More time than willingness to give up on this matter. It costs them time and money, too, and that’s enough to feel worth it to me.

Yes. One that has less shit “security” practices. Or that properly staffs their checkout. Or whatever reason I chose to walk out.

HONK! HONKHONKHONKHONKHONK! HONK!

I thought it was a new social media platform focused on pictures of skeletons.

The detection algorithm is also trash and may decide to eat you anyway, as well.

Adding nothing to the discussion? Believe it or not, downvote.

I have and will continue to walk out mid transaction when I notice particularly egregious shit like that. It’s the least I can do. Actively talk into the camera, and make sure they KNOW exactly why I’m walking out. Does it do any good? No, but it makes me feel a bit better.

Generally the only thing I think about shareholders is feeding them into a grinder feet first.

Sorry, to be clear, that line was sarcasm. I agree with you, these videos aren’t click bait.

I mean, sure. Still hypocritical.

Clearly any video that asks a question or implies a strange phenomenon or situation is click bait. See also:chubbyemu videos here

For the record, I do not think these are click bait, if they’re accurate. Or, at least, they’re click bait that actually gives you a worm instead of some shitty rubber faux worm.

“we need workers so you can’t take PTO”

“We don’t need you, you’re fired.”

They told him in one sentence he was essential, and in another, he was replaceable. Either they did not need him for the time he requested, as evidenced by the fact that they fired him, or they DID need him, and the boss isn’t a hypocrite, just a short sighted idiot on a power trip.

And Occam’s Razor pretty easily lets us throw out this line of reasoning, absent any further information.

The facts we know are:

• Employee put in a PTO request

• Employer denies it

• Employee takes PTO day anyway

• Employer fires employee

• Employer makes post referenced in OP.

Occam’s Razor states that, when two or more scenarios are equally likely, the one that makes fewer assumptions is the more likely one. It certainly seems like the gymnastics required to reach the scenario you presented requires a lot more assumptions (active project, able to move deadline, proper communication was given to the employee) than the scenario most people here have gone with - assuming the boss is a bad boss, and fired the employee out of retribution.

So yeah, I think most people are gonna land on “the boss is the asshole” barring motivated reasoning, like enjoying boot leather.

Ooooor you sound like you think you know the other person’s life better than they do. Like a manager who thinks it’s appropriate to fire someone while their relative is actively dying. No hive mind here, just a gaping asshole.

Alternatively, pi_sing off people who call things cringe is based as f_ck so maybe I’ll start self censoring.

I mean, yeah. Unless this is a critical business, like emergency services, then… Oh no, we can’t make someone’s bullshit for another day or two? The fucking HUMANITY. Won’t anyone think of the bottom line???

Mostly scheduling shit. There’s always the “clopen” in retail, now imagine no close, there’s bound to be bullshit shifts.

I don’t think anyone’s tongue is getting to the prostate. It’s a ways up there.

I hope they take this advice instead of the “obviously run” advice below… There’s nothing inherently wrong with having a limited diet.

Like spray them with water? Sure, if they’re in the sink or on the counter. If you mean just swat them away, I wouldn’t trust that to kill them. And as soon as it doesn’t kill them, and they find their way back to the nest, there’s a chance they’ll lead others back, if they found so much as a scrap of food.