No good deed...



  • ... goes unpunished.

    I have a friend who works for a 24-hour company which will be left unnamed.

    Lately, there have been many staffing issues at this particular place. However, my friend (I'll call him "John" for arguement's sake) is usually a reliable guy to help fix the problem. He often volunteers to stay late in place of other employees who didn't come in (either because they're skipping work, or because the retard managers didn't schedule them), and he is happy to do so because he is able to pick up many overtime hours in this manner.Now, John is a great guy. Everyone loves him. He's been working at this place for a while and knows his stuff up and down. He's a very reliable worker.

    Now, on Friday, it was worse than normal. There were MAJOR staffing issues. People who needed to be there just weren't there. There was only one thing for John to do: stay. Ovenight. For a massive amount of time.

    Now, on top of the required 1.5x pay you get for working more than 40 hours a week, this particular company also offers 1.5x pay to employees for each hour they work longer than 12 hours in a day. I'm just saying this to illustrate the fact that John is always very happy to be picking up these hours. He was tired, yes, but he still did it all with a smile.

    John stayed for a whopping 20 hours, raking in x2 his normal pay for
    most of the night (at least, I think that's how it works...). He only
    awaited the morning manager to come in...

    And then THIS came from left field.

    The morning manager came in, and BOOM, suddenly, John is fired.

    Why?

    He broke the zero-tolerance uniform policy for having facial hair.

    Yes, I'm not joking. He fired just like that for having a beard. Because he stayed for 20 hours and couldn't shave on the job. And according to him, it wasn't even a "beard", just some stubble. He'd shaved before he came into work that day. Or, the previous day. Whatever you want to call it. And no demerit or anything. Just out-right fired.

    Now, I don't know how this story is going to end, since the shit is still in the fan at the moment. John says he's going to be able to get his job back, because the particular manager who made the call is new and perhaps didn't realize what kind of an asset he got rid of. Besides, it wasn't John's fault at all. He was doing the place a favor by staying. You can't even make the point that he could have brought a razor to work with him, since he didn't know he'd be staying that long when he came in.

    He just got done telling me all of this over an AIM conversation. I don't think I've ever seen him this pissed. I'll let you know how the story ends. (If you ask me, though, it sounds like the facial hair probably wasn't the whole story. This manager probably had the whole "I hate this guy, fire him on the first mistake he makes" thing going on. Or maybe he was just having a bad morning.)

     

     



  • What the hell? There are actually places you can get fired from for 5 o'clock shadow?

    What sort of ridiculous fucking rule is that? I'd be glad to be away from that company.



  • I knew this was going to be about a total bullshit policy the moment I noticed the phrase "zero-tolerance" as my eyes passed over the text before I'd actually started reading the post. If the higher-ups have any common sense, the idiot manager will be fired instead.



  •  wouldn't be surprised if they staffing issue prior to John's firing where manufactured.



  • @drinkingbird said:

    What the hell? There are actually places you can get fired from for 5 o'clock shadow?

    What sort of ridiculous fucking rule is that? I'd be glad to be away from that company.

     

    I'm more concerned about firing people for just having facial hair. I won't argue if the fired employee was an unkempt gorilla (even though they should give a warning before they fire him), but this is extreme. It's not like beards are unnatural (or gross, as some people imply).

     

    PS: I'm a bearded guy myself (well-groomed if I do say so myself).



  • Of all the things to have a zero-tolerance policy about, I just can't imagine who would decide to put facial hair on the list. I could see having talk with someone who repeatedly comes in with unkempt stubble, but firing for a single occurance of a beard is ridiculous.



  • True story: During a summer between college semesters, I joined a temp agency in the hope of finding at least somewhat computer-related work. After a while, they called with a job. It was just data entry, but it was money at least.

    But most people at the temp agency had never actually met me or seen me. I came in to talk to them and prepare for the job I'd be taking. As soon as the guy saw me, he looked deflated. "Oh dear," he said. "I'm afraid this particular company won't take you. We'll have to get someone else."

    I asked why. "Because," he answered, "they don't accept anyone with facial hair."

    He then went on to cite some of the other ridiculous requirements there. For instance, no males with shoulder-length or longer hair. (I could understand that requirement for salesmen, but data entry?) No males with any earrings. Suit and tie worn at all times. The topper was that women who worked there were not permitted to wear pants. Ever. Skirts and dresses only.

    This was in the US, east coast. Fairly large company.

    This took place in 1990. To some DailyWTF users, that may seen like ancient history, but really, people were pretty enlightened in 1990. (Well, not all of them, obviously.) This stuff was appropriate for 1960, not 1990.



  • @VGR said:

    This stuff was appropriate for 1960, not 1990.

    It was never appropriate, that's why we gradually stopped doing it.



  • @VGR said:

    He then went on to cite some of the other ridiculous requirements there. For instance, no males with shoulder-length or longer hair. (I could understand that requirement for salesmen, but data entry?) No males with any earrings. Suit and tie worn at all times. The topper was that women who worked there were not permitted to wear pants. Ever. Skirts and dresses only.

     

    Aren't there some employee rights to be violated by this?



  • Sounds like someone was just trying to come up with a reason to fire him for all that overtime work.  To him it looked like he was doing a favor but to the company he looks like a major cost they could avoid. 



  • @CAD said:

    I have a friend who works for a 24-hour company which will be left unnamed.

    You haven't mentioned the type of employment that your friends was in. If it was retail/customer service then I can understand the presentation requirements - and I would hate to think what a customer's opinion of a company would be when being served by someone who has not showered/shaved/changed for the last 24 hours.

    But that doesn't absolve the manager from showing some common sense/respect for your friend. It also raises the issue of labor laws and the maximum length of time a person is allowed to be on-shift continuously even if he volunteered for it.

    If this was the US it would a very interesting unfair dismissal lawsuit.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Sounds like someone was just trying to come up with a reason to fire him for all that overtime work.  To him it looked like he was doing a favor but to the company he looks like a major cost they could avoid. 
     

    It would probably be more expensive to close the doors, especially if the store is part of a franchise that requires offering 24 hr service.  I would suspect too, that he can only offer to take more time, and a manager would have final approval of who gets the extra shift - and if it just so happens he's the only one who can take it, then its the manager's fault for letting employee management get that bad and cost the company that much money to pay a single person.



  • @BeenThere said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Sounds like someone was just trying to come up with a reason to fire him for all that overtime work.  To him it looked like he was doing a favor but to the company he looks like a major cost they could avoid. 
     

    It would probably be more expensive to close the doors, especially if the store is part of a franchise that requires offering 24 hr service.  I would suspect too, that he can only offer to take more time, and a manager would have final approval of who gets the extra shift - and if it just so happens he's the only one who can take it, then its the manager's fault for letting employee management get that bad and cost the company that much money to pay a single person.

    I didn't mean closing down the store, I meant that his willingness to take overtime shifts made it easier for other employees to duck out of their responsibilities so he may have been seen as an expense that enabled other employees to slack. 



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @BeenThere said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Sounds like someone was just trying to come up with a reason to fire him for all that overtime work.  To him it looked like he was doing a favor but to the company he looks like a major cost they could avoid. 
     

    It would probably be more expensive to close the doors, especially if the store is part of a franchise that requires offering 24 hr service.  I would suspect too, that he can only offer to take more time, and a manager would have final approval of who gets the extra shift - and if it just so happens he's the only one who can take it, then its the manager's fault for letting employee management get that bad and cost the company that much money to pay a single person.

    I didn't mean closing down the store, I meant that his willingness to take overtime shifts made it easier for other employees to duck out of their responsibilities so he may have been seen as an expense that enabled other employees to slack. 

     

    also, the manager might have told him to stop putting in so many overtime hours.  Often managers don't want to take the time to look up exactly the number of hours someone will put in over a week so they count on their employees being careful and not putting overtime in.  If I told someone to stop putting so much overtime in, and then I came in and found out what he did, I'd probably fire him too.



  • @dhromed said:

    @VGR said:

    This stuff was appropriate for 1960, not 1990.

    It was never appropriate, that's why we gradually stopped doing it.

    I say we move for a renaisance and bring that shit back.  I'm way too young to have ever had the opportunity to use the term "dames".  I've missed out on an important misogynistic milestone, dammit!



  • @VGR said:

    The topper was that women who worked there were not permitted to wear pants. Ever.

     

     

    ... that just made it worthwhile coming into the office early, in a country where pants does not mean trousers.



  • Only place I've seen people get punished for something this stupid was the army. And even there you could catch a break seeing as it's a bit difficult to shave when you're pulling a 12 hour guard duty shift.



  •  Wow.

     I regularly arrive into work having not shaved for 3 or four days. In fact, I have about 2mm of stubble right now. And a shirt and tie on.  I also wear three earrings that I haven't taken out in about 18 months. And I don't work in some hippie place, it's one of the largest companies in <insert industry> in the world. I'm getting better though, I used to go a week or so. My excuse is that if I shave any more often than every two days, I bleed. Badly. And that's with an electric razor. Using a blade I look like an extra from a vampire flick.

     That said, I also live in a country with decent employment law. I couldn't be fired for coming in unkempt unless they'd gone through the entire disciplinary process. 

     I could probably come into work in my underwear every day and it would take about 2 months to get rid of me.



  • @tster said:

    If I told someone to stop putting so much overtime in, and then I came in and found out what he did, I'd probably fire him too.

    Why not fire the people that didn't come in ? I mean, he was staying over because someone wasn't there for that position, he took advantage of an opportunity. If people want to skip work all the time, and you have to pay overtime because of it, I don't view the person who covered as being in fault, but the person who skipped. If he had shown up, you would have your regular expense. But since he didn't, the person took advantage of the overtime opportunity. 

    Also, I feel like whomever was the manager is at fault also, because if they were worried about overtime costs and the person scheduled to come in doesn't, then the manager could call in someone with less overtime racked up. (Or depending on the position, hire a temp)



  • Where in the world did this happened?

    I'm inclined to think like morb, that there is more to this firing than the hair policy... and I know a there are a few countries where I've lived, that he could get this company in trouble for this nonsense.

    I have declined job offers because this always shaved policy.  I have a
    beard and I always keep it very well groomed. I use a machine to keep
    the beard trimed and nice. But the skin on my neck will get really ugly
    really fast if I ever pass a razor near it.  And this is a medicall
    condition. (Yes I've been to doctors, and the consensus is: don't use
    razors.) So I always look like I have a 2 day beard.

    This "condition" has made me decline a few job offers (which I wouldn't want to work in a place with reverse taliban rules). I'm pretty sure I look nicer with my beard than with a bleeding rashed neck. 

     



  • @pitchingchris said:

    Also, I feel like whomever was the manager is at fault also, because if they were worried about overtime costs and the person scheduled to come in doesn't, then the manager could call in someone with less overtime racked up. (Or depending on the position, hire a temp)

     

    Better yet, the manager, most likely being exempt from overtime, should have worked the shift himself.



  • @RayMarron said:

    Better yet, the manager, most likely being exempt from overtime, should have worked the shift himself.

    Believe it or not, I do know a handful of managers that would do this.  But I can guarantee the one in this case wouldn't. Depending on the environment, some managers would shut a section down before they would even consider performing any work.

    Assuming that this is a possibility, which is worse, to have a person with a little scruff, or to have nobody working ?  I find it hard to believe you'd be willing to fuss about overtime and facial hair when the alternative would have cost a lot more.

     However, given the information, the manager probably thought he came in like that bright and early, and was too stubborn to listen otherwise if any objections were made.



  • it's a glatt kosher restaurant, and the manager is a sikh.

    no, wait...

     

     



  • @drinkingbird said:

    What the hell? There are actually places you can get fired from for 5 o'clock shadow?

    What sort of ridiculous fucking rule is that? I'd be glad to be away from that company.

     

    When I was growing up (lived near Philadelpha), I remember being told that all Philadelphian cops were clean-shaven (there was some sort of policy/reason for this).  Turns out that this is actually rather strictly enforced and is only relaxed in cases of chronic skin issues and religious cases (Muslim cops, I believe), in which case the cop must keep the beard very short. I don't think you would get fired, but probably would be kept from your daily beat.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    I didn't mean closing down the store, I meant that his willingness to take overtime shifts made it easier for other employees to duck out of their responsibilities so he may have been seen as an expense that enabled other employees to slack. 
     

    I guess we would need more information - I got the impression that management dealt with scheduling and asked him to work those hours.  Its hard around here to 'take someone's shift' in any kind of job, because you'll get fired if you habitually have others cover for you. 



    Something else we don't know - could he have been so jacked on coffee after the marathon shift, that the manager thought he was on crack?



  • @BeenThere said:

    could he have been so jacked on coffee after the marathon shift, that the manager thought he was on crack?

    You don't even need coffee after 20 hours to make it look like you're on crack. I've done it numerous times and every time I've done it, I'd have baggy and red-lined eyes. I would look like crap in that situation, but then again, I wasn't working in food or retail. So as long as I kept my brain functioning enough, I was ok.

    If you're in a software position, it certainly does not pay to do this too much though, good rest is crucial otherwise you can chase your tail a lot because your tiredness drives your frustration a bit.



  • Well, this is good news. Today, he went in to talk to a manager, and he's free to come back to work on Tuesday as normal.

    Also, he says that the new manager wasn't fired, but he was "dealt with" and "removed from the picture". Apparently this isn't the only stupid thing he's done lately. My friend is convinced he got demoted.

    Score one for the good guys...



  • @CAD said:

    Well, this is good news. Today, he went in to talk to a manager, and he's free to come back to work on Tuesday as normal.

    Also, he says that the new manager wasn't fired, but he was "dealt with" and "removed from the picture". Apparently this isn't the only stupid thing he's done lately. My friend is convinced he got demoted.

    Score one for the good guys...

     

    can we please know what kind of work this guy does?  If he drives a forklift then working 20 hours should be an instant firing for safety reasons as well as an instant firing for the manager that allowed it. You see what we mean when we say we need more info.  You have told us only the smallest amount of information, and we're just guessing on everything.  



  •  @seamustheseagull said:

    I regularly arrive into work having not shaved for 3 or four days. In fact, I have about 2mm of stubble right now. And a shirt and tie on.  I also wear three earrings that I haven't taken out in about 18 months. And I don't work in some hippie place, it's one of the largest companies in <insert industry> in the world. I'm getting better though, I used to go a week or so. My excuse is that if I shave any more often than every two days, I bleed. Badly.

    Aye, me too. But not because I have bad skin. I'm just a lazy shaver. I should probably unearth an apparatus to keep my "talking pussy" (I really hate that general nickname) in tight shape.



  • @tster said:

    can we please know what kind of work this guy does?  If he drives a forklift then working 20 hours should be an instant firing for safety reasons as well as an instant firing for the manager that allowed it.

     

    An always-shaved policy for forklift drivers would constitute a wtf on its own. But I see your point - different jobs, different requirements.



  • @ammoQ said:

    @tster said:

    can we please know what kind of work this guy does?  If he drives a forklift then working 20 hours should be an instant firing for safety reasons as well as an instant firing for the manager that allowed it.

     

    An always-shaved policy for forklift drivers would constitute a wtf on its own. But I see your point - different jobs, different requirements.

    It would be interesting to know what he does that requires a clean shaven policy.  An always shaved policy for forkift drivers (or any occupation) is not necessarliy a WTF if he works in a chemical plant..  There are many plants where anyone who enters certain areas for any reason must wear special protective breathing apparatus, due to the hazardous chemicals in the area,  and OSHA regulations require you to be clean shaven in order to get a good seal on the face piece.

     



  • @dhromed said:

    I should probably unearth an apparatus to keep my "talking pussy" (I really hate that general nickname) in tight shape.

    I've never even heard the phrase "talking pussy" before.  Seriously, what in God's name are you talking about?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    I've never even heard the phrase "talking pussy" before.  Seriously, what in God's name are you talking about?
     

    Obviously he means his mouth with a beard/moustache around it.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.