제목   |  [Career] 5 of the worst company policies of all time 작성일   |  2015-05-11 조회수   |  3285

 

5 of the worst companypolicies of all time 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

No two companies arealike. Some companies have been deemed as the best ones to work for becausethey seek to provide their employees with meaningful work and a pleasantatmosphere while on the job. Others might have their goals in the right place,but execute them in ways that end up hurting the company in the long run. Andstill others have policies or procedures that make little sense, are entirelyarbitrary, and end up becoming the bane of existence for employees,customers, or both.

Insome cases, the bad policies are handy for customers but hurt the bottom linein very real ways. Ultimately, those sorts of policies create a more unstable workenvironment for employees, who are on the receiving end of those costlymistakes. Other times, certain policies create a hostile environment foremployees or infringe on personal decisions that happen outside of awork shift.

Sometimes,these rules might have had logical beginnings but end up being completelyridiculous. One question on Reddit aboutthe worst workplace policies in effect included the outlawing of popcorn, andonly allowing employees to drink water from tiny cups before throwing it away —no water bottles allowed. These rules must have started with a problem at onepoint, but the rules have been taken to the extreme and now seem a little overthe top.

Thesilver lining is that as other companies start up they have theopportunity to learn from these blunders and find creative ways to address thesame issues without the negative side effects. In honor of Small Business Week,we've compiled a list of five terrible company policies that other businessesshould try to avoid at all cost.

1.Rules about facial hair

Ifyou work in the food service industry, it might seem reasonable to put limitson facial hair and what is allowed — hair nets are pretty difficult to put overa beard, after all. It might seem unfair that you can't grow a goatee on yourpersonal time, but it also makes a little bit of sense from a sanitarystandpoint.

Whatdoesn't make sense, however, is limiting facial hair in industries that havenothing to do with sanitation or food service. Several Reddit posts talkedabout policies related to facial hair, but no policy is so well known as theone Disney had in place until 2012. The company had a strict policy banningfacial hair since WaltDisney opened Disneyland inCalifornia in the 1950s.

Thecompany still maintains that all facial hair must be fully grown in (so nostarting that beard during your first week of employment), and it must be keptwithin a quarter of an inch long.

2.Incredibly strict dress codes

Alongthe same lines of facial hair, companies can also err too far on the side ofcaution in terms of dress code. Though in all cases these rules are meant toenhance the overall aesthetic of the company, sometimes they go too far.The Week highlights rules from Swiss bank UBS, for example, that provided itsemployees with a 43-page handbook for the company's dress code — down to thetypes of makeup the women should wear. If followed properly, the bank'sguidebook claimed proper care for appearance would "enhance yourpersonality," and "increase an individual's popularity," amongother things.

Notto be outdone, Abercrombie& Fitch alsohad an extremely detailed style guide that describes how low men should weartheir jeans, how high women should cuff theirs, and how to properly tuck in ashirt. The company is notorious for its public relations blunders inrecent years, mostly related to appearance, so it's not surprising the companyalso places a high value on how their employees dress while on duty. But doesit really need to go so far as to detail how the sleeves on your shirt shouldlook?

3.Faulty return policies

Sometimes,what's great for the customer isn't so wonderful for the bottom line. Perhapsno retail policy is quite so varied, or susceptible to fraud, than astore's return policy for unwanted or damaged goods. Some stores, likeNordstrom, don't require a receipt or certain number of days to return items.Others, like Zappos andTarget, used digital tracking to monitor purchase activity for customers andgoods. As a result, returns are normally less hassle at these companies thanothers.

Butwhen returns are conducted without receipts, it puts the companies in jeopardyfor being scammed. For an item or two, you might not feel so alarmed, or evencare. But retail fraud, because of faulty return policies and companies notchecking merchandise thoroughly, accounted for almost $11 billion in the UnitedStates last year. Some stores have begun to use return authentication servicesto cut down on this, but the problem is still enormous and ultimately affectsthe company's bottom line.

4.Stealing employees' time

Timetheft normally refers to when employees use company time for personal things,be it phone calls, surfing the Internet, or taking a longer lunch break than ispermitted. But in some cases, company policies work the other way, usingnon-paid time for work-related activities.

Oneof the most prominent cases of this is for a contractor called IntegrityStaffing Solutions, which employed workers at Amazon fulfillment warehouses inNevada. The company requires employees to pass through a metal detector at theend of each shift in efforts to cut down on theft, a process that can amount to25 minutes each day of unpaid time. In December, the Supreme Court ruled thecompany did not have to pay the employees for that wait, since the policy wasnot integral to work operations.

But lawyers for theemployees disagreed. "If the employer requires it, the work should bepaid," said Catherine Ruckelshaus, general counsel at the NationalEmployment Law Project. "If we don't have to pay for things, we take themfor granted. Because the employer didn't have to pay for the workers' time, itdidn't care how long the screenings took, and had no incentive to add capacityto speed things up and be more considerate of the employees' time."

Thecourt ruled that these types of issues should be addressed at union bargainingtables, not courtrooms.

5.Ridiculous company contracts

Weknow that the number of non-compete clauses in employee contracts is rising.But with that, so are a number of other seemingly arbitrary clauses that end upmaking some contracts look like a joke.

Onecompany that has earned negative publicity for this in recent years is Amy'sBaking Company, made infamous by its owners' appearance on Gordon Ramsay'sKitchen Nightmares. Restauranteurs Samy and Amy Bouzaglo, now most recentlyaccused of taunting customers and threatening one in particular with aknife, required their employees to sign contracts that forced them to workweekends and holidays, or face a $250 cut in their paychecks. On top of that,the cost of any plates broken or food burned because of "directnegligence" would also result in a pay cut.

Thebinding contract also doesn't allow any employee who is fired or who resigns towork at any competitor within 50 miles for a year following their employment atthe restaurant.

 

Article Source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2015/05/10/cheat-sheet-worst-company-policies/70898858/

Image Source: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRjCpX8wrW15pok_Kx6E8u7I-aGGBhnVLz_3PO_O8eY6JcC9TCC

 

VOCABULARY WORDS:

1. Bane (n.) ~ a cause of harm or ruin  

2. Hostile (adj.) ~ feeling or showing illwill 

3. Infringe (v.) ~ exceed the limits of  

4. Silver lining (n.) ~ a hopeful or comfortingprospect in the midst of difficulty 

5. Aesthetic (adj.) concerned with beauty  

6. Blunder (n.) ~ a stupid or carelessmistake  

7. Susceptible (adj.) ~ likely to beinfluenced  

8. Taunt (v.) ~ provoke or challenge withinsulting remarks  

 

QUESTIONS FORDISCUSSIONS:

1. Is there a dress code in your office?How does the company dress code affect the job productivity of the employee 

2. Are you required to work overtimeregularly? Do you think it’s fair for the company to require constant overtimefrom the employees?  

3. Why?Is there a policy inyour office that you don’t agree on? What is it and why don’t you agree withit? 

 

인쇄하기