So, Directors and above have a choice: take the unpaid one week furlough, OR work both weeks but still only be paid 50% of your regular pay. Seems like you'd be a fool not to take the furlough, but it looks like there are other factors at play. Some locations are posting that their Directors, etc are taking furlough, and others that they're working for 50%. Someone claiming to be CSC stated that the whole reason they were given a choice was as a test. If they choose furlough, they will be like the recent PIP people, heads on the chopping block. At CSC I am seeing both, and I'm going to see what happens if we start going through cycles of RIFs. I'm confident I'll be around for awhile, since I have one of those truly indispensable IT positions. Also, I know where the bodies are buried (just kidding). What is going on at your location, and do you believe that the choice is really more of a trick? If not, why would ANYONE not take a furlough, and if everyone would, why offer the choice at all? Sometimes are higher ups are like riddlers. What do you think this means?
20 replies (most recent on top)
917, boo Hoo. Your 50% is probably still twice as much as our 100%. And how valuable are any employees working for this cesspool. You'll forgive me I'm not crying over your car payment so your Bentley payment is late this month. Perhaps you'll have to make your maid take a furlough? Boo f***ing Hoo.
I meant my boSS usually works...
35905: I've been assigned 50% and I feel like it's finally a step too far. I was even told that the reason was because I was so "valuable" to the team. I AM being punished for being a hard-working, reliable, uncomplaining person. I got to Director by working long and hard hours, and now I'm finding myself to be nothing more than everyone's bitch. I work over 50 hours every single week and my bodd usually "works" from home. She was so, so proud to announce that she had to take furlough too, just like all the little people. I don't think I'll be in Monday.
Be glad you're not at Socle TPA. The "Idiot Squad" (think more than 50 percent of the managers, less than 10 percent of the managing) just made a point of walking past an actual manager and laughing loudly while they talked about the big party they were going to have on their "summer break." Of course, since she actually gets stuff done, she was assigned to work at 50% pay. They are the biggest assholes I have ever worked with.
That truly sucks. So basically, everyone takes one week unpaid furlough. fair enough, that happens. But if you're running an entire department yourself (like me), usually meaning 60 hour weeks doing two full-time jobs, you're the exception. You get to take NO time off but still only be paid for one week?!? That is complete and total BS and it seems to me that should be at least enough to quit and get unemployment. We're not going to be around much longer. How much abuse and stress can a person take?
Anonymous35898: Unfortunately, I actually believe you're a real employee because of your description of KD. I wish I thought you were a troll because I should not be working with someone with your maturity level. God, what the hell have we been hiring?
892 - right on! she's a fat, wrinkly, pimply ol' bum! screw the useless ignorant bitch, but not literally cuz that would be truly gross and you'd prob end up as gay as mh!
35890: I think you've got it. I've heard (second hand) what each of the directors+ at Socle are doing, and it follows that pattern. The knowledgeable ones who actually come in and get stuff done will be working for 50%. the lazy dumb-asses who spend most of their time socializing will be taking time off. It really disgusts me to see it. KD is such a bum.
No one is indispensable in IT. Portal development team decimated, DBA down to 4 and lost their manager, HRS team gone, system engineering is a ghost town. keep thinking you have security.
35878 - so it's phrased as "furlough or 50%" but it's not a choice. Some are assigned the furlough, and some are assigned the 50%. If I were assigned the 50% I'd be pissed as hell! Why? (1) Working for half pay when others were not, and (2) knowing that the whole reason I was being screwed is because we have so many "leaders" who do nothing and won't be missed. It seems like it's the same with vacations. Some take 2 weeks at a time, others don't ever seem to be allowed to take any time off. Of course, the latter are the only ones worth a damn. Reward bad behavior and punish excellence. Boy this company is screwed up!
Why don't we just follow FCC and send our students elsewhere? This is ludicrous!
CSC agents must take one week "voluntary non paid time off". My mortgage does not take "test" payments, so if this is a test it fails. The monitor needs to do his job, and make CCI accountable not only to their students but employees as well.
OP, around for a while? You sound proud you may have more security than others, in a sinking ship. You are so clueless, give it a few months and you will realize how naive you truly are about your future outside of CSC.
To help you understand how it works, most of us had no choice. Most of us had to take the week off. If you are in a position where you may be the only employee in that department you are required to work for half pay. There really isn't much of a choice, your duties dictated how you gave up your pay. If you had the choice to work 2 weeks for half price or work 1 week and take the second week off, which would you choose? If I'm giving up 50% of my pay I would choose the week off. BTW I was furloughed for a week. I just wonder what we will be asked to give up to meet the next payroll.
875, what the f*** are you talking about?
Big pit o' banana pudding!!! Oink, oink!
35873: Awesome, awesome idea! Hell I'd work a free week to see that shit! At Socle Tampa, we could have TP in his Halloween cow costume (you think I'm kidding, don't you?), MH dressed as a somewhat feminine Nacho Libre, etc, etc. Give them all little paring knives and throw them in a big pit o' banana pudding! Some would just try to eat as much as they could before they were chipped at to death, but I'll bet a few would turn out to be feisty!
I think they should just have a director and higher level Hunger Games.
Maybe it's a test. Maybe not. I'm still trying to figure out how they are going to limp along at the end of a term without thousands of emotes over a 2 week period. I suppose they want some managers to show they're willing to take one for the team. But at the same time, 4th floor leadership has seemingly given up on even bothering to keep up morale. They've not been visible, they have not been encouraging, and they have been unapologetic about the position they've put employees and students in. At this point if it's a choice to be fired or not, it's so childish. But maybe they don't have the drive to bother deciding who is doing their jobs or not. Frankly, I think whatever directors get fired, I'm not feeling any empathy towards them. They are failures as managers, too, IMO.
Sophie's Choice.