Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

warpcrafter wrote
That's also a way to "Get a little grateful mum" if you follow my meaning...

You might think that, I couldn't possibly comment

I'm shocked and outraged!!! I thought that GW was this big cuddly company created for hobbyists and like-minded individuals congregate somewhere fortunate enough to provide a job!! But wow, now I find out that some hobbyists are in charge of others, so called 'managers', and want to run it as a business before a hobby club and suddenly start making you act professionally!!! zOMG!!11!!!1! WTF? I thought all wargamers were equals with mutual respect and had to stick together because we are such a niche group. Wow, I mean I'd never have thought a brother wargamer would stab another in the back like this over something as insignificant as slagging them off online. If you can't trust the mighty Workshop to look after their own, who can you???!!!

Chimera_Calvin wrote:I don't know if there are any current UK GW employees who would like to weigh in here, but I was a GW manager for a while and we never had any sales targets.

They have targets, they just aren't "Sell x amount of stuff to y number of people" They are more indicators of performance like a single product or action that you should be doing as a staff member (showing people how to play springs to mind) If you aren't doing those things, theres a problem- and then there are steps to sort out such a problem- This can be seen as "disciplinary action" but unless its been going on a while, would result in taking steps to fix any problem rather than giving someone the boot. It therefore is a system in place to get the right people in the right jobs-

Polonius wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Its also called right to work in Texas and other states in the South Polonius-fyi. The term can be used interchangeably in common vernacular in many locations.

Ok, I didn't know it used that way in common speech. They really are two separate legal doctrines through, and any serious conversation would do well to keep the concepts apart. I'm assuming most of the confusion arises from the fact that outside of professionals, really only union member enjoy any form of contractual protection from at will termination. In most Right to Work states, there is little union activity, and even if there was you wouldn't be forced into it. They'd be related, to be sure. Right to work as a concept dates back really only until 1947 (although it was founded on the ideological basis of Lochner and related legal doctrines) and was created by Federal statute (which allowed states to pass such laws) while the concept of at-will employment is an ancient part of common law. Under the statute of frauds, any contract over a year must be in writing, but contracts less than a year may be oral. In agricultural societies, most work contracts were for a year, but by 1877 it was pretty accepted that all employment is at will unless it can be proved by the employee that it was for a year.

We're OT'ing (but what thread doesn't), but the concepts are interrelated in common viewpoint here. I have the right to work anywhere and be free from union interference (ie no closed shop nonsense), but at the same time my employer has the right to terminate my employ for any reason, barring labor/equal employment law or written contract terms. Its viewed as a single balanced doctrine.

And state law.

Texas has section 1983 to cover against racial discrimination which dates back to the post civil war era.

That particular legislation is rarely used since most employees resort to the Federal Employment Discrimination Act which only applies to companies above a certain number of employees.
Age discrimination is another beast in itself since the rules are very different from the regular Employment Discrimination Act.

Squig_herder wrote:Now with the Facebook thing, the issue isnt that he thought it was private but this is the internet, a single "hurtful" word over it and he gets fired?? what about all the people at my school that say so much worse? are you saying because school is classed as a work environment they should be exspelled? no sense in it, and if there really was any concern then they should have look further into the matter.

Cyber-bullying is actually a large problem for schools. The main problem is that when a school attempts to do something about it, parents sue for the school exceeding their authority or violating the child's free-speech. Many schools are actually trying to work with parents to set up acceptable things both the school and parent can do to prevent Cyber-bullying, from allowing the school some control if it affects the child adversely at school to parents themselves deleting the bully's IM/Facebook/etc. account, removing the ISP or internet from a child's computer and monitoring them when online on the family computer. Of course, not everyone sees it as a problem or is co-operative and there's no laws yet on the problem, so very little is actually getting done.

Again, we don't know the whole issue and it may be the final nail for the guy, but work=/= school and generally insulting your manager does get you fired.

sleazy wrote:GW staff really do have a thankless job and it seems the company is making it harder.

Those nasty men! I bet they're making it really hard for them to get any miniature painting done at work! GW employees should quit and go work in a more casual and laid-back store where they don't have to endure such terrible strain.

Actually, from talking to some GW staffers recently this is actually becoming a genuine problem.

Obviously some managers vary in their attitudes but staff are increasingly told they can't paint. This is leading to a very low quality of displayed miniatures which in turn is having an adverse effect on sales. Its not as easy to sell the latest new toy when the finished example in the window looks gak because they were given no time to do a decent job.

The other issue is that (certainly when I was managing) one day per week was designated as a staff hobby day, so they could work on their own projects. This was a great way of ensuring that staff armies were painted - giving customers a chance to talk to staff about their approaches to army building/painting and also to have some fully painted (and therefore more inspiring) armies turned out on game nights.

This could often lead to new armies being bought!



Sorry, you can go back on topic now..

While painted armies would encourage purchases,a Staff Hoby Day would be a perk of that store, not a divine employee right.

What is the GW store policy on painting your own armies or even armies for display?

Just to throw a few cents into yon ring:

1) If they were written up for not meeting their sales targets, then they essentially were put on a short term probation.

2) Publicly slagging your boss whilst being written up can be (and generally is) grounds for dismissal.

I fail to see the problem.

There is a perception that I've seen amongst some people that working for GW is all sunshine and unicorns. It's not. You're in retail sales. We can be critical of GW's practices sure and believe me I am....know of any other company that increased it's sales targets in the current economy?

malfred wrote:What is the GW store policy on painting your own armies or even armies for display?

From what my redshirt friends have told me: Painting your own armies is done on your own time, not on the clock. Painting display armies is something they're called upon to do regularly - putting down the brush to help a customer of course. If the display army is the employee's army, it's purely voluntary but if they want to add any more items to the display they must do so in their own time.

@malfred - when I was there it was fairly simple.

Each GW store was required as a minimum to have fully painted versions of the contents of (as it was then) Battle for Macragge, 6th ed WFB and whichever LotR box was out.

They also had to have sample armies painted up, one of which must be Ultramarines and at least one army each from WFB and LotR.

Finally, new releases were recieved by the store at least one month before they went on sale. These had to be built and painted so they could go in the cabinets for a couple weeks before the release.

Anything else depended on the space you had left and the manager. Some shops displayed a rotation of older stuff that was in effect owned by the shop. Others allowed staff member's armies or individual display pieces (although a lot depended on the quality of the work).

As an example, if you remember a white dwarf Mumak showcase that had a conversion with one being brought down by a swarm of army of the dead? That was done by a guy who worked at GW Meadowhall when I was there and was on display in the shop window for ages.

First off, there is one side of the story here. When do you ever hear "Yeah, I was fired, but I totally deserved it" Take these stories with a grain of salt. j

As to Frazzle's comments:

Frazzled wrote:
1. Disciplined for not meeting sales. In the real world world if you are a salesman and don’t meet sales you are fired. Whats the problem again?

2. Facebook. Lesson learned now try not to be a moron next time.

Yep, welcome to the real world. I've run a gaming store for 21 years. I work 80 hours a week right now, with no days off. If I miss my target numbers, I don't make rent. Do that two or three months in a row, and I'm out of business. There is a harsh reality right now for business: Lower sales, absolutely not credit available from banks, and distributors are in the same situation and won't extend terms either.

Discipline for not making numbers? Hell, that's a wakeup call. It's a much more polite way of letting you know you're not doing your job. Less polite is "Store is closed/closing, you're fired". Look around and notice how much of that is going on.

As to posting on facebook: What part of 'any comment you made will be seen by everyone' is not sinking in? The guy was stupid to do it. I'd have probably fired him simply for proving that he was not smart enough to work for me.

Working for GW is like working for anyone else. It's a job. Your an employee. Take the job seriously, meet expectations and obey the rules. Or find yourself looking for another job.

Disclaimer: 80 hours a week makes you grumpy. And a realist. And desperately in need of the 40,000pt apocalypse game we have this weekend.

I agree with you totally mikhaila . Loyal fans of the hobby often forget GW is still a buisness company at core.

They may be friendly to promote a nice gaming environment , but they arnt a charity. When it all comes
down , a job is a job.

LunaHound wrote:Loyal fans of the hobby often forget GW is still a buisness company at core.

They may be friendly to promote a nice gaming environment , but they arnt a charity.

LOL. I don't think *anyone* forgets GW is a business. They kind of keep beating it into our heads, actually.

Back OT...like others, I don't really see the travesty here.

Frazzled wrote:

Polonius wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Its also called right to work in Texas and other states in the South Polonius-fyi. The term can be used interchangeably in common vernacular in many locations.

Ok, I didn't know it used that way in common speech. They really are two separate legal doctrines through, and any serious conversation would do well to keep the concepts apart. I'm assuming most of the confusion arises from the fact that outside of professionals, really only union member enjoy any form of contractual protection from at will termination. In most Right to Work states, there is little union activity, and even if there was you wouldn't be forced into it. They'd be related, to be sure. Right to work as a concept dates back really only until 1947 (although it was founded on the ideological basis of Lochner and related legal doctrines) and was created by Federal statute (which allowed states to pass such laws) while the concept of at-will employment is an ancient part of common law. Under the statute of frauds, any contract over a year must be in writing, but contracts less than a year may be oral. In agricultural societies, most work contracts were for a year, but by 1877 it was pretty accepted that all employment is at will unless it can be proved by the employee that it was for a year.

We're OT'ing (but what thread doesn't), but the concepts are interrelated in common viewpoint here. I have the right to work anywhere and be free from union interference (ie no closed shop nonsense), but at the same time my employer has the right to terminate my employ for any reason, barring labor/equal employment law or written contract terms. Its viewed as a single balanced doctrine.

That explains a lot about Texas, if you think that at-will employment and right-to-work are somehow linked.

Florida's like that too. Right-to-work means no unions, but it also means you can get canned for any reason. Of course, companies have to give no reason, or they'll be sued. And God forbid you give an honest appraisal of an ex-employee.

Ugh. The whole thing stinks.

I hate Florida.

I think that sacking a dude is way too much. Mybe give him a weeks suspension, no pay or what not, but sacking? GW, you dissapoint me.

Golden Eyed Scout wrote:I think that sacking a dude is way too much. Mybe give him a weeks suspension, no pay or what not, but sacking? GW, you dissapoint me.

Why? Because someone posts one sided info on the internet?

You know absolutely nothing about the situation, or whether it even happened. Might be the guy was a lazy, pain in the ass and this was the last straw. Maybe he wasn't fired and quit? Maybe he doesn't even exist?

I'd be more disappointed that GW kept people that weren't worth keeping. Poor sales often come from poor staff. And we certainly see enough threads about bad GW staff.

If you're under cost pressure due to reduced sales revenue, and some slow gives you cause, you fire him. He's off your books and you don't owe unemployment. Good call by the manager.

As I understand capitalism, and correct me if I'm wrong:

The firm provides goods and services through suppliers to you the consumer. The goal of every firm is to maximize the efficiency of production so it can distribute a volume of goods equivalent to demand to the supplier. The supplier's goal is to distribute the maximum amount of goods to you, the consumer. This is all a well-oiled machine, and if one of the cogs has been persistently giving you grief, the logical solution is to fix it or replace it. If one of these cogs calls you a twit on facebook, well that's just asking for it.

I always figured 'twit' was a nice way of saying 'tw@'.