Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallex
There wasn't a later deal to be had. If you can wait and get a better deal then by all means do it but Burke couldn't do it.
Where does this "lowball" idea come from? Prices were low that deadline... it's more reasonable to think that Burke wasn't getting lowballed and that he was instead getting offered current market rate and Burke misread the market. Are you saying the Flames should never make a market rate deal? Burke played chicken with the field and Burke lost.
|
Let's look at it this way. You run a company and have a great worker who has been with you a long time, has a good report with all of your other employees, and who is a veteran of the business, but he has informed you he is leaving in 3 months. By the grace of a new crazy labor law, you are able to trade your expiring employee to a competitor for another crack at the pool of 1000s of student resumes, after all those with even a sniff at any guarantee of being a good employee are gone. let's also assume that your company is on the downswing and needs younger, cheaper, but also capable replacement workers.
Do you A) Keep your expiring worker and let him train his replacement(s) and those around him for the 3 months before he goes or B) Take the random shot in the dark at the resume pile? Does the knowledge he passes onto new employees outweigh the fact that you "lose him for nothing"?
The benefits of either scenario are debateable, but you couldn't say the manager is in error by keeping his man.
This scenario also requires that we are dealing with human beings with undefinable personality differences and defects, and not with stocks or robots that are replaceable purely by their statistics and system capacities.