Workers who leave the head office to buy a cup of coffee are costing an Australian mining firm too much money, according to its boss.
Managing director of Mineral Resources Chris Ellison said during a financial results presentation on Wednesday he wants to “hold staff captive all day long”.
“I don’t want them leaving the building,” he said.
The head office in Perth has a restaurant, nine staff psychologists, a gym, and other facilities designed to encourage staff to stay in the office.
“We have a lot of different benefits that we have brought on,” said Mr Ellison, whose company has a strict “no work from home policy”.
"Why have I done that? Because when I get them first thing in the morning, I want to hold them captive all day long. I don’t want them leaving the building.
Why have I done that? Because when I get them first thing in the morning, I want to hold them captive all day long. I don’t want them leaving the building.
Then he goes on to talk about child care on site. He also mentioned having all their food and stuff there (which I assume they have to pay for and it’s not provided).
You want slaves, dude. Just use plain English and stop with corp speak. He probably wants them to sleep there too and just build their lives around “the company” who is their “family”. Fucking hate this bullshit.
That “captive” word is quite plain. You are the one overlooking it, this is not your normal corporate-speak.
“We have a lot of different benefits that we have brought on,” said Mr Ellison, whose company has a strict “no work from home policy”.
I’m fine with employers asking people to not work remotely on a regular basis, but unless the job is one that does not permit to be done remotely – I mean, you can’t really be a dental assistant working remotely, say – I also think that it also buys a lot to have some level of flexibility. Like, okay, say you’re having a plumbing repair done and you need to be present for that. I’m not sure that it makes sense to have people come in. On the other hand, I’m not sure that taking the day off makes sense either. I mean, you can be working, and you may not want to be totally taking the thing off. Also kind of annoying if I can’t rely on a coworker being available on some day because they have some relatively-minor thing that they need to deal with.
Maybe have a certain number of “work from home” days if you feel the need to regiment it or something.
You can fuck right off with all that. It’s a job not a fucking prison.
Dude can’t even cross his arms normally. Clearly an alien imposter trying to exert control over he human population.
Dude probably drinks water like this:
I legit thought the Zuck one was slowed down for effect but then the lady in the background started typing normal speed. WTF is wrong with these people?
He’s ready for his coffin
I’m guessing they provide coffee on-site then? But he seems to be ignoring the value of just taking a break and going for a walk. It’s a critical part of how our brains work. Ignoring that is spending a dollar to save a dime.
That seems to be the main thrust of the interview. Employees leaving the building is bad for productivity, therefore I provide a variety of services, food, and support inside the building. Employees don’t have to ever leave, which boost productivity.
Whether or not that is true, that’s another matter. In fact, I would hazard a guess that the CEO’s statements are all “I want” statements precisely because he isn’t interested in debating the actual effect on employees. Is it more productive? Does the data support the expense? Doesn’t matter, he wants it.
I find it helps me be more creative to leave my working space for a change of scenery, but it also helps me focus on mundane tasks to have things at my fingertips to avoid leaving my workspace. I doubt there’s one universal answer, but a workplace that provides coffee and food isn’t preventing employees from leaving the building, it’s encouraging them to stay.
But I also work from home. I wouldn’t work for a company with a strict in-office policy, even if they provided coffee and daycare.
I assume so if they have childcare, psychologists, a restaurant and all that.
Ellison: grand wave of the hand y’know what this company needs? A place for our workers to live on site. We should build housing for them! The houses are our property and we can’t let them live there for free, so we need to charge them rent to cover ‘upkeep’. They will need food to eat so we should create a company store on site! We have to cover the costs of food, so we will have to charge them exorbitant prices due to ‘shipping’
“it would be far more efficient to create company scrip to pay them with, it’s not like they need anything we don’t provide right here.”
This way, if they decide to strike, they have no real money, and we can waive their scrip at a whim! This is a heavy deterrent to pesky strike action which really slows down production
Capital idea!
Why pay real money when they’re using it at our store? Just give them company scrips they can use right here on site!
Back in 1999 the company I worked for was growing so fast that they couldn’t hire fast enough. They paid EXTREMELY well but everyone was always overworked. They attacked the problem of lost time by having fully stocked kitchens, and food delivery runners (free). They alao added a coffee station with early version of the automatic barista machines Starbucks uses.
If this dumb idiot has a problem with his employees leaving the building for coffee, he can add a free Starbucks to the office and hire staff to deliver the orders placed from each cubicle. Cheap fuck.
Exactly, except that in Australia it wouldnt be a starbucks, but a non-chain basista coffee shop.
BBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for BBC News:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
Wait, you guys leave the workplace for coffee break? In my country we get 2 10-minute breaks, one in the morning, one in the afternoon, but we get our coffee from the coffee machine
You can have my coffee over my cold unemployed hands.
Google and Facebook already went down this route. Lots of amenities on-site (at least, in their headquarters). But they were more used as carrots to induce people to join the company and stay. The stick approach of ‘you can’t leave’ is an interesting variation.
Let’s see how long before the ‘apology/I was misquoted/retiring to spend more time with family’ tour kicks off…
Edit: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/29/arizona-wells-fargo-worker-death
Where I live, the regulations specifically say that employees are allowed to go offsite during their breaks, doubtless because of some asshole like this in the past. I’d be unsurprised if they don’t have the same rules in Australia. Sure, incentivize them to stick around, but never say the breaking the law part out loud.
The head office in Perth has a restaurant, nine staff psychologists, a gym, and other facilities designed to encourage staff to stay in the office.
Maybe reducing the hostility from management might require fewer staff psychologists? Just a thought.
Not likely:
“Why have I done that? Because when I get them first thing in the morning, I want to hold them captive all day long. I don’t want them leaving the building.”
Talk about saying the quiet part out loud
It’s amazing because it’s probably costing them money.
