• palordrolap@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Do employers actually care about being understaffed or do they only wish that that staff would stop complaining that the company is understaffed?

    After all, an understaffed company is a lean, efficient company that doesn’t give out money all willy-nilly to the sort of people who have to do undesirable work and thus ensures good value for the C-level end-of-year bonus and stockholder portfolios, which ought to sound like a win from their point of view.

    • Retrograde@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Damn, it’s pretty crazy how far we’ve come considering how nobody has wanted to work anymore for over a century

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s sort of true, but not in the way they mean it. Most people don’t want to work or they would never retire. But we’re also mostly willing to work. Even work really difficult and/or dangerous jobs.

    • Damaskox@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Meanwhile I love doing volunteer work with no problems whatsoever (free work most of the time) and at the same time I have problems keeping my mental health stable for a longer period of time when working for a wage…

  • Cyv_@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    My SO works fast food. Corporate never allocates enough hours so they’re perpetually understaffed, but the store manager has permission to call people in if needed. So there’s a lot of “your scheduled 10-4, but at 3:30 I’m gonna ask if you’ll stay to 6, or I’ll call you 2 hours before your shift to see if you can come in early”.

    Its a lose lose, nobody gets the hours they want, manager can’t retain workers, people hate being called in or asked to stay late, and the schedule is always shorthanded and mostly a suggestion. Of course nobody wants to work in that shitty mess of cost cutting and begging employees to pick up the slack that the MBAs at corporate have caused.

    • Ragdoll X@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s 100% intentional.

      Hire less workers to cut costs, and squeeze as much profit as possible from what few workers there are.

      Less free time and higher employee turnover also means it’s harder to unionize, which is definitely a plus for CEOs.

    • Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I used to work at Taco Bell and the manager that hired me got fired for scheduling one “extra” person a shift. Every other metric was great, of course.

      • Lesrid@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s astounding that modern management is all just metrics. Here are your target numbers, we don’t know how you will hit them and it’s easier for us if we don’t know; if you can’t hit your targets we will fire you for underperforming and will do the same until we hire our divine sociopath that will achieve our metrics by any means necessary.

    • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m a software developer and my company flat out refuses to hire graduates (if they didn’t work as students here) or offer apprenticeships, even though apprenticeships are a great way to basically produce your own developers.

      At the same time, there’s a constant staff shortage basically everywhere and we even have to refuse projects because we can’t staff them.