Would you fire him?

[The Grand World Order]

Do the bosses actually perform the labor that creates capital for the company? No.
We are all forced into a system where we have to work to survive, but without us, the company and bosses cannot horde capital.

Yes, I understand socialist theory.

No, it's not practical or realistic to think that you're actually going to impact a company (save for artistic-based ones or ones small enough to where the boss actually sometimes does the same work as his workers) by having a one-man revolt. It's no different from when angry moms say "I'M NEVER SHOPPING HERE AGAIN" because a store won't accept their return. Companies have a vested interest in making sure that workers are replaceable, just as the military does.

[Risottia]

Do the bosses actually perform the labor that creates capital for the company? No.

1.Define "boss". A CEO performs work (albeit ofter overpaid) hence he produces surplus value. A mere shareholder (or mere owner) does not, but he takes the surplus value that has been produced.
2.You say "create capital", I think you mean "produce surplus value". Capital isn't "created", it's provided initially by the owners/investors/shareholders. Then the owners (the capitalists) take the surplus value produced by the workers' labour and use it (partly) as new capital, and they appropriate the other part as their income.

I mean, seriously, this is Das Kapital 101.

We are all forced into a system where we have to work to survive, but without us, the company and bosses cannot horde capital.

"Hoard".

[Ifreann]

Not only would I immediately fire him but I would call a meeting of the entire staff* and outline exactly what happened stressing how horribly disgustingly disrespectful he was and why they all need to know how disgustingly rude he was because and why he deserves to die but alas I can but only fire him. Bottom line is simple, zero tolerance for bullshit. If you have problems take it out on your wife or something and than come to work with a smile. And yes, by the way, that is a standard I live by which is why I expect it of others.


* If possible. Obviously if I am working with a giant company and not a smallish business this might need to be replaced by a memo instead.

This might be an employment law violation in some states.

Also, deserves to die? Really?

Death before dishonour.

[Sovaal]

This might be an employment law violation in some states.

Also, deserves to die? Really?

Death before dishonour.

Just allow employers to kill any employees they want and the economy will be fixed, duh.

[Katganistan]

"A general needs a army, but a without a general a army is leaderless and ineffective"

A general can also destroy a veteran army.

And this general was stupid enough to provoke the outburst.

[Methodological Individualism]

However, one morning the employee seems unbelievably pissed off. When you ask him what the matter is... he says its "none of your god damn business"

Probably true, if a little curt.

...and that you better "beat it."

The interaction stops here, since the implied threat is already actionable, especially if witnesses are present. Proceed to human resoruces with witnesses immediately.

Done.

(But, just for fun...)

You then tell him: "Choose your next words wisely, choose them true, and choose them right."

Escalating the situation in this way is incredibly stupid not only from a personal safety point of view, but doing so will also weaken my case re: the threat. So openly provoking continued hostility in this manner makes me an aggressor and so open to discipline myself.

Rookie mistake, hate to see it.

You have not yet talked to him about his behaviour...

Right, cause I'm too busy marching my office full of witnesses through human resources, and not screwing my case with unnecessary interactions.

...explain that he's insulted the honour of the company...

I cannot think of any idea or factor more completely irrelevant to the scenario. Is this even a thing?

Otherwise you will not be respected and feared and you will be unable to run the organisation.

Oh, I see. We're not talking about an employment scenario, but rather about tinpot dictator fantasies. Fortunately I work in a well educated, well compensated, and highly unionized public sector area, where management tends to be promoted from within according to well defined career ladders and salary schedules. Our bosses tend to be former underlings. Accordingly, I've noted a considerable lack of wannabe dictator so far.

Can't speak for the private sector, but I've heard stories. If the tinpots wanna stay over there, I'd be perfectly happy.

[Holy Tedalonia]

A general can also destroy a veteran army.

And this general was stupid enough to provoke the outburst.

To be fair, asking if anything is ok is a question any good manager should have. I mean it displays a friendly manager appearance.

[New haven america]

And this general was stupid enough to provoke the outburst.

To be fair, asking if anything is ok is a question any good manager should have. I mean it displays a friendly manager appearance.

And when someone tells you it's none of your business, you should listen to them and try not to cause further provocation.

[Senkaku]

If you have problems take it out on your wife or something and than come to work with a smile.

[Herador]

If you have problems take it out on your wife or something and than come to work with a smile.

I regularly beat my wife before work, helps get the stress out. It's basically my coffee.

[Senkaku]

I regularly beat my wife before work, helps get the stress out. It's basically my coffee.

Even offensive jokes are supposed to actually be funny, my guy :|

[Herador]

I regularly beat my wife before work, helps get the stress out. It's basically my coffee.

Even offensive jokes are supposed to actually be funny, my guy :|

I wasn't trying to be funny, I was trying to mock.

[USS Monitor]

I'd summon him into the firm's main hall, explain that he's insulted the honour of the company, and then fire him.

That's the coward's option! Whip out your Bat'leth and disembowel the faithless P'tak!

I don't have a Bat'leth. Will a banhammer do in a pinch?

[Des-Bal]

Well since I'm not horribly self centered I'd notice that someone's behavior and attitude suddenly and radically changed and become concerned something was seriously wrong. Is he losing his house? Was he diagnosed with cancer? Did his kid commit suicide? You may well be judging a person based on how friendly they are on the worst day of their life. Make sure he's okay, make sure this isn't happening again, and let him continue his job.

[Torrocca]

You are an employer.

Whoa now, when did I get redpilled into liking the capitalist system?

I jest. On we go!

You've recently hired a new employee. The employee performs exceptionally well and far above the level of your other employees. He's very friendly and behaves very professionally.

A strong laborer, and kind to boot! Just my type!

However, one morning the employee seems unbelievably pissed off. When you ask him what the matter is... he says its "none of your god damn business" and that you better "beat it."

I tell him, "well, alright. If you need the day off to handle whatever it is that's bothering you, feel free, it won't go against your pay. And if you need to talk about anything at all, my office door is always open." Because deescalating a situation and ensuring the safety and well-being of my laboring comrades is always important.

You then tell him: "Choose your next words wisely, choose them true, and choose them right."

No I don't, because I'm not a goading, egotistical chauvinist with my head stuck up the ass of 17th century Bushido code Japan.

He then says to your face and in full view of the entire office:

"Okay then.

F*** the company.

**** this job.

**** you.

You can go **** yourself."

Only assuming I gave him the response of a goading, egotistical chauvinist with my head stuck up the ass of 17th century Bushido code Japan, of course.

He then storms off and goes home, skipping more than half a day of work.

As long as this helps him ensure the best of his mental and physical well-being, good!

The next day he comes back to work, happy and productive as a clam. You have not yet talked to him about his behaviour that day but a few days later... he's back to his super productive and over-performing mode.

And see? It has!

So I ask you NSG...

What would you do about this employee? Would you talk to him (how and what about)? Would you fire him? Would you just let it go since it seems to be a one time incident?

It's pretty obvious: deescalate first, ensure the man's (or woman's) health, well-being, and safety is secure by any means (letting them to home to cool their jets, talking to them, etc.), and avoid such a nasty, unnecessary situation to begin with.

I'd summon him into the firm's main hall, explain that he's insulted the honour of the company, and then fire him. When he chose to say those words, he didn't just make a mistake, he made a choice. He's insulted the honour of the company and if someone does so (regardless of their performance), they have to be let go. Otherwise you will not be respected and feared and you will be unable to run the organisation. Also, it is evident that he can no longer be trusted and that his loyalty is in question. And in this day and age, loyalty is currency. Its not a question of performance, its a question of loyalty and honour.

Oh boy, Hollywoodified 17th century Bushido code Japan, here we come!

[Ardrentt]

You are an employer.

Whoa now, when did I get redpilled into liking the capitalist system?

I jest. On we go!

You've recently hired a new employee. The employee performs exceptionally well and far above the level of your other employees. He's very friendly and behaves very professionally.

A strong laborer, and kind to boot! Just my type!

However, one morning the employee seems unbelievably pissed off. When you ask him what the matter is... he says its "none of your god damn business" and that you better "beat it."

I tell him, "well, alright. If you need the day off to handle whatever it is that's bothering you, feel free, it won't go against your pay. And if you need to talk about anything at all, my office door is always open." Because deescalating a situation and ensuring the safety and well-being of my laboring comrades is always important.

You then tell him: "Choose your next words wisely, choose them true, and choose them right."

No I don't, because I'm not a goading, egotistical chauvinist with my head stuck up the ass of 17th century Bushido code Japan.

He then says to your face and in full view of the entire office:

"Okay then.

F*** the company.

**** this job.

**** you.

You can go **** yourself."

Only assuming I gave him the response of a goading, egotistical chauvinist with my head stuck up the ass of 17th century Bushido code Japan, of course.

He then storms off and goes home, skipping more than half a day of work.

As long as this helps him ensure the best of his mental and physical well-being, good!

The next day he comes back to work, happy and productive as a clam. You have not yet talked to him about his behaviour that day but a few days later... he's back to his super productive and over-performing mode.

And see? It has!

So I ask you NSG...

What would you do about this employee? Would you talk to him (how and what about)? Would you fire him? Would you just let it go since it seems to be a one time incident?

It's pretty obvious: deescalate first, ensure the man's (or woman's) health, well-being, and safety is secure by any means (letting them to home to cool their jets, talking to them, etc.), and avoid such a nasty, unnecessary situation to begin with.

I'd summon him into the firm's main hall, explain that he's insulted the honour of the company, and then fire him. When he chose to say those words, he didn't just make a mistake, he made a choice. He's insulted the honour of the company and if someone does so (regardless of their performance), they have to be let go. Otherwise you will not be respected and feared and you will be unable to run the organisation. Also, it is evident that he can no longer be trusted and that his loyalty is in question. And in this day and age, loyalty is currency. Its not a question of performance, its a question of loyalty and honour.

Oh boy, Hollywoodified 17th century Bushido code Japan, here we come!

You can't deny it would make a good movie... or at least a good-ish Western maybe.

I mean, at least by controversy standards, it would make a killing.

[Australian rePublic]

As long as he's not a dick to customers. Although, if he was that pissed, I'd get him to do something without customers. The next day, I would talk to him, and see what's wrong. I'm not going to be a dock to someone who experiences the normal human emotion of anger

[Torrocca]

Whoa now, when did I get redpilled into liking the capitalist system?

I jest. On we go!



A strong laborer, and kind to boot! Just my type!



I tell him, "well, alright. If you need the day off to handle whatever it is that's bothering you, feel free, it won't go against your pay. And if you need to talk about anything at all, my office door is always open." Because deescalating a situation and ensuring the safety and well-being of my laboring comrades is always important.



No I don't, because I'm not a goading, egotistical chauvinist with my head stuck up the ass of 17th century Bushido code Japan.



Only assuming I gave him the response of a goading, egotistical chauvinist with my head stuck up the ass of 17th century Bushido code Japan, of course.



As long as this helps him ensure the best of his mental and physical well-being, good!



And see? It has!



It's pretty obvious: deescalate first, ensure the man's (or woman's) health, well-being, and safety is secure by any means (letting them to home to cool their jets, talking to them, etc.), and avoid such a nasty, unnecessary situation to begin with.



Oh boy, Hollywoodified 17th century Bushido code Japan, here we come!

You can't deny it would make a good movie... or at least a good-ish Western maybe.

I mean, at least by controversy standards, it would make a killing.

This summer, witness ever loyal and always faithful employee Ser Jim of House Goodman as he ventures on his quest of vengeance against the evil Ser Wallace of House Street after unjustly being fired for dishonoring the company on one bad day. Starring Keanu Reeves as Jim and Bruce Willis as Wallace in... Fir3D. NowinIMAXandIMAX3d(extrafeesmayapplyseelocaltheaterfordetails).

[Purpelia]

Not only would I immediately fire him but I would call a meeting of the entire staff* and outline exactly what happened stressing how horribly disgustingly disrespectful he was and why they all need to know how disgustingly rude he was because and why he deserves to die but alas I can but only fire him. Bottom line is simple, zero tolerance for bullshit. If you have problems take it out on your wife or something and than come to work with a smile. And yes, by the way, that is a standard I live by which is why I expect it of others.


* If possible. Obviously if I am working with a giant company and not a smallish business this might need to be replaced by a memo instead.

You didn't say disgusting enough times.

I think I did. The intent was to deliberately cut the number off to indicate that this would not be angry ranting but a very deliberate if hateful statement.
After all, it would be very hypocritical if I was the kind of person to punish an idiot for being rude and angry only to expose a whole bunch of people to an angry rant of my own. Rather, it would be a targeted statement to the effect of making that one person into an example they must all look at and heed.

This might be an employment law violation in some states.

Not just states but countries, mine included. Still, this is not a question of what can be done practically but what our opinion on the subject is in terms of general principal. Thought experiments generally shouldn't delve into legality after all unless their purpose is to examine a legal system.

And let's face it. If I wanted to fire someone I could always find a reason just as a teacher who wants to fail someone can always find a question to ask. It's the benefit of having superior power in a relationship.

Also, deserves to die? Really?

Strictly speaking no. If you monitor my posts you should notice that I tend to to exaggerate and embellish my responses for dramatic, comedic or some other effect as par for the course. Especially if it has an underlying purpose, such as in this case where it is to indicate I'd be mighty pissed at the idiot.

[The Conez Imperium]

Wow I feel that some people in this thread have thin skin? I understand that you want to have a strict professional working environment and want no employee challenging your authority but threatening them with expulsion? Are swear words that heinous they justify using the "punishment" of last resort.

I'd probably be concerned with his health or state of affairs. Anecdotally, arguments with lots of heated exchanges are sometimes productive. The arguments of Stalin/Zhukov had higher stakes (literally life and death) but didn't end in the firing of Zhukov.

[Purpelia]

Wow I feel that some people in this thread have thin skin? I understand that you want to have a strict professional working environment and want no employee challenging your authority but threatening them with expulsion? Are swear words that heinous they justify using the "punishment" of last resort.

I'd probably be concerned with his health or state of affairs. Anecdotally, arguments with lots of heated exchanges are sometimes productive. The arguments of Stalin/Zhukov had higher stakes (literally life and death) but didn't end in the firing of Zhukov.

What are you talking about? This is not about standing up to authority to get the job done better because you disagree with command. It's about the guy being a dick for no good reason. The guy is NOT acting in the best interests of the company here! Indeed, even if we ignore him being rude he literally engaged in theft by refusing to provide the time and work I as his employed paid for.

There is a big difference between being a good responsible worker arguing in the best interests of your employer and being a rude work avoiding good for nothing. It's the same difference between a debate and a brawl. One is productive, the other destructive.

[The Conez Imperium]

Wow I feel that some people in this thread have thin skin? I understand that you want to have a strict professional working environment and want no employee challenging your authority but threatening them with expulsion? Are swear words that heinous they justify using the "punishment" of last resort.

I'd probably be concerned with his health or state of affairs. Anecdotally, arguments with lots of heated exchanges are sometimes productive. The arguments of Stalin/Zhukov had higher stakes (literally life and death) but didn't end in the firing of Zhukov.

What are you talking about? This is not about standing up to authority to get the job done better because you disagree with command. It's about the guy being a dick for no good reason. The guy is NOT acting in the best interests of the company here! Indeed, even if we ignore him being rude he literally engaged in theft by refusing to provide the time and work I as his employed paid for.

There is a big difference between being a good responsible worker arguing in the best interests of your employer and being a rude work avoiding good for nothing. It's the same difference between a debate and a brawl. One is productive, the other destructive.

Within the limits of the thought experiment

-He is an above average productive worker "over-preforming"
-He's recently hired meaning we spent a lot of time and energy recruiting him for our business

It would simply be more productive to dock him half a day of work ? then try to equivocate the situation as theft. Furthermore, establishing if people are unsavory generally takes more evidence than 1 outburst. In my view we don't have enough evidence/observations to make a good claim.

Lastly, we don't know why the employee had an outbreak. That is probably the most important fact to establish before we start thinking of docking people's pay or firing people. What happens if he found out that his wife has cancer or something?

[Purpelia]

If you have problems take it out on your wife or something and than come to work with a smile.

The way I see it the employer-employee relationship is one of trade.

The employee sells his labor, defined as his skill multiplied by hard work applied over a predetermined period of time. The employer in turn provides him with money and additional benefits as defined by their contract and national law.

What either of them does at home is utterly irrelevant for the exchange. All other things being equal I would rather hire someone who beats his wife at home and puts in a productive days work than someone who would newer harm a fly at home but goes out and takes those frustrations out of his productivity instead.

Within the limits of the thought experiment

-He is an above average productive worker "over-preforming"
-He's recently hired meaning we spent a lot of time and energy recruiting him for our business

It would simply be more productive to dock him half a day of work ? then try to equivocate the situation as theft. Furthermore, establishing if people are unsavory generally takes more evidence than 1 outburst. In my view we don't have enough evidence/observations to make a good claim.

That's a classic case of sunk cost fallacy.

It is better to rid our self of someone like this right now when the first cracks appear and accept the lost from that than to invest trust in him hoping it won't happen again and potentially lose far more down the line. And that is the inevitable outcome of that because by allowing him to stay the only thing you would achieve is setting a precedent for tolerance whilst at the same time sinking even more cost into this person making him and others like him even harder to punish in the future.

And I would always rather have 10 stable and productive mediocre workers that put in 80% every day all day than one petulant star worker that achieves 200% when he feels like it. At least in most industries.

Lastly, we don't know why the employee had an outbreak. That is probably the most important fact to establish before we start thinking of docking people's pay or firing people. What happens if he found out that his wife has cancer or something?

Not my problem.

I don't care if he literally caught his wife, mother and underage son all having group sex with Hitler. Leave that at home. Or if you can't politely call and ask for a day off. Politely. There are mechanisms for people to ask to be excused from work that an employer has to provide for legal reasons. If you refuse to do those and instead opt to come in I expect no less than the 100% I my self would give as an employee.

[Ethel mermania]

And this general was stupid enough to provoke the outburst.

To be fair, asking if anything is ok is a question any good manager should have. I mean it displays a friendly manager appearance.

It was the "choose your words wisely" bit that threw the whole thing into bizarre world fantasy land.

[Purpelia]

To be fair, asking if anything is ok is a question any good manager should have. I mean it displays a friendly manager appearance.

It was the "choose your words wisely" bit that threw the whole thing into bizarre world fantasy land.

Why? I mean, I personally would not use those words exactly but I would most certainly ask something along the lines of: "You are stepping over the line of what is acceptable. Calm down right now and explain your self or else." And that's just a really fancy manager talk for the same thing.