Vince68 said..
Yep i agree with a lot of that and in relation to safety well that begins with insurance premiums and then flows down the chain. Insurance companies will do all they can to avoid payout. And to reduce premiums companies have to demonstrate that can reduce risk, therefore introduce another control, system or procedure that in the long term cost time. Time cost money and resources.
Safety is becoming so fargin retarded. I agree with Razzonater. The safety personnel of yesterday were passionate, like me. I got into safety because of my various industry experiences. Yep i'm a safety dude and have been one for 17 years. I was going to be a paramedic but though why patch people when i could prevent the ****e from happening in the first place. But over the last few years my passion is fading because safety is becoming too far removed from reality and i no longer have the energy to fight it. Management are under pressure to perform for their bonus. Some can lead well but others are just wankers and really have no idea. Safety has a place but needs to return to reality. And yes i see loads of uni grads who come from the text books believing they know everything but have no life or trade experience. They just look like knobs and get no respect. It make my job harder. It's a shame you can't punch people in the face from time to time anymore. And weed out the ****wits who are a waste of space, don't fit in or who are just ass licking carnts.

wow that was a rant... i need a rum...but sadly i'm only allocated 4 mid/day and that tastes crap

I think the OHS expansion (explosion) is probably due to "Multi Skilling". What's multi Skilling, it's where you get someone who doesn't know anything, give them a procedure to read, "Hey Presto" they're qualified. Call an ambulance now!!!!

I'm working with a 4th year electrical apprentice who doesn't even know what a diode does, can't sharpen a blunt drill (and never been shown) and doesn't have the first idea about electrical fault finding. I think the system has failed him. And who was his employer for the last 3 and a half years -A Group Training organisation. Now that would have be a misleading name to call these types of businesses. Maybe they should be called "The Cheap Labour Company". Another problem is when they get to their 3rd or 4th year, their hire out rate is above employing a tradesperson.

Just starting to wonder what these guys learn when they go to Tech College.

Unless this $hit attitude to training changes, OHS is going to continually get bigger and uglier. (not saying your ugly Vince)

well you could be on the mark with my looks now from recent dog attach to the face, age and other ****e being cut off as a result of my youth and the sun. But no chance of hurting my feelings Crusoe, i leave them on the mantle piece when i walk out of the house

I have a vague recollection of a study many years ago that concluded it would more profitable for a majority of large companies to pay the CEO their salary, but for them to stay at home and not come to work so as to avoid making poor business decisions which would significantly impact the bottom line.

Select to expand quote

albers said..
I have a vague recollection of a study many years ago that concluded it would more profitable for a majority of large companies to pay the CEO their salary, but for them to stay at home and not come to work so as to avoid making poor business decisions which would significantly impact the bottom line.

Do you remember which company it was ? I want to send in my CV before everyone here knew about it

Client > Prioritise > Bugs > Developer.

That's how it could be here, and it would work even better than it currently does, which is:

Client > Triage (12 people) > Prioritise > Bugs > Manager 1 < Manager 2 < Testers x 2 < Developer x 3.
[Plus 2x more layers of senior management; unseen for months]

There are actually more managers than developers.

Most of the managers' work involves passing up the chain status reports, or attending meetings, triage for example where they take note of client's priority requests. Wow. Then manager A makes a spreadsheet, passes to B and so on. There is a lot of pompous bull****; it's like being trapped in an episode of Suits.

Status ultimately comes from developer, who passes to testers, who pass to manager, who collates, passes up the chain, to be collated further. Then they have an overall view of where we've been, and absolutely no option of changing anything anyway no matter what any report says. They have a great view out the back of the ship they aren't controlling.

Layers of chargeable bull****. It's actually applaudable in some ways; I am impressed they get away with it so well for so long.

every now and then I'm impressed by good managers - people that listen and give prudent advice, stopping problems before they hit as problems. steering complex jobs and businesses along the right path, educating junior team members, dealing with egos and HR issues - adding value wherever possible rather than being dead wood. Saving time, money, effort. it is something to aspire to if that's the sort of job where you cash a check, rather than just bag out the system constantly.

a lot of it doesn't get recognised, but the saying "no news is good news", usually applies where solid management has been in effect.

me? I do project management types of work haha

I do believe that as a company grows big, the employees begin to feel, real or otherwise, isolated.

When I left that big mining company before it was taken over, I saw the signs on the wall. More and deeper level of bureaucracy. Managers came and go like rashes in hot summers. Most of the managers wanted to stamp their own marks on the company but left with nothing significant because a new one will soon wipe off any changes they saw as "not one of my own".

So it was a competition for who can forge changes the quickest, but without thinking of the consequences to the company and, above all, to the employees. We, the mobs of "Indians" if you like, named our company "Hollywood" because all the senior managers were titled "Acting XXXXX"

When I left and joined a smaller mining company with only 200 odd people in it, it was good. In fact, very good. It was very good because the owners themselves, 3 of them, knew us all and they treated us just like their own family, and vice versa. As the company grew, possibly because there was a good cohesion between the top and the bottom, the separation between the top and bottom became distinct again, just like the previous company. So to us it was no longer enjoyable to come to work as there were extra layer of ass-holes in between, and these ass-holes were out to impress the owners at the expense of the "Indians", which we were.

Bad manager tells you how to do you job. Good manager asks you what you need to get your job done, gives it to you, then gets out of the way.

ha ha I wish the 110 staff I manage were as good as you guys. Never a sickie, all really competent, very productive, no conflicts, etc. View up is so different to the view down. Walk a few miles in someone elses shoes and you wont be so condescending.

Select to expand quote

hilly said..
ha ha I wish the 110 staff I manage were as good as you guys. Never a sickie, all really competent, very productive, no conflicts, etc. View up is so different to the view down. Walk a few miles in someone elses shoes and you wont be so condescending.

Look up all you see is assholes, look down all you see is sh**

I know you guys are mostly talking about corporates/ mining, but sheesh I'm seeing a fair bit of the same sameness in the education sector.

Many a school principal who is surrounded by yes men ans thinks the sun shines out his A.

And tonnes of middle management who simply want to implement a change, not for improvement of the end goal (a well run school) but as Jupiter says, simply want to make their mark so it looks good on their CV when they apply for the next job.

Select to expand quote

hilly said..
ha ha I wish the 110 staff I manage were as good as you guys. Never a sickie, all really competent, very productive, no conflicts, etc. View up is so different to the view down. Walk a few miles in someone elses shoes and you wont be so condescending.

When you've experienced the good and the bad, it's easy to tell the difference.

When you look at the real measures of performance, the way we are going in Australia is appalling. I think mismanagement and over-regulation on so many levels is a big part of the reason (I suspect poor management and over-regulation at all levels of government is a larger contributor on average than private enterprise big or small).

If it wasn't for high levels of immigration we would actually be going backwards as a country. When World Bank stats (second link) show a steep decline in per capita GDP for consecutive years, something is majorly wrong.

Clarence

www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-19/high-immigration-masks-australian-economic-decline/8193628

google.com.au/search?q=GDP+per+capita+australia&oq=GDP+per+capita+australia&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.5352j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=australia+gdp+per+capita&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOPgUeLUz9U3SM5Iz6jUMstOttLPyU9OLMnMz9MvLgHSxSWZyYk58UWp6UAhq_SUgvi8_NzMPKBQQWpRfHJiQWZJYhejMxfCFCFKTbFMNi83oNiU5JLy-CRyTQEAbtQxrRcBAAA

I kept telling everyone who care to listen that each group has its own "culture". Regardless of how small the group is, sooner or later, some culture of some form will rule the organization. I suspect it is to do with leadership. It could be good leadership or equally as a result of poor one.

As we know sooner or later, an informal defacto leader will arise out of a group. It could be due to personality, skill sets, or social factors. The trouble with such informal leader is that it can disrupt an organization by taking with him (yes, mostly men) down a path which is contrary to the organization's common good.

I know some really bad situations where sub-groups are formed, and they are secretly fighting over control of the joint. I suppose you can call it "office politics". It is obvious to anyone such internal political groups are bad as cohesion is lost.

I myself had been above politics as I don't care for it, and I have no respect for people who indulged in it because I believe I was employed to do a job, and politics is not one of the reasons I got paid for. Sadly though, some companies actually encouraged such activities because the one at the top is using it to advance his own career. With such negative boss, there are bound to be c**k-suckers or "yes-men" among them who forget why there were there in the first place.

Select to expand quote

Crusoe said..
people in managerial positions don't make money and are usually a huge financial burden to a business, it's the people at the work face who generate the income.

LOLs. I'm currently an employee of a small (150ppl worldwide) mining consulting firm and seconded to one of the big mining companies in an operational role. I am set up on the big miner's system with an email address, job title etc and I clicked on a thing in Outlook the other day that showed me the levels of management above my role. There are more levels of management between me and the top of the department I'm working in than in my own entire company. Then there are several more to the top of the company after that. Beggars belief. And yeah, the politics and infighting etc. is something to behold.

^ That's typical of authoritarian conservative organizations. Do you have prayer meetings?

If ya work for big companies ,ya put up with the crap for the perks . eg Not being made to feel guilt for a sickie or annual leave, and comes with decent pay.
Small companies , I find make better tradesmen as theres now where to hide , but don't want to pay the same,.
I take the bigger companies any day . At least ya can slack off a bit and have a laugh with the fellas at the companies expence

Select to expand quote

GreenPat said..

Crusoe said..
people in managerial positions don't make money and are usually a huge financial burden to a business, it's the people at the work face who generate the income.

LOLs. I'm currently an employee of a small (150ppl worldwide) mining consulting firm and seconded to one of the big mining companies in an operational role. I am set up on the big miner's system with an email address, job title etc and I clicked on a thing in Outlook the other day that showed me the levels of management above my role. There are more levels of management between me and the top of the department I'm working in than in my own entire company. Then there are several more to the top of the company after that. Beggars belief. And yeah, the politics and infighting etc. is something to behold.

Middle management is often redundant in most middle sized and larger organisations, once the true running cost and purpose of the organisation is carefully assessed. It is usually middle management that creates the greatest overheads and the greatest chance of achieving true mediocrity. The best chance for success is to keep the average hard working and profit-making employee who is actually doing something of value close to the senior management, who are often far more intelligent than the middle management employee. A burgeoning middle management is a sure sign of organisational dysfunction.

Big companies can get to be too big for its own good. As it gets bigger, the management structure becomes too burdensome. People at the top are becoming too remote from their employees, the ones who are actually hammering nails into the timber.

To justify their existence, these highly paid head honchos have to find somethings to do beside scratching their asses and flossing their teeth. So they invent silly rules. Worse still, they brought in HR managers to give them ideas to further f-up the already strained relationships between the management and hammer operators.

I had personally worked in a situation where something against the norm occurred. I worked for a manager who didn't believe in the bureaucracy of top management. In other word, he was a "renegade". Someone who bucked against the rules. Top honchos hated that. But couldn't do much about it because, guess what, he delivered.

He kept the industrial peace. Mining unions are well-known for their militancy. He kept them happy by being chummy with them. But that was his nature, being approachable and easy to talk to. Not only that, he made you feel you are one of the very special people who can help him do great things. I enjoyed working for him.

But good things do not last. The company went through a huge management crisis. As per usual, they brought in management consultants. And these consultants are just a bunch of HR bloody managers who used to work in hospitality industry, or retails. They are used to conformity, and the manager in question was "managed" out.

As a final note, the company went from bad to worse, and was taken over.

www.slideshare.net/phil_ep/rowers-1-pps

says it all