101 Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 27 minutes ago, Snobot said: It was this lot:- https://www.scotsman.com/business/dickson-minto-scotlands-highest-paying-law-firm-1562749?amp So yes, it would be life changing amounts of cash if you ever made it to partner level, but at what cost? He jacked it and is now some kind of wealthy London financier. Not for me, Clive. One of boys in the picture has lost his hair by 40 and the other looks a baw hair from a stroke. I agree, not for me Clive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honest_Man#1 Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 1 hour ago, Pato said: What I don't get is if Goldman is so mega rich why not just hire 3x as many staff so everyone can work 40 hour weeks and actually be effective? As usual it'll probably be the cachet of working for the big name. If everyone who has their wealth managed by these banks just chucked their cash into some passive tracker funds and left it alone they'd earn more over the long run but that rips the mystique away from the idea these investment banks are critically important entities that merit so much sacrifice to work for them. Do you really not get why? I think you do know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honest_Man#1 Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 4 minutes ago, Pato said: I get that the appeal of eventually being a partner at Goldman means there's more people prepared to do this to themselves than there are vacancies at Goldman, and Goldman views this pool of people as completely replaceable, and views the inevitably toxic and competitive environment as a good thing because of the economic affinities of the senior people there. What I don't get is why it persists. Particularly as competitors are going in the other direction. It was the bit I had highlighted in bold I was referring to. I think you know why rich Goldman don’t just hire 3x as many staff so the rest don’t burn out. They would be less rich. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aufc Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 Aye its the same with the big 4 accountants. They dont pay for the extra hours which everyone works. So your salary looks great but if you break it down to an hourly rate its shocking. They know this but they know people will still come and work for them. Most people will think f**k this and leave but some people will stay with the view to progressing to partner and the big bucks. No matter how many people leave they will always someone wanting to come to get the name on the CV. It is basically their business model and why they pay such huge bonuses to the guys at the top 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 2 hours ago, Aufc said: This is probably a controversial comment but playing devils advocate on people being off with stress etc. On occasions it does seem too easy for some people to go to a doctor and say they are stressed and get signed off. Anecdotal but in my work there is a guy who threw his toys out the pram over something trivial and handed his notice in then tried to retract it but the company accepted it. They then had a meeting and he threw a massive tantrum and walked out and went to the doctor and got signed off. He also said in the meeting “i know all the tricks”. Signed off on full pay for two months after sayijg he was stressed and has got a lawyer involved for a pay off. It has totally fucked that department and left us all trying to sort it out. It should be easy for those in genuine need. A folk folk faking it being the price to pay is absolutely fine for me. Unless I'm reading it wrong, why hasn't your company hired a new person within those two months? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latapythelegend Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Aufc said: This is probably a controversial comment but playing devils advocate on people being off with stress etc. On occasions it does seem too easy for some people to go to a doctor and say they are stressed and get signed off. Anecdotal but in my work there is a guy who threw his toys out the pram over something trivial and handed his notice in then tried to retract it but the company accepted it. They then had a meeting and he threw a massive tantrum and walked out and went to the doctor and got signed off. He also said in the meeting “i know all the tricks”. Signed off on full pay for two months after sayijg he was stressed and has got a lawyer involved for a pay off. It has totally fucked that department and left us all trying to sort it out. Had a similar experience with another guy I worked with. The thing with mental health is that it can be a case of the boy who cried wolf. I completely sympathise with people who struggle but its an easy bandwagon to jump on and a lot of employers hands are tied when they are trying to genuinely help people but at the same time not have the piss ripped out of them. Edited March 19, 2021 by latapythelegend 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aufc Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 It should be easy for those in genuine need. A folk folk faking it being the price to pay is absolutely fine for me. Unless I'm reading it wrong, why hasn't your company hired a new person within those two months?I agree on the first part. But if that happens to a company then you can understand to a degree why there may be some scepticism in some cases (as sad as that is).The issue is the guy was basically in charge of the division and it was organised chaos which was fine when he was there but it was a single point of failure. The company tried to offer him someone several times but he always rejected it as “he didnt have time to train people”. So been a pain trying to get all the pieces together. One of his operatives has stepped up but needs support. In a way, it will be better long term as now be better managed but just a few bumps to get to that point 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honest_Man#1 Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 12 minutes ago, Pato said: This makes the assumption (probably a valid one in 2019) that keeping the wage bill down and the junior staff working inhuman hours is sustainable. I'd also point out investment banks are not generally renowned for pay restraint. Unfortunately it’s been sustainable and worked well for them for a long, long time so can’t see it changing any time soon. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk blues Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 2 minutes ago, Pato said: Why not, given all their competitors are striking a very different tone on flexible working, and we have a year of pretty good evidence it does not make a dent in productivity for desk based work? Keeping information confidential is one issue I can see straight off the bat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aufc Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 Why not, given all their competitors are striking a very different tone on flexible working, and we have a year of pretty good evidence it does not make a dent in productivity for desk based work?You are talking about different things here no? You are talking about the office/home debate? That may change but the ridiculous working hours wont change 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk blues Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 2 minutes ago, Pato said: I don't follow If you were talking about WFH within the finance industry, then working from home is an issue because of the less secure environment which means confidential info is less well-secured. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonD Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 11 hours ago, parsforlife said: Seems a very weird place as well. You can see why someone might get a bum job but the actual anus, I'm not even sure how that would function, surely your shit would just flow out randomly? Urban myth about a guy who had an artificial anus fitted (for medical reasons, not a lifestyle choice). It had a valve operated by a magnet which he would use when he went for a dump. It all worked fine until the first time he went through the metal detector at the airport... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aufc Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 Yes - the head of Goldman Sachs said he was keen to get everyone back in the office asap, which was why I posted the survey here in the first place. I thought it was interesting (particularly the sky-high rating for 'I am micro-managed') in that context, and how strikingly different his attitude is to all his competitors who seem to see benefits to continuing it in some form.Aye although i suspect people will still want to work with them due to the name 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honest_Man#1 Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 16 minutes ago, Aufc said: You are talking about different things here no? You are talking about the office/home debate? That may change but the ridiculous working hours wont change Yeah I’m a bit confused. @Pato mentioned inhumane working hours and why not hire 3x the staff numbers to all do 40 hour weeks instead of the current situation. It didn’t seem to be anything to do with WFH and all about the hours, which is what I was responding to. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 42 minutes ago, Aufc said: I agree on the first part. But if that happens to a company then you can understand to a degree why there may be some scepticism in some cases (as sad as that is). The issue is the guy was basically in charge of the division and it was organised chaos which was fine when he was there but it was a single point of failure. The company tried to offer him someone several times but he always rejected it as “he didnt have time to train people”. So been a pain trying to get all the pieces together. One of his operatives has stepped up but needs support. In a way, it will be better long term as now be better managed but just a few bumps to get to that point It sounds as much of a Management failure as his. If he's that bad point out concerns, monitor performance, give him a chance to improve with necessary support. If he refuses or doesn't improve...Do I need to tell you the rest? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honest_Man#1 Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 3 hours ago, Pato said: What I don't get is if Goldman is so mega rich why not just hire 3x as many staff so everyone can work 40 hour weeks and actually be effective? @Pato I really don’t understand how the above can not be talking about their working hours, and only WFH? The post explicitly mentions everyone working 40 hour weeks? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk blues Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 31 minutes ago, Pato said: Yes - the head of Goldman Sachs said he was keen to get everyone back in the office asap, which was why I posted the survey here in the first place. I thought it was interesting (particularly the sky-high rating for 'I am micro-managed') in that context, and how strikingly different his attitude is to all his competitors who seem to see benefits to continuing it in some form. But the finance industry, law, medicine, whatever have all trundled on throughout this period without an abundance of incidents, so doesn't that say the small increased risk of you having your Amazon Echo listening in as you cut a deal is something to balance against all the positives of WFH? Just to be clear first - I'm talking about investment bankers at the Goldman Sachs level. Whilst they may have "tolerated" the WFH system as they have no choice but when faced with the option then I think they'll want folk back on the office. These guys are very big on confidentiality and simply won't want to take the risk unless they have no choice. There's more to it than Alexa listening in on a client call, the risk of leakage is something that a client won't wish to consider. I spent a fair time in Hong Kong in investment banks' offices (English teacher) and they went to some extremes to limit exposure i.e. no documents to be taken in/out of the room amongst other things. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genuine Hibs Fan Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 17 hours ago, NotThePars said: I've started working in HR and that's the type of sick leave I'm processing far and away the most. Substantial sick leave as a result of work-related stress followed by depression, anxiety and low mood. Felt like sending her a copy of Capital Realism and highlighting chapters 5-6 for them, but I sadly do not want to get sacked 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 So who has the plastic arsehole then? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aufc Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 It sounds as much of a Management failure as his. If he's that bad point out concerns, monitor performance, give him a chance to improve with necessary support. If he refuses or doesn't improve...Do I need to tell you the rest?Aye management are shit. Most of thw directors are directors due to how long they have been there 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.