|
|
|
|
|
by anon84873628
1246 days ago
|
|
I always assumed the rationale was this: That employee now doing extra work accepts it because they are either scared of being laid off themselves, know they can't find a better job elsewhere, have irrational loyalty to the company, whatever. In any case the company benefits by exploiting the person. If instead the person leaves, then the process fails and the issue rolls up the org hierarchy. Now the leadership evaluates if this process was actually necessary anyway. If not, let it die or let the shit roll downhill elsewhere. If it was important, invest in the refactor that everyone knew was probably necessary anyway. For corporate leadership it's an easy way to either squeeze more out of the peasants, or force a reevaluation of priorities. |
|