Dean G. wrote:
> wrote:
>> On Nov 28, 12:53 pm, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>>> Pete C. wrote:
>>>> I believe it's supposed to be "hide" as in the managers at some
>>>> stores hide when lines are long instead of doing something to
>>>> resolve the problem.
>>>
>>>> Pete C.
(cross-posting removed)
>>>
>>> I'm sure we've all encountered situations like that. How many
>>> times are the lines at the grocery store outrageous but only 2-3
>>> out of the 14 (for example) are actually "open"? A good manager
>>> would either get more checkout stations open or, lacking cashiers,
>>> pitch in and do the job him/herself. I'm a firm believer that
>>> managers and supervisors should be able to do the job they expect
>>> their employees to do.
>>>
>>> Jill- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -
>>
>> Really? Seems superfluous to me -- if I can do the job, why should
>> my manager be able to do it? In the specific instance under
>> discussion here (a shortage of cashiers), it would perhaps be useful
>> if the manager ran a line, but even then I can see problems. What
>> if a check needs to be approved? Takes longer, because the manager
>> has to finish ringing whatever he/she's doing before coming over.
>> Or what if there's a need to override the computer's price on a sale
>> item that didn't get updated? Typically that requires a manager's
>> key as well.
>
>> I'd much rather have a manager who knows how to manage then one who
>> can do my job.
>
> How can a manager manage when he or she doesn't know how well their
> employees are performing ? I have worked for managers that only
> managers, and managers that knew what they were managing, and in every
> case the manager only types were pathetic in comparison.
(snippage)
> Dean G.
Exactly, Dean. I've had performance appraisals written by many a person who
couldn't sit down and do my job in a crunch. How the hell are they supposed
to judge whether I'm doing a poor, adequate or outstanding job when they
don't understand and can't do the job themselves?
Jill