The Official No Need To Start a New Thread, Thread

[Great68]

Ah fuck, spoke too soon, no help buying conversion fuel tank for me

[StylinRed]

Originally Posted by sonick

Lol insane.

Washed out MMA fighter, now Maga/mysogonist social media influencer Andrew Tate sent a tweet to Greta Thunberg bragging about his cars.

Greta responds and absolutely destroys him on twitter:

https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/st...56944501178368

He posts a weak response video (basically 'i know you are but what am I'), which turns out provides evidence of his presence in Romania, where he was wanted for sex trafficking.

https://twitter.com/Cobratate/status...12791009374208

Authorities proceed to raid his home and arrest him based on evidence from his response video

https://twitter.com/theserfstv/statu...42176480481280

youtu.be/TOc8LygTlEs

Looks like he was a pimp who also committed tax fraud and then created an online course to teach ppl how to do the same

How he got away with it for so long is mind boggling, Eastern Europe I guess, but now he's done

Edit: ble dunno why it's not embedding

[Badhobz]

anyone else thinks this threshold for $$$ is low as shit? lousy socialist bastards.

[Great68]

Anyone been to a restaurant in Yaletown called "Robba Da Matti"? How is it?

My mom's 70th is coming up and my Sister is looking at this place for a dinner.

Other option is Pepinos on Commercial.

She's asking me for my opinion on which one to go to and I'm like "I don't fucking know"

[Hondaracer]

Peppinos is amazing

It’s not formal at all if that’s that you’re looking for. It’s basically the opposite of formal but the food is legit like as good if not Better than Italy imo lol

[Great68]

Looks like Pepinos it is!

[Great68]

So, federal government workers in Victoria are losing their minds over being mandated to return to the office for a minimum of 2-3 days a week:

https://www.cheknews.ca/thousands-of...toria-1134189/

“A lot of folks have or had to look at reevaluating and trying to change their child care, elder care, how they get to work, some people have given up cars, bus routes have changed significantly,” said Jamey Mills"

Why would anyone make permanent lifestyle changes like this before they get approval that they would get permanent WFH?

[sonick]

Entitlement.

Also they're gov't workers, probably wouldn't be very marketable or able to adjust to the demands of a normal industry job if they decide to quit.

[Euro7r]

Then just quit the fucking job. I'm sure there are plenty of people wanting to get into government work. Government never said WFH was permanent, stupid entitled fucks.

[Gumby]

The ability to WFH has always been a privilege, and temporary. Your employer has the right to make changes so I don't know why these people thought it was a permanent arrangement.

[Hondaracer]

How much time theft goes on from govt. workers working at home? Lol 35-50% more than in office?

[westopher]

And the baseline at the office is already 80-85% haha

[underscore]

If WFH was only listed as temporary then it's a poor assumption to make, but it's no different from people in the private sector who did the same thing.

That said, if 60% of them having been working from home just fine then mandating them back into the office with no reason given sounds like someone trying to justify paying for office space that they don't really need or someone in middle management hoping nobody notices they don't provide any actual value. Having people in an office for the sake of having them in an office is stupid.

Originally Posted by Gumby

The ability to WFH has always been a privilege, and temporary.

Depends on the job/agreement. I'm fully work from home and if the company I work for tried to force everyone to go in the company would fall apart because a ton of us are nowhere near the offices. I'm a 7 hour drive from the Canadian office lol.

[GLOW]

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

How much time theft goes on from govt. workers working at home? Lol 35-50% more than in office?

i'd say it's dependent on the position/work.

some positions are just insanely busy period, and could be working more at home, but this doesn't match the stereotype. i've been working more in a wfh situation rolling out of bed early to the computer and staying late on it working...

[Great68]

Originally Posted by underscore

If WFH was only listed as temporary then it's a poor assumption to make, but it's no different from people in the private sector who did the same thing.

That said, if 60% of them having been working from home just fine then mandating them back into the office with no reason given sounds like someone trying to justify paying for office space that they don't really need or someone in middle management hoping nobody notices they don't provide any actual value. Having people in an office for the sake of having them in an office is stupid.
l.

That's fine but the correct process for this was to have WFH negotiated into their next contract. Making big lifestyle changes like cancelling your kids' daycare and selling your car before you get the permission to have permanent WFH is just dumb.

On the topic of kids' daycare though, there's no fucking way someone is getting a solid day's work while also caring for their kids at home. Salaried employees might have a bit more leeway to "Make up the work" later, but hourly paid employees with their set shifts would totally be stealing time

[Hondaracer]

Originally Posted by GLOW

i'd say it's dependent on the position/work.

some positions are just insanely busy period, and could be working more at home, but this doesn't match the stereotype. i've been working more in a wfh situation rolling out of bed early to the computer and staying late on it working...

I know enough people who work in the public sector that I wouldn’t say it’s just a generalization.

Project managers, technicians etc. I know do half the work for similar pay as their private sector counterparts. And then there’s the whining.. lol

[underscore]

Originally Posted by Great68

That's fine but the correct process for this was to have WFH negotiated into their next contract.

Shouldn't that be the case for mandating them into the office as well?

Originally Posted by Great68

On the topic of kids' daycare though, there's no fucking way someone is getting a solid day's work while also caring for their kids at home. Salaried employees might have a bit more leeway to "Make up the work" later, but hourly paid employees with their set shifts would totally be stealing time

It says change their child care, not provide or find child care. My wife used to have to pick up my oldest from preschool when my youngest had a nap. I was just an adult in the house making sure it didn't burn down, I was still working normally, but she wouldn't be able to do that if I wasn't WFH. Or now they'll need a place that's open earlier/later due to the commute. Or the current place might be in the opposite direction of the office. There's countless scenarios where you're going to need to change things if the person goes to an office without them stealing time now.

Not to mention if they were that bad at their job they would've been sacked already anyways.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by underscore

Shouldn't that be the case for mandating them into the office as well?

No, because they never had that right in their contract to begin with.

It says change their child care, not provide or find child care.

See above, they never had a right to expect that they wouldn't need to ever go back into the office to make child care changes in the first place. Anything after that is moot.

[yray]

LOL

worksafe lady was complaining to me that WFH sucks

no chitchat with others, just work... work till the last minute of the day and still thinking of work after

[MarkyMark]

Originally Posted by underscore

Not to mention if they were that bad at their job they would've been sacked already anyways.

Have you ever worked in a union environment before? Lol

[hud 91gt]

That goes for people who sold their houses and moved to the burbs during the pandemic. I know people who moved to Chilliwack, then shocked when WFH ended lol. Ended up quitting.

[underscore]

Originally Posted by Great68

See above, they never had a right to expect that they wouldn't need to ever go back into the office to make child care changes in the first place. Anything after that is moot.

There's a huge difference between never and suddenly. 2.5 months isn't a lot of time to make changes to care.

Reading the article again they also aren't "losing their minds" like you seem to think either. They're a bit annoyed because a change is being made that inconveniences them with no benefit. Whether they have a "right" to expect it or not doesn't change that it's annoying for them. You'd have the same reaction if your employer did something similar to your work arrangement and moved to an office further away or changed you to night shift or something.

Originally Posted by MarkyMark

Have you ever worked in a union environment before? Lol

You think it's going to be any different because they're in an office building?

[GLOW]

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

I know enough people who work in the public sector that I wouldn’t say it’s just a generalization.

Project managers, technicians etc. I know do half the work for similar pay as their private sector counterparts. And then there’s the whining.. lol

oh i hear ya, just saying there are some entities that do get crazy busy...but ya even then you have sloths among them.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by underscore

There's a huge difference between never and suddenly. 2.5 months isn't a lot of time to make changes to care.

I'm not sure what you mean by a difference between "never" and "suddenly"? They never had the right to expect permanent wfh, so any smart person would always expect they could be recalled at anytime, which could in fact be "suddenly", and should have prepared for that reality. Although come on, this isn't that "suddenly", only a moron doesn't look around and see other workplaces recalling workers over the last year and think that they'd be somehow immune to the same from happening in the near future.

Reading the article again they also aren't "losing their minds" like you seem to think either.

The ones losing their mind are in here: https://www.reddit.com/r/VictoriaBC/..._to_office_in/

It's representative because a huge number of members on that forum are the government workers.

They're a bit annoyed because a change is being made that inconveniences them with no benefit. Whether they have a "right" to expect it or not doesn't change that it's annoying for them. You'd have the same reaction if your employer did something similar to your work arrangement and moved to an office further away or changed you to night shift or something.
?

My work did actually move its office to a further location back in 2011. I wasn't annoyed or bitch about it at all actually, it was what it was.

[68style]

I work in the fed gov, you can feel free to ask me any questions... it's neither as bad as some people are saying here nor is it as great as a private company might be "work ethic/sacrifice" wise since there's no stocks or bottom line to protect.

For me I'm against going back into the office solely because there's no benefit of it. I'm not public facing, all my work is conducted through email and phone and it's a waste of $ to provide a desk to me and I have zero need to interact face to face with anyone. On the rare occasion I have to personally deal with someone on-site, I am in 1 day a week. On the personal side of things, I live alone and and my dog is 16.5 years old with cancer, so it would be really hard for me to have to go back in every day trying to take care of her until she passes away.

I think you would find most people in tech and a variety of other fields are in the same boat as me. No customers to deal with, why do you need to come into an office?