[MatekCopatek]

I disagree, what I would want to say in such a situation is simply "this meeting is useless, let me get back to work", but I would be percieved as a grumpy developer with an attitude.

I wouldn't call all the sugarcoating effective communication as I expect everyone in the company to understand that not wasting people's time will let them do more work and benefit the customer in the end.

[kjakm]

>> I disagree, what I would want to say in such a situation is simply "this meeting is useless, let me get back to work", but I would be percieved as a grumpy developer with an attitude.

Of course you would be. Why does it have to phrased in some extremely positive or negative way? Why not something like "I'm pretty busy working on x. If anything comes up in the meeting that needs my attention let me know afterwards and I'll arrange a time to chat."

[NoOneNew]

Because the person conducting the meeting has already failed miserably at their job and must be made aware.

A boss that conducts a useless meeting, knowing it's to hear themselves talk while knowing their subordinates are busy with important tasks that actually keep the company afloat is generally considered, and this is the technical term, a dick maneuver. His/her choice to have a time wasting meeting greatly increases the chances of those employees having to work overtime to accomplish a task on schedule, cutting into their family/personal time. Since most of these types of jobs are salary, there's no overtime pay. So yes, negativity is important in this matter. Why cuddle someone who wants to waste other people's time just to hear themselves speak and have some artificial self-important time?

[lonelappde]

The personal hosting the meeting thinks it's not useless, so flatly disagreeing without a rationale is useless.

[amylene]

The onus is on the organizer to explain why the meeting will be useful. If they don’t do that upfront, a good culture encourages and supports ICs who ask the organizer for an agenda.