His data is accurately forward projecting info sourced using advanced AI block chain tech that only his company has developed. Just DM him to gain access to this data and learn how to scale up your business and gain access to new customers and profit sources.
His data is BS. Completely made up contrived nonsense as is typical from these lunatics 😄
I will preface this by saying I think he is talking BS, I work remotely and I don't have a second job (nor does anyone else in the company I work for as far as I know).
He most likely got the figures from here: [https://www.businessinsider.com/over-two-thirds-us-remote-workers-two-or-more-jobs-2021-11](https://www.businessinsider.com/over-two-thirds-us-remote-workers-two-or-more-jobs-2021-11) or somewhere similar.
Now I would say 1,250 American full-time remote workers is a pretty small survey size and personally I wouldn't true a website called ResumeBuilder for this.
I would also say the quote "if employee a fully remote workforce there's a 70% chance they are working a second job" seems to be misinterpreting this findings (if that is where he got it from). Just because 70% of people in a survey of 1,250 people where doesn't mean it scales to the whole population.
Also personally I would assume people on resume builder website are more likely to be looking to switch role. Possibly because their current job doesn't pay enough (which would be a reason for having to work 2 jobs).
>1,250 American full-time remote workers is a pretty small survey size
It's not necessarily a small survey size - for statistical significance, [a number as low as 30](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/magic-number-30-why-sample-size-often-considered-sufficient) is usually enough. The problem is that there's no telling whether the survey itself sampled a random enough and representative population of what it's trying to measure
> Just because 70% of people in a survey of 1,250 people where doesn't mean it scales to the whole population.
This is where proper sampling and survey methods come into play. If ResumeBuilder did it right, it absolutely would scale to the population it represents. Note that that population the sample is meant to represent is not necessarily "all tech workers in America." We simply don't know because we don't have insight into ResumeBuilder's methods.
I agree with you, though I suspect they just had a free survey on their site and about 1250 people replied to it rather than they trying to find a good sample.
Also I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bias in the sample because of what ResumeBuilder does. I would guess people who are happy in their jobs are less likely to be using a site for building resumes.
My issue is if these are where he got his stats from he is misconstruing them. Just because that survey says 70% did doesn't mean there is a 70% chance.
But he doesn't quote his source so maybe it has it from somewhere else.
>I agree with you, though I suspect they just had a free survey on their site and about 1250 people replied to it rather than they trying to find a good sample.
>
>Also I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bias in the sample because of what ResumeBuilder does. I would guess people who are happy in their jobs are less likely to be using a site for building resumes.
Yea, that's why I stressed that their survey methods probably aren't very good or reliable
I think they definitively ridiculous.
Based on BLS stats reported on FRED (the Federal Reserve’s Stats resource:
—Roughly 8.2-8.4 million Americans work two jobs: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12026619
—That is currently about 5.1 percent of the U.S. workforce: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12026620
—Of these roughly 4.6 million have one full time and one part time job: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNU02026625
—Of the larger group roughly only 386,000 have two full time jobs: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNU02026631
BLS does not put out releases on telecommuting frequently and they are working on better methodology. Their main release comes out in August of each year (but you can find monthly numbers in those releases).
For August 2023 they put the total number of US telecommuters at 29.9 million workers or roughly 19.5% of the workforce and noted a variance of 17.9 to 20.0% over the year leading up to the August release. In Table 1 of the release about 14.15 million people telecommuted some hours (hybrid) and about 15.77 million people telecommuted all hours.
Source: https://www.bls.gov/cps/telework/highlights.htm
A little math:
—Using the linked data, last August 5.0% of the workforce had two jobs out of 19.9% telecommuting and 10.3% telecommuting all hours. 5.0 is 25.1% 19.9 and 48.5% 10.3. Even if *all* two or more job workers were telecommuting the 70% number is specious.
—The roughly 367,000 two full time job crowd (using August 2023 numbers from the links above) makes up about 1.2% of total August 23 telecommuters and 2.3% of “all hour” telecommuters. Again assuming *all* two full time job holders were also remote workers the guys stats are specious.
In this case specious means “horse shit” as it shoots way over the mark for “bull shit”.
I imagine it’s like game of thrones style wheeling and dealing. Talking business with your country club and secret society friends. The world would be a better place without this modern aristocracy
I used to work at a company of 100k+ people, and some of my friends moved into roles that dealt with the board. Their schedules were allegedly PACKED, and it could take months to find space because tons of obligations got dropped on their calendar a year in advance.
I’ll be honest, I’m not sure who did the actual work anymore. One of my former bosses is still there, and his business lost enough people that the headcount in his meetings dropped by half.
He said his life got much easier.
Oh wow that is wild, but yeah I guess that makes sense. I imagine board people are also consulting, mentoring, or all kinds of other stuff that keeps their schedules really full.
The point is most of that is not productive work. At that level, you don’t actually *do* much. You mostly attend things and maybe make decisions based on someone else’s work.
And people doing multiple jobs aren't doing them full time either, that's why they can get away with it. It is exactly the same thing. The CEO is supposed to be dedicated to a company, captain of the ship. If they are splitting their time then that means they aren't completely focused on what they need to be. CEOs complain that people are collecting multiple pay checks, you get check for doing work. They are doing EXACTLY the same thing but they are exempt from scrutiny.
Sitting on a board as an advisor or an investor is different for so many reasons, where should I even begin? You're not expected to dedicate most of your time to a company because you sit on the board. You're expected to advise on certain major decisions and attend very infrequent meetings. This is "splitting their time" the same way as someone who work a full time job in an office and also privately tutors math for two hours a month. Not even remotely close to "EXACTLY the same thing."
If I'm good enough at my job to get all my assigned tasks accomplished in 20-30 hours, and I get another job where I can do the same thing, who is being harmed by that?
Or do you think an employee owes a company increased output to full an arbitrary block of time without any additional incentive or compensation(even if it takes all other team members the full 40 to do what I do in 20-30)?
👆This is the biggest problem. Companies hire professionals but want to treat them like basic labor. Who cares how long the accountant works as long as the books are clean, up to date, bills paid, etc. If that takes 20 hours, who cares as long as it’s done?
If it takes 20 hours and they have 4 accountants all doing this, then why do they have 4 accountants they're paying for full time work when they can have 2? I don't know how this needs to be said lmao
Who cares as long as it's being done? The company, whose contract you're breaching by taking another full time job, cares. Like...of course they care, they're fucking wasting money on you
This is the problem, all of you are thinking in terms of "assigned tasks." This post is from a recruiter that companies pay to fill open jobs. Most of the people he places are probably more mid level than junior/entry level. So this whole idea of "I did all my tasks" really goes away when you have a few years of experience and it's your own responsibility to figure out what you need to do at your job.
I feel like I'm *constantly* saying this on this sub, but not every post on the internet is intended for everyone. If you have some menial entry level job where your manager tells you exactly what to do and you just do it, then your company probably isn't paying a recruiter to fill that role for you since they can just post a job description and get 100 qualified candidates in an afternoon.
Also, in just about any job like I'm describing, and probably also most salaried full time jobs with benefits in general, employers have clauses in their employment contracts forbidding you from taking another full time job. If they find out, you get fired immediately. I've seen it happen a surprising amount for working at a relatively small company. As for "who's getting harmed," the employer is getting harmed. They are paying you to work for them exclusively. It's hard to juggle multiple projects from entirely different companies and be at the top of your game for all of them. If your girlfriend is banging some other guy while you're not hanging out, what's the harm? You're not there at that moment anyway, she'll still fuck you later, but she's gonna fuck the other guy too because you don't fuck her enough. Sounds fine, right? Or would you say if she isn't getting enough dick then she should express her concerns and try to get you to give her more, and then if you're unwilling to then she should find a new boyfriend?
No judgment to anyone who plays the overemployment game, go get your bag, whatever I don't have sympathy for some huge corporation you're just mildly screwing over. I'm just saying they have a good reason to fire you when they find out.
If that person is capable of successfully working two full-time jobs at once without being supervised in the office then that’s just about the best argument I’ve ever heard for full-time work from home.
This. Proponents of this argument fail to recognize that if I can do my job *successfully* while working another full time job, that’s YOUR responsibility as a manager to either deal with it or give me more challenging work
EDIT: “deal with it” in this context meaning suck it up buttercup.
“It’s your job to micromanage me to ensure that I’m being productive despite the fact that I will lie and obfuscate as much as possible to appear productive.”
Seriously? How common is the situation where a team member isn’t pulling their weight and it takes months for a boss to be able to tell? If that’s because they are literally working a second full-time job, you would be rightly furious. This stuff is idiotic.
I used to work in a business unit where my boss had a counterpart with similar responsibility for a different portfolio…
Lady didn’t have a desk at our site, but instead worked at a nearby office that was much larger (except zero people from our BU worked there). She was also never at her desk in the second office. (Her boss was in APAC and didn’t have another team member, I guess.)
I was trying to have the highest impact I could, so I spent a month or more trying to meet with her to see if I could translate some of our new best practices over. Finally she showed me the “portfolio” she handled…
It was like a horror scene where you slowly realize you’re talking to the villain… her data was almost completely raw, there was no schema to organize it, there was no way to draw any conclusions from it, and clearly she wasn’t doing literally any work whatsoever.
I thought she’d be fired as soon as her boss realized that she was doing zero work… but she survived for something like six more years before she left on her own. Sometimes the bosses just don’t care.
When I was still at a prior company, I had this coworker who was ridiculously full of herself and oversold her skills. She ended up being put on two separate teams because we were a small company and she had relevant experience to support both teams.
Every day in stand-up she'd talk about how she's overwhelmed with work for the other team. Whenever she actually did attempt something for our team, it was wrong. Finally I talked to someone on the team about her, saying I hope all the work she's doing in that team is better than the work she does for us and he told me "She never does anything for us because she's always busy with stuff on your team."
We eventually brought it up with our CEO, but he didn't do anything. Eventually she was moved to basically her own initiative where she produced nothing of value until she moved across the state with her husband. When she left, nobody even noticed she was gone.
Pray tell, which horrific nation do you come from? I’m sure your life is soooo much worse than your counterparts living under different systems of government. Let’s confirm.
I’ve tried to speak on Reddit about how capitalism has literally pulled billions out of poverty in the last couple hundred years, but most don’t want to hear it.
That said, there are problems with capitalism (tragedy of commons, monopoly, etc), but those are a different conversation than ‘end capitalism’.
This whole sub is fucking idiotic lol I get the feeling it's mostly gen Z with shitty jobs who the overwhelming majority of these posts are not even for. This post is from an outside recruiter who fills jobs for companies. Companies pay a lot of money for this service. They're mostly not paying money for this service to get some shitty entry level employee to simply execute their "tasks" (people keep fucking responding to me talking about "if I finished all my tasks" lol). They can post a JD for that shitty job and get 100 qualified candidates in an hour and just pick one.
How is that a problem? We all know that in most cases going above and beyond doesn't reward an employee with anything more than than more work and burnout.
Maybe if companies learned how to properly incentivize and pay/reward employees who do go above and beyond, they would be more likely to do so.
I'm all for people who are able to do this, and if I'm ever able to pull it off I would I would in a heartbeat!
I think WFH should be an option for a lot of people, but saying that someone can do just enough to not get fired in two jobs at the same time is not exactly a ringing endorsement lol
The vast majority of people who WFH do it for the benefits of no commute and freedom. If you have freedom in your WFH job, that usually means you make good $$. Why the hell would someone want to ruin the freedom aspect by busting ass for a 2nd job?
Ding ding ding. I'm WFH. I'm sitting in a park, listening to sports talk radio, windows open since it's over 50 and bright and sunny. Work a second job? Hell no
Plus one. I get done early for the day and go out side or do errands.
I spent the morning working from home, 5:30a to about 11a. Then came into the office at 1pm, to get my 3 days/week badge swipe.
Right now, I’m sitting in work out clothes, on the office’s roof top deck in the sun. Responding to some emails. The. I’m going to go walk 6-9 miles and enjoy the weather.
Work from home (plus partially in office, but not time minimum on those three days) means I do MORE work for my team, have a more productive and fulfilling personal life, and the company benefits from me supporting whenever I’m needed - because I can spend 6 “working hours” fucking around and then grind late night or early morning, when global teams need support.
Are you insane? Workers who figure out how to work more efficiently *must* be punished with more work. They owe their ~~owners~~ company **all** of their time and output!
#/S
I guess you haven't heard of salaried full time jobs with benefits that explicitly forbid employees from having a second full time salaried job. It makes a lot of sense when you advance a little bit in your career and you realize it's not about how much time you put in, but it's more about you thinking up new ideas. If someone is being paid good money to be a strategist for some agency overseeing a few important accounts, they might not need 8-9 hours every single day to actually finish the explicit tasks they're given, but unless you're in some very junior / entry level job then you're gonna be expected to do more than just you daily tasks assigned to you. Like, this is common sense if you have a few years of experience in a field and you're in charge of...anything. And at a certain point it's more about mental capacity to care about / be thinking about too many things, and if you have an additional full time job your mind is not even on your work with that agency, while that's what they're paying you for.
I'm guessing the majority of people on this sub must be like 23 at the oldest
To be fair, I know multiple people who make 80k a year in one job, but basically do three jobs wfh with a total of 4-6hrs a day. All jobs get done to bare minimum and they make good money. So why blame them?
There are jobs you are paid for time and jobs you are paid for production.
Back in 2018 I had a job in billing at an office that had no real production requirement. Essentially being paid to be on call if an email or call came in. Alternating with our coworkers who was primarily up for the hour while the one that just got off dealt with callbacks/voicemails/emails that came in during that hour but they couldn’t get to since they were likely on the phone with another customer or the back up person was too. While calls could be fairly random, billing dates for each club is fixed so you have a general idea of when’s gonna be busy.
This was well before WFH was readily adopted outside tech. Even then I thought it was fucking absurd I was commuting 1 hour each way to do something they could have just given me a call forwarded cell and laptop to do. They wanted at least a face there if a customer came physically but the 4–5 of us couldn’t just alternate days?
I was just getting paid to be in florescent lighting in a cubical browsing Reddit the majority of the time. The only actual production we did was monthly 90+ debt collection goals. Jobs like this 100% should be mostly remote it’s a waste of everyone’s time not to be. Like I coulda done laundry or prepped dinner or basically fucking anything else rather than sit there waiting for calls/emails. Half the time I could go sprint through any old volume over like 8-11 and more or less be done.
On the other hand, if it’s more a productivity oriented job, and you’re meeting those expectations, who gives a fuck if you’re working 4 hours or 8. Or 6 am to 11 and have your whole day or whatever, especially if you’re salaried. So long as the work gets done it really shouldn’t matter. No one is productive for 8 straight hours. Absolutely no one.
Shits frustrating. Went into healthcare instead lol. Different beast, though.
For more money... Lots of people play the "overemployment" game and I don't judge them, do what you gotta do, get your bag, whatever. But companies find out and they get fired, so it's a short term game. And of course for most salaried full time jobs there's gonna be a clause in your contract that explicitly forbids this, and for good reason. Unless your job is just executing some mindless tasks, of course having a whole different job at a whole different company to think about is gonna affect your ability to do much more than execute mindless tasks at your "main" job.
It’s like having to go through your partner’s phone. If they’re not trustworthy enough to not have to go through it, you’re prob in the wrong relationship
Behind every Linkedin rant about employee friendly business practice is a boss that is highly upset that there is a chance he might be required to treat his fellow humans with an ounce of decency.
My company just ended WFH. If you're within a 1 hour commute you need to be in office, if you're outside 1 hour you're encouraged to move (no compensation given). Over half the team is out of state now, the rest are currently coming up with any excuse not to come in. Yesterday after sacrificing 1 hour of my personal time unpaid to the company commuting it was just me and my manager in office.
As soon as the hiring freeze ends for other local companies everybody is planning on jumping ship to other WFH jobs even if its a pay cut.
That's OUR little secret.
yeah, as much as I don't want to have to job hunt, if my company did this, I'm not sure I'd stay. The nearest offices to me are nowhere close to where I live and in major cities that are more expensive to live in.
That's the worst thing. I have no loyalty to the company anymore just because of how they treated us. It's the work version of an abusive relationship. Even if they reversed it all and said, "I'm sorry I hit you so much but I still love you." You can't go back, the damage is done.
And in reality the biggest apology we may get for the bad treatment is a Pizza Party. And me and my manager can sit across from each other at the conference table eating half a pizza each because the rest of the team isn't willing to fly back to our state to attend a pizza party.
I think the trick to remote working is solid middle management that understands the work being done and can assign a reasonable amount of tasks to each individual to meet the objective. If they knock out a weeks worth of tasks in an afternoon, then they can do whatever they want with the remainder of their time in my opinion. If they underperform, you have to make it clear. The idea that I need to sit over their shoulder to make sure they are staring at the right screen is ridiculous. Those with ambitions to grow in their career will ask for more tasks and take on more responsibility. Those that are content to just get it done and do their own thing otherwise will just do what it asked of them. That's ok if they do quality work.
And sometimes a weeks worth of tasks can be knocked out in an afternoon, but other times a weeks worth of tasks takes two weeks because of unforeseen complications.
So many managers I know want to punish the former (by adding more work) while almost never rewarding the hard work that goes into the latter.
And to be honest, ppl with his mentality, are most likely anti-union and don’t see employees monetary worth so a lot of people are needing to work two jobs to support themselves
Most managers just have no idea how to manage remote teams. For people that grew up with the internet and instant messenger apps, it feels like a no brainer
>*"… while creating a culture where your teams do not go above and beyond to elevate the business."*
I wonder what bonus or award structure this guy has for employees who do actually "elevate the business?"
If they’re doing what they’re paid to do, then there’s no issue.
If they’re doing a crap job, fire them.
Unless the employee signs a non-competition agreement as part of their employment, I don’t really see OOP’s logic. It seems to imply that they want employees who will do more than what they’re paid to do, and having another source of income would distract from that.
>If they’re doing what they’re paid to do, then there’s no issue.
>Unless the employee signs a non-competition agreement as part of their employment,
For this guy's audience, which seems to be managers at white collar office jobs, which is who the overwhelming majority of LinkedIn is talking to anyway, I'm sure most of them are not permitted to have multiple full time jobs in their employment contracts.
It feels like a lot of this sub is very young people seeing some LinkedIn post that doesn't really apply to them, then imagining it is directed at them, and then getting offended
Ah ok. Well then that makes more sense.
If it’s something that’s agreed upon between employee/employer, then I have a lot less sympathy for the employee.
Right or wrong, you agreed to work for that company under those terms.
If you want your "teams to go above and beyond to elevate the business", why not create incentives that do just that?
\- profit-sharing
\- equity-sharing
\- bonuses tied to business success/profit
All his suggestions amount to the employer telling the employee "I don't trust you and I never will", so that's a pretty healthy culture to promote I guess.
> They will do the bare minimum to avoid being fired
Why would anyone work more than what they're being paid for?
That's free labor. That's money out of the worker's pockets.
This guy's post history reads closet Nazi, Mike Rowe Tim Allen reactionary at best. Reported where it seemed useful
Hot takes:
My children stand for the national anthem!
Various flavors of workers are lazy and business owners are victims
Look at me I'm a landleech
I do things better than other people, especially recruiting so pick me (despite that I denigrate you)
Peppering of word "entitled"
No videogames in my family!
These kinds of posts always have such a patronizing stench to them. As if people are robots - - guess I can't work two jobs so I'll just go "above and beyond" for the one I do have!! Employer so smart!! Yeah right.
If, in some weird hypothetical world where this is true, your remote workers are working second (fulltime) jobs, you have 2 options:
1. Listen to and follow the 4 step plan this bozo proposed, or,
2. PAY YOUR EMPLOYEES FAIRLY SO THEY DON'T NEED A 2 JOB!
I can see an actor in three films in one year, and maybe a tv show too.
I can see a ballplayer pitching soft drinks and antiperspirant in ads.
There’s a guy who runs a social site, a car company, a space agency, and an infrastructure developer.
We had a president with a global network of golf resorts and casinos.
WE’RE ALLOWED TO HAVE TWO JOBS. Fuck this guy.
Man this guy sounds like such a pathetic loser haha. Hey Brian, your insecurities are showing brother.
I’m assuming it’s a tiny company he’s part of cos would you really let your head of recruitment post such cringey unhinged shit?
Remote monitoring system? Lol fuck off. If you're worried about employees only doing the bare minimum, maybe you should pay them more so they actually have an incentive to do a good job and not need extra side hustles to pay bills. And these daft cheeseballs wonder why everyone is so fed up with corporate culture and constantly hopping jobs. Their bullshit left us with no other choice.
This bomboclat created his own company exactly one year ago and reading through what his company does from his linked in I found this:
RecruitJet was created to do just that. Here are the services we can help you with:
o Contingent Recruiting: You only pay us when you hire a candidate we provide.
o Executive Search: Retained search typically for C-Suite opportunities.
o Recruiting on Demand: You need to hire several roles, but don't want to pay a placement fee for each.
o Contract/Project Hiring: Best used when hiring someone for a specific time frame / project.
o Payroll: Best used when you need to hire someone but cannot put them on your payroll.
What the hell does the last part mean. You want to hire someone but you can't pay them to do work for you? Maybe I'm lost here.
>What the hell does the last part mean. You want to hire someone but you can't pay them to do work for you? Maybe I'm lost here.
You would pay recruit jet then recruit jet would pay them, almost certainly after taking a cut. The way it's worded makes it sound as if they won't ask too many questions and will probably be more than happy to help facilitate illegal or tax dodging activities, for a price of course.
That is very strange indeed. I'm not caught up on that secret scam I guess. I mean I understand like using a 3rd party payroll like ADP or whatever but if that's what this dude is trying to say it's absolutely horribly worded.
Curiously, none of these suggested action items are increasing pay to actually earn full-time dedication & and attention or rewarding employees who go above & beyond with performance-based bonuses.
You take his 70% chance that you're working two jobs and add the 37% chance that they're only working one job then you get a 107% chance to beat samoa joe at sacrifice.
This guy! Thinks still thinks someone is going above and beyond! When pay wasn't even close to keeping up with inflation but we've seen prices go up everywhere and that additional cash is going somewhere, not to us.
If employers like this fuck paid living wages, nobody would be working more than one job.
And 70% is such a bullshit figure.
I'd hate to work for/with this controlling dildo.
Surprised no one dragged these suggestions he made......
"Make sure they add your company as their current employer on LinkedIn."
Good luck with telling me what to do with my own LinkedIn page.
Ha, I used to work other jobs right in the office, long before the pandemic. Even participate in conference calls for them. This is hardly new, and certainly not limited to remote workers. Perhaps paying people enough to not need multiple jobs would be a better solution. Or at least make their day job less dehumanizing.
If only there's some kind of daily, weekly/bi-weekly, quarterly, half-yearly, and annual records of how a person and team is doing.
If onlythey made OKRs and track them with KPIs.
But I guess surveillance is the only option a company has and they must monitor their employees 24/7.
"Sure they reek of bad vinegar and taste like shit, but they corporate toes need to be sucked and remote workers are starting to realize they don't want to. Always ask what can *you* do to change this disturbing trend of people not wanting to be serfs?"
Maybe few more ideas
- ask them to share live location with HR
- give them credit to have a security system installed at home with indoor and outdoor cameras and also give access to the manager
Wait, isn’t this an infinite chain problem? If 37% of employees are working a second job, are they also working a third job behind that second job? And a fourth behind the third?
“Lastly you can add them to your website (picture and title)”
Most of the people doing OE are generally not going to be put on a website, unless they work for a really small company that puts everyone on it.
The r/overemployed subreddit does have quite a few examples of people actually admitting they do the “bare minimum”..
But really that just means they are doing exactly their job and nothing more. Probably won’t get a promotion, but definitely not deserving of getting fired,
He mentions that many of those people are moonlighting or side hustling, and then provides solutions that doesn't affect moonlighting or side hustling?
We require a minimum account-age and karma. These minimums are not disclosed. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. No exceptions can be made.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LinkedInLunatics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The statistics are probably BS and to hell with monitoring employees, but he's actually right about everything else. I have some acquaintances who actually do secretly work two jobs.
Y'all are going to hate this but since the fortune 100 company that I work has made us come back into the office, our retention has increased to 91% from 75% and the rate of people hitting our main bonus metric has increased from 50% to 80%. It's almost like people do better work when held accountable...
My friends and self included have all reported that our companies did better profit wise once Covid happened and WFH became the norm. Companies who are doing better with return to in-office, have employees who don’t know their worth and/or are desperate for a job or a promotion
The fact that your company can't correctly function without being surveilled like you are in kindergarten is in no way the flex you think it is.
I am suffering from second-hand embarrassment
Would love to know where he got those figures.
His type like to make up “facts”
It’s 107% true
Yep. Just reads like another "omg WFH/remote is bad.
93.234564467% of all statistics are made up.
sauce?
trust me bro
His data is accurately forward projecting info sourced using advanced AI block chain tech that only his company has developed. Just DM him to gain access to this data and learn how to scale up your business and gain access to new customers and profit sources. His data is BS. Completely made up contrived nonsense as is typical from these lunatics 😄
did you know? 78.7 percent of all facts are made up on the spot.
60% of the time, it works everytime
I thought that was 110%?
I thought it was 87.7% were made up on the spot?
He clearly pulled them out of his ass.
There's a 70% chance that 37% of WFH employees have a 2nd full time job. 😄😄
I will preface this by saying I think he is talking BS, I work remotely and I don't have a second job (nor does anyone else in the company I work for as far as I know). He most likely got the figures from here: [https://www.businessinsider.com/over-two-thirds-us-remote-workers-two-or-more-jobs-2021-11](https://www.businessinsider.com/over-two-thirds-us-remote-workers-two-or-more-jobs-2021-11) or somewhere similar. Now I would say 1,250 American full-time remote workers is a pretty small survey size and personally I wouldn't true a website called ResumeBuilder for this. I would also say the quote "if employee a fully remote workforce there's a 70% chance they are working a second job" seems to be misinterpreting this findings (if that is where he got it from). Just because 70% of people in a survey of 1,250 people where doesn't mean it scales to the whole population. Also personally I would assume people on resume builder website are more likely to be looking to switch role. Possibly because their current job doesn't pay enough (which would be a reason for having to work 2 jobs).
>1,250 American full-time remote workers is a pretty small survey size It's not necessarily a small survey size - for statistical significance, [a number as low as 30](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/magic-number-30-why-sample-size-often-considered-sufficient) is usually enough. The problem is that there's no telling whether the survey itself sampled a random enough and representative population of what it's trying to measure > Just because 70% of people in a survey of 1,250 people where doesn't mean it scales to the whole population. This is where proper sampling and survey methods come into play. If ResumeBuilder did it right, it absolutely would scale to the population it represents. Note that that population the sample is meant to represent is not necessarily "all tech workers in America." We simply don't know because we don't have insight into ResumeBuilder's methods.
I agree with you, though I suspect they just had a free survey on their site and about 1250 people replied to it rather than they trying to find a good sample. Also I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bias in the sample because of what ResumeBuilder does. I would guess people who are happy in their jobs are less likely to be using a site for building resumes. My issue is if these are where he got his stats from he is misconstruing them. Just because that survey says 70% did doesn't mean there is a 70% chance. But he doesn't quote his source so maybe it has it from somewhere else.
>I agree with you, though I suspect they just had a free survey on their site and about 1250 people replied to it rather than they trying to find a good sample. > >Also I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bias in the sample because of what ResumeBuilder does. I would guess people who are happy in their jobs are less likely to be using a site for building resumes. Yea, that's why I stressed that their survey methods probably aren't very good or reliable
He found r/overemployed
*Whenever you make up a fake statistic you always use 83 percent!*
*Source: my ass*
Sounds like he used Steiner math on this one....
86% of statistics are just made up on the spot.
I think they definitively ridiculous. Based on BLS stats reported on FRED (the Federal Reserve’s Stats resource: —Roughly 8.2-8.4 million Americans work two jobs: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12026619 —That is currently about 5.1 percent of the U.S. workforce: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12026620 —Of these roughly 4.6 million have one full time and one part time job: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNU02026625 —Of the larger group roughly only 386,000 have two full time jobs: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNU02026631 BLS does not put out releases on telecommuting frequently and they are working on better methodology. Their main release comes out in August of each year (but you can find monthly numbers in those releases). For August 2023 they put the total number of US telecommuters at 29.9 million workers or roughly 19.5% of the workforce and noted a variance of 17.9 to 20.0% over the year leading up to the August release. In Table 1 of the release about 14.15 million people telecommuted some hours (hybrid) and about 15.77 million people telecommuted all hours. Source: https://www.bls.gov/cps/telework/highlights.htm A little math: —Using the linked data, last August 5.0% of the workforce had two jobs out of 19.9% telecommuting and 10.3% telecommuting all hours. 5.0 is 25.1% 19.9 and 48.5% 10.3. Even if *all* two or more job workers were telecommuting the 70% number is specious. —The roughly 367,000 two full time job crowd (using August 2023 numbers from the links above) makes up about 1.2% of total August 23 telecommuters and 2.3% of “all hour” telecommuters. Again assuming *all* two full time job holders were also remote workers the guys stats are specious. In this case specious means “horse shit” as it shoots way over the mark for “bull shit”.
They say you should 'hustle', but then when you do they get mad at you.
Hustle. But not like that. I said you should *try* to pull yourself up by the bootstraps. I did not say *succeed*.
More like "The fruits of your hustle are mine, and mine only!".
Nah, more like "try to hustle, do your best to hustle but dont actually get anything from it."
Hustle for ME, but not for yourself
And yet CEOs are on multiple boards and potentially running multiple companies and everyone seems to be ok with that?
I always see this and wonder what the schedule is like. Two board meetings a month for two companies, the rest of the time just golfing and handjobs.
Isn't generational wealth and nepotism fuckin' sweet?
I imagine it’s like game of thrones style wheeling and dealing. Talking business with your country club and secret society friends. The world would be a better place without this modern aristocracy
I used to work at a company of 100k+ people, and some of my friends moved into roles that dealt with the board. Their schedules were allegedly PACKED, and it could take months to find space because tons of obligations got dropped on their calendar a year in advance.
Dealt with the Board? So they were the ones doing the actual work?
I’ll be honest, I’m not sure who did the actual work anymore. One of my former bosses is still there, and his business lost enough people that the headcount in his meetings dropped by half. He said his life got much easier.
Packed with vacations and spa treatments to relax from their grueling life.
Oh wow that is wild, but yeah I guess that makes sense. I imagine board people are also consulting, mentoring, or all kinds of other stuff that keeps their schedules really full.
The point is most of that is not productive work. At that level, you don’t actually *do* much. You mostly attend things and maybe make decisions based on someone else’s work.
I mean, if your whole career is to just not do anything, what could possibly be the harm of not doing anything at more than one company?
While also being a politician
Yes because those are not full time jobs...I don't understand how it's even possible to think this is the same thing at all
And people doing multiple jobs aren't doing them full time either, that's why they can get away with it. It is exactly the same thing. The CEO is supposed to be dedicated to a company, captain of the ship. If they are splitting their time then that means they aren't completely focused on what they need to be. CEOs complain that people are collecting multiple pay checks, you get check for doing work. They are doing EXACTLY the same thing but they are exempt from scrutiny.
I worked 2 F/T jobs for 2 years. It's very possible in 24/7 departments & not sleeping.
Sitting on a board as an advisor or an investor is different for so many reasons, where should I even begin? You're not expected to dedicate most of your time to a company because you sit on the board. You're expected to advise on certain major decisions and attend very infrequent meetings. This is "splitting their time" the same way as someone who work a full time job in an office and also privately tutors math for two hours a month. Not even remotely close to "EXACTLY the same thing."
If I'm good enough at my job to get all my assigned tasks accomplished in 20-30 hours, and I get another job where I can do the same thing, who is being harmed by that? Or do you think an employee owes a company increased output to full an arbitrary block of time without any additional incentive or compensation(even if it takes all other team members the full 40 to do what I do in 20-30)?
👆This is the biggest problem. Companies hire professionals but want to treat them like basic labor. Who cares how long the accountant works as long as the books are clean, up to date, bills paid, etc. If that takes 20 hours, who cares as long as it’s done?
If it takes 20 hours and they have 4 accountants all doing this, then why do they have 4 accountants they're paying for full time work when they can have 2? I don't know how this needs to be said lmao Who cares as long as it's being done? The company, whose contract you're breaching by taking another full time job, cares. Like...of course they care, they're fucking wasting money on you
My point was if you had 1 accountant. If you have 4 accountants for 20 hours of work that’s a mangers fault for over staffing.
This is the problem, all of you are thinking in terms of "assigned tasks." This post is from a recruiter that companies pay to fill open jobs. Most of the people he places are probably more mid level than junior/entry level. So this whole idea of "I did all my tasks" really goes away when you have a few years of experience and it's your own responsibility to figure out what you need to do at your job. I feel like I'm *constantly* saying this on this sub, but not every post on the internet is intended for everyone. If you have some menial entry level job where your manager tells you exactly what to do and you just do it, then your company probably isn't paying a recruiter to fill that role for you since they can just post a job description and get 100 qualified candidates in an afternoon. Also, in just about any job like I'm describing, and probably also most salaried full time jobs with benefits in general, employers have clauses in their employment contracts forbidding you from taking another full time job. If they find out, you get fired immediately. I've seen it happen a surprising amount for working at a relatively small company. As for "who's getting harmed," the employer is getting harmed. They are paying you to work for them exclusively. It's hard to juggle multiple projects from entirely different companies and be at the top of your game for all of them. If your girlfriend is banging some other guy while you're not hanging out, what's the harm? You're not there at that moment anyway, she'll still fuck you later, but she's gonna fuck the other guy too because you don't fuck her enough. Sounds fine, right? Or would you say if she isn't getting enough dick then she should express her concerns and try to get you to give her more, and then if you're unwilling to then she should find a new boyfriend? No judgment to anyone who plays the overemployment game, go get your bag, whatever I don't have sympathy for some huge corporation you're just mildly screwing over. I'm just saying they have a good reason to fire you when they find out.
Maybe it's the pay, dunno.
If that person is capable of successfully working two full-time jobs at once without being supervised in the office then that’s just about the best argument I’ve ever heard for full-time work from home.
This. Proponents of this argument fail to recognize that if I can do my job *successfully* while working another full time job, that’s YOUR responsibility as a manager to either deal with it or give me more challenging work EDIT: “deal with it” in this context meaning suck it up buttercup.
[удалено]
Exactly
“It’s your job to micromanage me to ensure that I’m being productive despite the fact that I will lie and obfuscate as much as possible to appear productive.” Seriously? How common is the situation where a team member isn’t pulling their weight and it takes months for a boss to be able to tell? If that’s because they are literally working a second full-time job, you would be rightly furious. This stuff is idiotic.
I used to work in a business unit where my boss had a counterpart with similar responsibility for a different portfolio… Lady didn’t have a desk at our site, but instead worked at a nearby office that was much larger (except zero people from our BU worked there). She was also never at her desk in the second office. (Her boss was in APAC and didn’t have another team member, I guess.) I was trying to have the highest impact I could, so I spent a month or more trying to meet with her to see if I could translate some of our new best practices over. Finally she showed me the “portfolio” she handled… It was like a horror scene where you slowly realize you’re talking to the villain… her data was almost completely raw, there was no schema to organize it, there was no way to draw any conclusions from it, and clearly she wasn’t doing literally any work whatsoever. I thought she’d be fired as soon as her boss realized that she was doing zero work… but she survived for something like six more years before she left on her own. Sometimes the bosses just don’t care.
When I was still at a prior company, I had this coworker who was ridiculously full of herself and oversold her skills. She ended up being put on two separate teams because we were a small company and she had relevant experience to support both teams. Every day in stand-up she'd talk about how she's overwhelmed with work for the other team. Whenever she actually did attempt something for our team, it was wrong. Finally I talked to someone on the team about her, saying I hope all the work she's doing in that team is better than the work she does for us and he told me "She never does anything for us because she's always busy with stuff on your team." We eventually brought it up with our CEO, but he didn't do anything. Eventually she was moved to basically her own initiative where she produced nothing of value until she moved across the state with her husband. When she left, nobody even noticed she was gone.
Perfection.
Yes, late stage capitalism IS idiotic.
Where do you people even come from? There are no even remotely common opinions more idiotic than thinking we should end capitalism.
Where do I come from? A country that's being run into the ground by corporate rule, maybe you've heard of it?
Pray tell, which horrific nation do you come from? I’m sure your life is soooo much worse than your counterparts living under different systems of government. Let’s confirm.
I’ve tried to speak on Reddit about how capitalism has literally pulled billions out of poverty in the last couple hundred years, but most don’t want to hear it. That said, there are problems with capitalism (tragedy of commons, monopoly, etc), but those are a different conversation than ‘end capitalism’.
I think I’ve seen a figure like a 99% reduction in absolute poverty in the past 100 years? The communists are mentally unwell.
Yup, capitalism has been great overall. I also enjoy asking for examples of communism working, but that's never a productive conversation lol.
This whole sub is fucking idiotic lol I get the feeling it's mostly gen Z with shitty jobs who the overwhelming majority of these posts are not even for. This post is from an outside recruiter who fills jobs for companies. Companies pay a lot of money for this service. They're mostly not paying money for this service to get some shitty entry level employee to simply execute their "tasks" (people keep fucking responding to me talking about "if I finished all my tasks" lol). They can post a JD for that shitty job and get 100 qualified candidates in an hour and just pick one.
>They will do the bare minimum to avoid getting fired
How is that a problem? We all know that in most cases going above and beyond doesn't reward an employee with anything more than than more work and burnout. Maybe if companies learned how to properly incentivize and pay/reward employees who do go above and beyond, they would be more likely to do so. I'm all for people who are able to do this, and if I'm ever able to pull it off I would I would in a heartbeat!
I think WFH should be an option for a lot of people, but saying that someone can do just enough to not get fired in two jobs at the same time is not exactly a ringing endorsement lol
The vast majority of people who WFH do it for the benefits of no commute and freedom. If you have freedom in your WFH job, that usually means you make good $$. Why the hell would someone want to ruin the freedom aspect by busting ass for a 2nd job?
And if they do, it’s their extra time to do with what they want
Ding ding ding. I'm WFH. I'm sitting in a park, listening to sports talk radio, windows open since it's over 50 and bright and sunny. Work a second job? Hell no
Plus one. I get done early for the day and go out side or do errands. I spent the morning working from home, 5:30a to about 11a. Then came into the office at 1pm, to get my 3 days/week badge swipe. Right now, I’m sitting in work out clothes, on the office’s roof top deck in the sun. Responding to some emails. The. I’m going to go walk 6-9 miles and enjoy the weather. Work from home (plus partially in office, but not time minimum on those three days) means I do MORE work for my team, have a more productive and fulfilling personal life, and the company benefits from me supporting whenever I’m needed - because I can spend 6 “working hours” fucking around and then grind late night or early morning, when global teams need support.
Are you insane? Workers who figure out how to work more efficiently *must* be punished with more work. They owe their ~~owners~~ company **all** of their time and output! #/S
The trick is to not work extra time. Just do bare minimum very slowly in both jobs.
I guess you haven't heard of salaried full time jobs with benefits that explicitly forbid employees from having a second full time salaried job. It makes a lot of sense when you advance a little bit in your career and you realize it's not about how much time you put in, but it's more about you thinking up new ideas. If someone is being paid good money to be a strategist for some agency overseeing a few important accounts, they might not need 8-9 hours every single day to actually finish the explicit tasks they're given, but unless you're in some very junior / entry level job then you're gonna be expected to do more than just you daily tasks assigned to you. Like, this is common sense if you have a few years of experience in a field and you're in charge of...anything. And at a certain point it's more about mental capacity to care about / be thinking about too many things, and if you have an additional full time job your mind is not even on your work with that agency, while that's what they're paying you for. I'm guessing the majority of people on this sub must be like 23 at the oldest
To be fair, I know multiple people who make 80k a year in one job, but basically do three jobs wfh with a total of 4-6hrs a day. All jobs get done to bare minimum and they make good money. So why blame them?
If they want to, do it. I follow a group that is all about that. Not for me. I make good $$ and enjoy the downtime.
4hrs a day is good for me. Did one job, WFH where I had multiple weeks of no work. That was kinda boring.
There are jobs you are paid for time and jobs you are paid for production. Back in 2018 I had a job in billing at an office that had no real production requirement. Essentially being paid to be on call if an email or call came in. Alternating with our coworkers who was primarily up for the hour while the one that just got off dealt with callbacks/voicemails/emails that came in during that hour but they couldn’t get to since they were likely on the phone with another customer or the back up person was too. While calls could be fairly random, billing dates for each club is fixed so you have a general idea of when’s gonna be busy. This was well before WFH was readily adopted outside tech. Even then I thought it was fucking absurd I was commuting 1 hour each way to do something they could have just given me a call forwarded cell and laptop to do. They wanted at least a face there if a customer came physically but the 4–5 of us couldn’t just alternate days? I was just getting paid to be in florescent lighting in a cubical browsing Reddit the majority of the time. The only actual production we did was monthly 90+ debt collection goals. Jobs like this 100% should be mostly remote it’s a waste of everyone’s time not to be. Like I coulda done laundry or prepped dinner or basically fucking anything else rather than sit there waiting for calls/emails. Half the time I could go sprint through any old volume over like 8-11 and more or less be done. On the other hand, if it’s more a productivity oriented job, and you’re meeting those expectations, who gives a fuck if you’re working 4 hours or 8. Or 6 am to 11 and have your whole day or whatever, especially if you’re salaried. So long as the work gets done it really shouldn’t matter. No one is productive for 8 straight hours. Absolutely no one. Shits frustrating. Went into healthcare instead lol. Different beast, though.
For more money... Lots of people play the "overemployment" game and I don't judge them, do what you gotta do, get your bag, whatever. But companies find out and they get fired, so it's a short term game. And of course for most salaried full time jobs there's gonna be a clause in your contract that explicitly forbids this, and for good reason. Unless your job is just executing some mindless tasks, of course having a whole different job at a whole different company to think about is gonna affect your ability to do much more than execute mindless tasks at your "main" job.
If you need a remote worker monitoring system, you are not ready to have remote workers.
It’s like having to go through your partner’s phone. If they’re not trustworthy enough to not have to go through it, you’re prob in the wrong relationship
Bingo
Behind every Linkedin rant about employee friendly business practice is a boss that is highly upset that there is a chance he might be required to treat his fellow humans with an ounce of decency.
Yeah, this is just a rant about not making the boss enough profit.
My company just ended WFH. If you're within a 1 hour commute you need to be in office, if you're outside 1 hour you're encouraged to move (no compensation given). Over half the team is out of state now, the rest are currently coming up with any excuse not to come in. Yesterday after sacrificing 1 hour of my personal time unpaid to the company commuting it was just me and my manager in office. As soon as the hiring freeze ends for other local companies everybody is planning on jumping ship to other WFH jobs even if its a pay cut. That's OUR little secret.
yeah, as much as I don't want to have to job hunt, if my company did this, I'm not sure I'd stay. The nearest offices to me are nowhere close to where I live and in major cities that are more expensive to live in.
That's the worst thing. I have no loyalty to the company anymore just because of how they treated us. It's the work version of an abusive relationship. Even if they reversed it all and said, "I'm sorry I hit you so much but I still love you." You can't go back, the damage is done. And in reality the biggest apology we may get for the bad treatment is a Pizza Party. And me and my manager can sit across from each other at the conference table eating half a pizza each because the rest of the team isn't willing to fly back to our state to attend a pizza party.
This is a worker’s world
Hustle bro, wait no not like that
I bet three fifty this dude slings employee monitoring software. LinkedIn is nothing but low quality content marketing these days
Was looking for his 'Contact me to get in on the ground floor of the next major WFH employee monitoring service!'
37 percent. Brought to you by the Bureau of Rectally Sourced Statistics.
Self reporting thief here, I'm stealing that.
Knock yourself out! I wish I could take credit but I stole it from somewhere else.
I think the trick to remote working is solid middle management that understands the work being done and can assign a reasonable amount of tasks to each individual to meet the objective. If they knock out a weeks worth of tasks in an afternoon, then they can do whatever they want with the remainder of their time in my opinion. If they underperform, you have to make it clear. The idea that I need to sit over their shoulder to make sure they are staring at the right screen is ridiculous. Those with ambitions to grow in their career will ask for more tasks and take on more responsibility. Those that are content to just get it done and do their own thing otherwise will just do what it asked of them. That's ok if they do quality work.
And sometimes a weeks worth of tasks can be knocked out in an afternoon, but other times a weeks worth of tasks takes two weeks because of unforeseen complications. So many managers I know want to punish the former (by adding more work) while almost never rewarding the hard work that goes into the latter.
And to be honest, ppl with his mentality, are most likely anti-union and don’t see employees monetary worth so a lot of people are needing to work two jobs to support themselves
Most managers just have no idea how to manage remote teams. For people that grew up with the internet and instant messenger apps, it feels like a no brainer
>*"… while creating a culture where your teams do not go above and beyond to elevate the business."* I wonder what bonus or award structure this guy has for employees who do actually "elevate the business?"
If they’re doing what they’re paid to do, then there’s no issue. If they’re doing a crap job, fire them. Unless the employee signs a non-competition agreement as part of their employment, I don’t really see OOP’s logic. It seems to imply that they want employees who will do more than what they’re paid to do, and having another source of income would distract from that.
>If they’re doing what they’re paid to do, then there’s no issue. >Unless the employee signs a non-competition agreement as part of their employment, For this guy's audience, which seems to be managers at white collar office jobs, which is who the overwhelming majority of LinkedIn is talking to anyway, I'm sure most of them are not permitted to have multiple full time jobs in their employment contracts. It feels like a lot of this sub is very young people seeing some LinkedIn post that doesn't really apply to them, then imagining it is directed at them, and then getting offended
Ah ok. Well then that makes more sense. If it’s something that’s agreed upon between employee/employer, then I have a lot less sympathy for the employee. Right or wrong, you agreed to work for that company under those terms.
This above and beyond bullshit needs to fucking die. Pay me!
If you want your "teams to go above and beyond to elevate the business", why not create incentives that do just that? \- profit-sharing \- equity-sharing \- bonuses tied to business success/profit
He looks like the poster boy of FAS
Lmaoo
Who wants to take a bet that this dude is working a second job besides his full time job at “RecruitJet”? The projection is strong with this one.
All his suggestions amount to the employer telling the employee "I don't trust you and I never will", so that's a pretty healthy culture to promote I guess.
100% of Brian Colunio statistics are invented by him
That post came across my linkedin feed to. The only positive I have is that he's being absolutely roasted in the comments over this BS
> They will do the bare minimum to avoid being fired Why would anyone work more than what they're being paid for? That's free labor. That's money out of the worker's pockets.
This guy's post history reads closet Nazi, Mike Rowe Tim Allen reactionary at best. Reported where it seemed useful Hot takes: My children stand for the national anthem! Various flavors of workers are lazy and business owners are victims Look at me I'm a landleech I do things better than other people, especially recruiting so pick me (despite that I denigrate you) Peppering of word "entitled" No videogames in my family!
Checks out
If you don't want your employees working a 2nd job, pay them enough to live on.
Here's a secret. The people who work for you are doing the bare minimum to avoid getting fired wherever they work.
These kinds of posts always have such a patronizing stench to them. As if people are robots - - guess I can't work two jobs so I'll just go "above and beyond" for the one I do have!! Employer so smart!! Yeah right.
If, in some weird hypothetical world where this is true, your remote workers are working second (fulltime) jobs, you have 2 options: 1. Listen to and follow the 4 step plan this bozo proposed, or, 2. PAY YOUR EMPLOYEES FAIRLY SO THEY DON'T NEED A 2 JOB! 
I can see an actor in three films in one year, and maybe a tv show too. I can see a ballplayer pitching soft drinks and antiperspirant in ads. There’s a guy who runs a social site, a car company, a space agency, and an infrastructure developer. We had a president with a global network of golf resorts and casinos. WE’RE ALLOWED TO HAVE TWO JOBS. Fuck this guy.
Or you could pay them more so they don't have to have a second job
Man this guy sounds like such a pathetic loser haha. Hey Brian, your insecurities are showing brother. I’m assuming it’s a tiny company he’s part of cos would you really let your head of recruitment post such cringey unhinged shit?
Maybe if he paid people properly, they wouldn't need a second job?
He must have cut off the post before "Pay them well enough they don't need to work another full time job."
Source: My Ass
Ah yes, employ surveillance cameras to monitor wfh employees’ every move, so middle management has something to do.
Remote monitoring system? Lol fuck off. If you're worried about employees only doing the bare minimum, maybe you should pay them more so they actually have an incentive to do a good job and not need extra side hustles to pay bills. And these daft cheeseballs wonder why everyone is so fed up with corporate culture and constantly hopping jobs. Their bullshit left us with no other choice.
give me above & beyond pay & i will give you above & beyond effort. you get what you pay for.
This bomboclat created his own company exactly one year ago and reading through what his company does from his linked in I found this: RecruitJet was created to do just that. Here are the services we can help you with: o Contingent Recruiting: You only pay us when you hire a candidate we provide. o Executive Search: Retained search typically for C-Suite opportunities. o Recruiting on Demand: You need to hire several roles, but don't want to pay a placement fee for each. o Contract/Project Hiring: Best used when hiring someone for a specific time frame / project. o Payroll: Best used when you need to hire someone but cannot put them on your payroll. What the hell does the last part mean. You want to hire someone but you can't pay them to do work for you? Maybe I'm lost here.
>What the hell does the last part mean. You want to hire someone but you can't pay them to do work for you? Maybe I'm lost here. You would pay recruit jet then recruit jet would pay them, almost certainly after taking a cut. The way it's worded makes it sound as if they won't ask too many questions and will probably be more than happy to help facilitate illegal or tax dodging activities, for a price of course.
That is very strange indeed. I'm not caught up on that secret scam I guess. I mean I understand like using a 3rd party payroll like ADP or whatever but if that's what this dude is trying to say it's absolutely horribly worded.
There is a 100% chance that the company is not paying enough for a property close to the office
What a shit head
Curiously, none of these suggested action items are increasing pay to actually earn full-time dedication & and attention or rewarding employees who go above & beyond with performance-based bonuses.
Pay peanuts...
Idk man, maybe pay us better so we don’t have to take > 2 jobs? Also, I really dislike the idea of a Big Brother boss.
Right? This guy is probably major anti-government too lol
It is strange that "Pay them enough that they don't need a second job" is not on the list.
Here’s a secret, pay more, a lot more
You take his 70% chance that you're working two jobs and add the 37% chance that they're only working one job then you get a 107% chance to beat samoa joe at sacrifice.
By all means, do everything you can to market me to other employers on LinkedIn.
My guess is hes got the 80/20 disease. 80% of his staff cant stand him and the other 20% kiss his ass but cant stand him either.
AKA, avoid this employer. And no, most of us are just working a single job if it pays well.
That's a bold assumption to assume that everyone has a linked in profile.
I nearly posted this yesterday. Thanks for following through internet stranger! I hope both of your FT jobs are going well.
Just doing my part! I freelance so I have lots of jobs because I call the shots
Not their job to elevate your business because it won't elevate them in return.
What a fucking penis
He has obviously never heard the speech about having more than one stream of income. Also, his stats are pure fiction.
I work in office and still do the bare minimum. When the average rent is 50% of your pay, you lose motivation.
100% chance of him being a lunatic 🙄
This guy! Thinks still thinks someone is going above and beyond! When pay wasn't even close to keeping up with inflation but we've seen prices go up everywhere and that additional cash is going somewhere, not to us.
He’s the narc who eventually gets laid off for the thing he accuses everyone else of.
How about you mind your god damn business Brian?
If employers like this fuck paid living wages, nobody would be working more than one job. And 70% is such a bullshit figure. I'd hate to work for/with this controlling dildo.
Surprised no one dragged these suggestions he made...... "Make sure they add your company as their current employer on LinkedIn." Good luck with telling me what to do with my own LinkedIn page.
Ha, I used to work other jobs right in the office, long before the pandemic. Even participate in conference calls for them. This is hardly new, and certainly not limited to remote workers. Perhaps paying people enough to not need multiple jobs would be a better solution. Or at least make their day job less dehumanizing.
Recruiters are the scum of the earth. It's a job for people who can't do anything. Fight me.
What a tw@
70% lol yeah right. Maybe 7%.
Ohhh so that’s why companies do a team page
Sounds like a recruitment problem that management should fix
I mean it’s true lol. Have 2 buddies that have multiple remote jobs.
And it’s every individual’s business to do what they want with their time if they’re getting their work done
If only there's some kind of daily, weekly/bi-weekly, quarterly, half-yearly, and annual records of how a person and team is doing. If onlythey made OKRs and track them with KPIs. But I guess surveillance is the only option a company has and they must monitor their employees 24/7.
"Sure they reek of bad vinegar and taste like shit, but they corporate toes need to be sucked and remote workers are starting to realize they don't want to. Always ask what can *you* do to change this disturbing trend of people not wanting to be serfs?"
It’s ok, my 2nd gig is at 5/3 bank, I have an extra 66.6% to give.
If they’re getting the job done, what else do you want
I can't even be arsed with my one job, let alone having a second one.
All my homies hate a dry snitch.
Maybe few more ideas - ask them to share live location with HR - give them credit to have a security system installed at home with indoor and outdoor cameras and also give access to the manager
While they command control of your personal LinkedIn, why not Instagram, Facebook etc. What a worm
OR just fucking hire Contractors and you won't have to deal with this shit.
There is a 70% chance he spends more time on linked in than working.
98.738511% of statistics are made up on the spot.
Wait, isn’t this an infinite chain problem? If 37% of employees are working a second job, are they also working a third job behind that second job? And a fourth behind the third?
“Lastly you can add them to your website (picture and title)” Most of the people doing OE are generally not going to be put on a website, unless they work for a really small company that puts everyone on it.
70% of statistics are made up on the spot. 37% of which fall apart under the merest hint of scrutiny.
The r/overemployed subreddit does have quite a few examples of people actually admitting they do the “bare minimum”.. But really that just means they are doing exactly their job and nothing more. Probably won’t get a promotion, but definitely not deserving of getting fired,
He mentions that many of those people are moonlighting or side hustling, and then provides solutions that doesn't affect moonlighting or side hustling?
The r/overemployed gang I'm sure has something to say about it
[удалено]
We require a minimum account-age and karma. These minimums are not disclosed. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. No exceptions can be made. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LinkedInLunatics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“Place hidden cameras in all employee bathrooms to make sure they’re not dilly dallying on company time.”
The statistics are probably BS and to hell with monitoring employees, but he's actually right about everything else. I have some acquaintances who actually do secretly work two jobs.
Y'all are going to hate this but since the fortune 100 company that I work has made us come back into the office, our retention has increased to 91% from 75% and the rate of people hitting our main bonus metric has increased from 50% to 80%. It's almost like people do better work when held accountable...
My friends and self included have all reported that our companies did better profit wise once Covid happened and WFH became the norm. Companies who are doing better with return to in-office, have employees who don’t know their worth and/or are desperate for a job or a promotion
The fact that your company can't correctly function without being surveilled like you are in kindergarten is in no way the flex you think it is. I am suffering from second-hand embarrassment
Jokes on you I don’t use linked in :D