Would you disregard your boss's "rule"?

[Papa Deuce]

The scenario goes like this:

Employees have been doing a job for the exact same way for 10 PLUS years. There has NEVER been even ONE error.

New boss comes in and says it needs to be done a different way. Every single employee in his department can tell that doing it the boss' way opens us up to all kinds of possible errors. Even the supervisors he has working under him know this, and he has told them he doesn't care. Do it his way.

Now if something goes wrong, it will be considered the employee's fault, not the boss. LOL We once were called in when our worlplace was doing poorly and reprimanded as a group. When someone questioned whether it was all non managemen't fault, the, with a straight face said "Yes it is, management is not responsible for this" No Lie. That is what they said. Non management gets fired occasionally, management almost never.

So, the boss is not here at the time he wants his way implimented. He is at home. He would have NO WAY to know whether you did it his way, or the way you have always done it.

Supervisor's have speculated, based on things they have heard, that management want people to make mistakes so that they can document it, and thus, lead to firing people who would not be replaced.

Our contract states that we will have no lay - offs before this current contract ends. However there are no clauses for performance firings, meaning too many bad performances can lead to a firing.

We are in the process of automating much of our workplace. When this contract is over, we will surely have some layoffs.

So, what would you do? Would you do it "your way" or the bosses way?

 

[Equidae]

Seems very danged if you do, danged if you don't, doesn't it? Well, I'm a stubborn person by nature, so I would probably do it the old, reliable way whenever possible. What a messed-up situation to be in!

 

[KristaTX]

The answer would vary based on what the job is and what the changes are. What do you do exactly, and what are the changes?

 

[Papa Deuce]

The answer would vary based on what the job is and what the changes are. What do you do exactly, and what are the changes?

Well, without getting technical, he wants us to do something manually when we currently do it automatically after inputting times. If you proofread and confirm the times, it works perfectly. He wants us to sit there and initiate individual events. However one could EASILY be distracted by a phone call, someone saying "hi"....

Once the times are in and confirmed, you are good to go.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I would be curious of "why" he wants it doen "his" way.

And as far as what you describe--if the only reason errors occur is b/c of phone calls and such--then I would be inclined to suck it up and do as instructed.

I worked in radio/television when it wasn't on auto-pilot. I just made sure my i's were dotted and my t's were crossed.

If it is that much of an issue--is there ANYONE above him who you can talk about it.

I'm sure $$$ was spent to make it possible to do it the way you have been doing it. Why waste the equipment/technolog by going to "manual" or some close proximity thereof? It just doesn't make good sense.

 

[Beth76]

I don't see how he can tell you how to do your job as long as you get it done correctly especially if ultimately you are the one responsible for it. If he has no way of knowing, then do it your way.

 

[Lyn5]

I would spend my energy looking for a another job...this example does not sound good. Follow the "bosses way" and you screw up and get fired. Not follow the "bosses way" and he may find out that you did not follow a directive and you get fired. Either way it doesn't look like a promising future, unless boss gets fired first and the company does not have layoff down the road.

 

[barkley]

i (coming from supervision) would do it his way. if i follow his instructions and it becomes an issue it is legal pursuable. if i refuse i am being insubordinate and despite any good intentions on my part i have still refused to follow my supervisor's directive (likely not legaly pursuable).

 

[KristaTX]

Sounds like a step backwards then, technologically. It seems unlikely, but is there a possible good reason for this that you may have overlooked? Have they even given you a reason for the change??

So how closely does he watch you? Would he be aware if you were to just program it your way, and then sit there near computer looking busy as if you are doing it manually? That would help to avoid any manual screw-ups, but would also keep the boss from knowing that you are NOT doing it his way.

 

[Taylor]

I would not work for a company that put me into such a position.

In my company it is my responsibility to always do what is best for the company, not what is necessarily what my direct bosses (President and CEO) think is right. If I can defend my actions, my job is always safe. This has been tested on many heated occasions.

 

[Papa Deuce]

I would be curious of "why" he wants it doen "his" way.

And as far as what you describe--if the only reason errors occur is b/c of phone calls and such--then I would be inclined to suck it up and do as instructed.

I worked in radio/television when it wasn't on auto-pilot. I just made sure my i's were dotted and my t's were crossed.

If it is that much of an issue--is there ANYONE above him who you can talk about it.

I'm sure $$$ was spent to make it possible to do it the way you have been doing it. Why waste the equipment/technolog by going to "manual" or some close proximity thereof? It just doesn't make good sense.

Sure, I do that all the time. But in network programming it is far safer to be on auto pilot. I'm expected to answer phones and transfer calls, tune in live shots, make calls.... But would ya really wanna take a chance that during one of the 10 phone calls per hour that I handle, you get involved and blow a local break? You could lose many 10s of thousands of dollars. If you get distracted for 2 seconds you could have a client refuse to pay.

If it is on auto pilot and proofread, then you have no such concerns.... unless the computer crashes, which could happen at any time, anyway.

 

[arminnie]

Here's my take on this from what I've read between the lines:

You have an automated process. By making you do it manually he is accomplishing two things. One - busy work for you (no taking it easy while the automatic stuff takes place) - you have to be constantly on guard for mistakes.
Sort of I can't lay you off but by golly you are going to have to be on your toes every second.

The second part is maybe he IS hoping for some mistakes - that will prove that automation is better and that the people are not needed - paving the way for future layoffs.

I'm old enough to remember when computerized typesetting was invented. They literally had to wait years until the old linotype operators died or retired off before the newspaper could totally switch to the new technology. No one is that patient anymore.

 

[Papa Deuce]

Sounds like a step backwards then, technologically. It seems unlikely, but is there a possible good reason for this that you may have overlooked? Have they even given you a reason for the change??

So how closely does he watch you? Would he be aware if you were to just program it your way, and then sit there near computer looking busy as if you are doing it manually? That would help to avoid any manual screw-ups, but would also keep the boss from knowing that you are NOT doing it his way.

No reason given, and we asked. Like I said, he is at home when it affects me.

 

[Papa Deuce]

Here's my take on this from what I've read between the lines:

You have an automated process. By making you do it manually he is accomplishing two things. One - busy work for you (no taking it easy while the automatic stuff takes place) - you have to be constantly on guard for mistakes.
Sort of I can't lay you off but by golly you are going to have to be on your toes every second.

The second part is maybe he IS hoping for some mistakes - that will prove that automation is better and that the people are not needed - paving the way for future layoffs.

I'm old enough to remember when computerized typesetting was invented. They literally had to wait years until the old linotype operators died or retired off before the newspaper could totally switch to the new technology. No one is that patient anymore.

But, see, we have been automated in this particular function for 10+ years, already.

 

[PrincessKitty1]

Depends--if the ENTIRE department (bunch of people) decided to continue doing it the old way, I'd probably go along with them. However, I would not stick my neck out and be insubordinate.

For me, my first priorities are ALWAYS what's best for my patients and what's best for my license. For instance, when I was a hospital staff nurse,several times I was put in the position of working a floor that was not safely staffed. At those times, I told my supervisor(s) I would have to go over their heads and file a complaint with nursing management (with a cc to the nursing union) if staffing did not immediately change (which sometimes meant that supervisory staff would need to work the floor and function as techs in order to adequately staff us). It worked and I never got fired, but I know there are many workplaces that would try to force a worker out for such actions.

The best thing, if possible, I think would be for ALL the workers to get together and approach the boss (perhaps through a union rep).

 

[dbarker]

Make sure you have a copy of his request for change in writing. If he refuses, then do it the old way. If he gives it to you in writing, then do it his way. But always CYA.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Sure, I do that all the time. But in network programming it is far safer to be on auto pilot. I'm expected to answer phones and transfer calls, tune in live shots, make calls.... But would ya really wanna take a chance that during one of the 10 phone calls per hour that I handle, you get involved and blow a local break? You could lose many 10s of thousands of dollars. If you get distracted for 2 seconds you could have a client refuse to pay.

If it is on auto pilot and proofread, then you have no such concerns.... unless the computer crashes, which could happen at any time, anyway.

I understand--but I am Chicken Little and while I will question authority--I don't defy authority.

I would go the route of finding out why he would suggest something so moronic (but in a nice way) and find someone superior to him. Unless he owns the company--someone is his boss.