Overtime hours donated to help widowed father.

RoYoBo · 11-03-2018 10:14am #1

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/widower-father-thanks-colleagues-who-worked-3000-hours-of-overtime-so-he-could-look-after-sick-son-36690711.html

This just made my day! What a wonderful example of human kindness.

Tilikum17 · 11-03-2018 10:21am

It was a great idea by the HR manager in fairness.

daheff · 11-03-2018 10:24am

Saw this and thought it was a wonderful story.

Fair play to them all

Rosie Rant · 11-03-2018 10:36am

Not one employee refused, not even those who never met him. Such a heart warming story. I hope the little boy will be OK.

RoYoBo · 11-03-2018 11:42am

It's an example of one of those rare times in life where there's a win/win situation all round. The dad got to stay with his son without losing his job or income, the company lost no money or working time (and gained enormous kudos) while the work colleagues got to help in a practical way at a time when people simply don't know what to say or do.

I'd love to see this copied elsewhere. Obviously, it was a big company and people didn't need to overextend their overtime donation, but it's a fabulous template.

professore · 11-03-2018 11:47am

No mention if the company themselves donated anything. Pretty pathetic if they didn't.

kneemos · 11-03-2018 11:57am

Rosie Rant wrote: »

Not one employee refused, not even those who never met him. Such a heart warming story. I hope the little boy will be OK.

Couldn't very well refuse could they.
Wouldn't be a fan of this kind forced charity.

Avatar MIA · 11-03-2018 12:04pm

kneemos wrote: »

Couldn't very well refuse could they.
Wouldn't be a fan of this kind forced charity.

Jesus, 2.5 hours a week for 2 weeks is hardly forcing them to hand over a kidney, and for this they get huge amounts of peace of mind. First of all they did a great thing, money can't buy that feeling.

PLUS, they know they work in a company where there is now an established policy, semi-official that the workers will look out for each other.

That's priceless.

Old Perry · 11-03-2018 12:04pm

kneemos wrote: »

Couldn't very well refuse could they.
Wouldn't be a fan of this kind forced charity.

Sure you could, if I couldn't afford to I wouldn't donate, but if you can afford it you'd have to be pretty heartless not to want to help.

khaldrogo · 11-03-2018 12:08pm

kneemos wrote:

Couldn't very well refuse could they. Wouldn't be a fan of this kind forced charity.

Maybe your opinion would change if you were that father......

RoYoBo · 11-03-2018 12:19pm

kneemos wrote: »

Couldn't very well refuse could they.
Wouldn't be a fan of this kind forced charity.

Out of all the charitable acts and donations available to me, this direct and measurable effort would be top of my list. I'm sure workers could have refused if they didn't feel like helping.

If 5 hours extra working time to help a person in need was too much for someone, why would what others might think of their refusal force them into doing it?

Hector Bellend · 11-03-2018 12:54pm

This is verging on emotional blackmail.

You are not allowed to say no to something like this even if you have to.

I agree that it a phenomenal gesture but what would have happened if it was purely voluntary.

11-03-2018 12:56pm

Charity and decency at its best. I knew somebody who works in Dublin Fire Brigade and his child was seriously ill in Crumlin Children's Hospital for years and his colleagues had a rota to cover his hours during that incredibly stressful time. It was very little extra to each of them as so many pulled their weight but it meant the world to that family. There remains a hugely inspiring culture of volunteerism in this country and so many of us have been blessed by being touched by that meitheal culture.

And to think there's some ineffably miserable bastards here who wouldn't even clean the snow off the path in front of their house - 'let the old people slip and break their legs - it's not my path!'. The mind boggles at such miserable, myopic fúcktard existences.

Avatar MIA · 11-03-2018 12:57pm

Hector Bellend wrote: »

but what would have happened if it was purely voluntary.

It wasn't compulsory, anyone could have refused. But, seemingly the company is deficient in its number of crabby, selfish fcukers.

Hector Bellend · 11-03-2018 1:05pm

Avatar MIA wrote: »

It wasn't compulsory, anyone could have refused. But, seemingly the company is deficient in its number of crabby, selfish fcukers.

So Easy.

doolox · 11-03-2018 1:09pm

Any scheme like this is open to abuse and short changing by unscrupulous employers. The legitimate question is asked did the employer make a contribution to the time-off scheme? If they got 100% of the workers to agree to this imposition was it due to intimidation and not wanting to be seen as contrary to opt out? Was emotional blackmail used?

I used to work for a multinational where the office staff used to organise farewell presentations for the admin staff but collect from everyone, including the lowly paid floor staff. When a member of floor staff was leaving no such effort was made and they often left empty handed. When a particularly bolshy and independently thinking member refused to pay into the next collection for one of the office staff he was upbraided and intimidated until he raised the subject with HR and the greedy office staff were told to lay off. All our eyes were opened to the duplicitous nature of this scheme, whereby office staff got going away presents and the floor staff got none although everybody was forced to pay up.

The Princess Bride · 11-03-2018 1:16pm

I know for a fact that prison officers have done similar in either/both of the Laois prisons.

They've helped recently widowed colleagues (nursing staff and prison officers) with young children, by donating either overtime or holiday hours, so that they can have extra paid time off to be with their children.

Some people just rally around to support others during their most vulnerable times.

Fair play.

tigger123 · 11-03-2018 1:19pm

There's no amount of paintballing weekends or team building exercises that could buy the kind of commardarie that will be in that workplace after that.

11-03-2018 1:24pm

Hector Bellend wrote: »

So Easy.

Your either trolling or your a dick.

Richard Hillman · 11-03-2018 1:26pm

650 staff worked around 3250 hours over 18 months. Roughly 5 hours each for 18 months. Works out at around 20 minutes a Month. If it's an hour a week then maybe "emotional blackmail" may be an issue but 20 minutes a Month, 5 minutes a week, Cmon lads. It was a great initiative

11-03-2018 1:33pm

doolox wrote: »

Any scheme like this is open to abuse and short changing by unscrupulous employers. The legitimate question is asked did the employer make a contribution to the time-off scheme? If they got 100% of the workers to agree to this imposition was it due to intimidation and not wanting to be seen as contrary to opt out? Was emotional blackmail used?

I used to work for a multinational where the office staff used to organise farewell presentations for the admin staff but collect from everyone, including the lowly paid floor staff. When a member of floor staff was leaving no such effort was made and they often left empty handed. When a particularly bolshy and independently thinking member refused to pay into the next collection for one of the office staff he was upbraided and intimidated until he raised the subject with HR and the greedy office staff were told to lay off. All our eyes were opened to the duplicitous nature of this scheme, whereby office staff got going away presents and the floor staff got none although everybody was forced to pay up.

Plenty of companies like this and normally the culture is faily toxic in these cases.

Big multinational that I workd for had created an office in the Philippines. When a lot of the guys homes were damaged during a hurricane the company refused to allow collections to be done to support them. Most of the staff just went ahead and did them anyway.

In this case it appears voluntary, but given the situation if faced with the similar even if you didn't like the person personally it would be for their kid that you're giving.

11-03-2018 1:37pm

professore wrote: »

No mention if the company themselves donated anything. Pretty pathetic if they didn't.

And if it were mentioned no doubt the same poor judges of character/people whose default disposition is misery would be saying it's a cheap public relations stunt from the firm. Why is it so hard for some people to understand that many/most people actually feel good by being able to help?

Perhaps if these people familiarised themselves with the story of Chuck Feeney it might open some decidedly closed world views and idiosyncratically miserable personal philosophies:

Chuck Feeney: the billionaire who gave it all away

blaze1 · 11-03-2018 1:46pm

Fairplay to his co-workers such a sad story, I hope the lad pulls through.

Some of the replies in this thread are scary - forced charity, I can only hope that you are never in a position to be looking after a family member.

Tell me how · 11-03-2018 1:53pm

professore wrote:

No mention if the company themselves donated anything. Pretty pathetic if they didn't.

doolox wrote:

Any scheme like this is open to abuse and short changing by unscrupulous employers. The legitimate question is asked did the employer make a contribution to the time-off scheme? If they got 100% of the workers to agree to this imposition was it due to intimidation and not wanting to be seen as contrary to opt out? Was emotional blackmail used?

Hector Bellend wrote:

This is verging on emotional blackmail.

What's going in in your head that you see an uplifting story and look for a negative angle?

Your Face · 11-03-2018 2:07pm

Fair play to his colleagues.

11-03-2018 2:13pm

Tell me how wrote: »

What's going in in your head that you see an uplifting story and look for a negative angle?

Agree with what your saying but would be good to know if the company (top level management) did help the guy out financially too

Your Face · 11-03-2018 3:26pm

DubInMeath wrote: »

Agree with what your saying but would be good to know if the company (top level management) did help the guy out financially too

All I read was that the HR managers decision was supported my senior management.

https://www.9news.com.au/good-news/2018/02/08/11/50/colleagues-work-overtime-to-help-dad-care-for-sick-son

11-03-2018 9:14pm

Your Face wrote: »

All I read was that the HR managers decision was supported my senior management.

https://www.9news.com.au/good-news/2018/02/08/11/50/colleagues-work-overtime-to-help-dad-care-for-sick-son

Just wondering as management would be on salary with time in lieu instead of overtime in Germany.

Would have been a bit harsh if the management not to support the move, as in not allow it.

PandaPoo · 11-03-2018 9:29pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Charity and decency at its best. I knew somebody who works in Dublin Fire Brigade and his child was seriously ill in Crumlin Children's Hospital for years and his colleagues had a rota to cover his hours during that incredibly stressful time. It was very little extra to each of them as so many pulled their weight but it meant the world to that family. There remains a hugely inspiring culture of volunteerism in this country and so many of us have been blessed by being touched by that meitheal culture.

And to think there's some ineffably miserable bastards here who wouldn't even clean the snow off the path in front of their house - 'let the old people slip and break their legs - it's not my path!'. The mind boggles at such miserable, myopic fúcktard existences.

I think i know the person you are talking about. Are his initials BT? If not it has happened twice!

My own sister and brother in law went through hell for a year, their 10 month old was diagnosed with cancer and spent a year fighting it before passing away. My brother in law worked for a large very famous company and they gave him all the time off he needed, all his colleagues were understanding and more than willing to work extra shifts to help him out when he returned.

You never know when it could be you next, and you'd hope people would be kind and generous.

the_pen_turner · 11-03-2018 9:33pm

i think its a great thing they did for their collegue.
but i think it sets a dangerous precident. i would support it but i can see how it would create a lot of problems down the line if it took hold.

bucketybuck · 11-03-2018 9:41pm

DubInMeath wrote: »

Agree with what your saying but would be good to know if the company (top level management) did help the guy out financially too

Surely the senior management contributed solely based on the fact that they allowed and facilitated this happening?

Thats not insignificant, they basically paid this guy despite him not actually doing any work for months on end, its one thing to say that his productivity was covered but still there are places that would have seen things differently, that would have wanted the overtime done and the guy to do his own work.

Avatar MIA · 11-03-2018 9:49pm

bucketybuck wrote: »

Surely the senior management contributed solely based on the fact that they allowed and facilitated this happening?

Thats not insignificant, they basically paid this guy despite him not actually doing any work for months on end, its one thing to say that his productivity was covered but still there are places that would have seen things differently, that would have wanted the overtime done and the guy to do his own work.

Even that is speculation. Damned if they did (only doing it for publicity). Damned if they don't (cheap skates).

Simply, we don't know if management contributed or not. I'd be shocked if they didn't. I don't expect a short news report to get all the details in the story.

11-03-2018 9:56pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Why is it so hard for some people to understand that many/most people actually feel good by being able to help?

"People don't see the world as it is; rather they see it as they are".

Anais Nin.

11-03-2018 10:00pm

PandaPoo wrote: »

I think i know the person you are talking about. Are his initials BT? If not it has happened twice!

My own sister and brother in law went through hell for a year, their 10 month old was diagnosed with cancer and spent a year fighting it before passing away. My brother in law worked for a large very famous company and they gave him all the time off he needed, all his colleagues were understanding and more than willing to work extra shifts to help him out when he returned.

You never know when it could be you next, and you'd hope people would be kind and generous.

Sorry for your loss, PP. I hope your family is doing okay.

Most people are decent and will do their best for someone in need, there's no question about that. I think the kind who would begrudge helping someone out when they're going through hell are few and far between, just louder on the internet.

Water John · 11-03-2018 10:00pm

Yes, Pen Turner, fierce risk we might turn into, a socially concerned society.

the_pen_turner · 11-03-2018 10:12pm

Water John wrote: »

Yes, Pen Turner, fierce risk we might turn into, a socially concerned society.

iv no problem with a genuine cause like this, but next time its a bit less worthy . it sets a precidence. eventually it will get to cases where there is no need for it and its just taking the piss .

bucketybuck · 11-03-2018 10:18pm

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Even that is speculation. Damned if they did (only doing it for publicity). Damned if they don't (cheap skates).

Simply, we don't know if management contributed or not. I'd be shocked if they didn't. I don't expect a short news report to get all the details in the story.

Its not speculation at all, this story doesn't exist if the company and its management hadn't allowed the gesture in the first place.

Bob_Marley · 11-03-2018 10:25pm

Wouldn't work here. A lot of companies/managers in Ireland these days expect people to work quite a few hours overtime every week for free without anyone other than the greedy employer/manager benefiting.

Your Face · 11-03-2018 10:27pm

DubInMeath wrote: »

Just wondering as management would be on salary with time in lieu instead of overtime in Germany.

Would have been a bit harsh if the management not to support the move, as in not allow it.

Well, I don't know. I would like more details too but in a way it doesn't matter.
His colleagues and HR manager stepped in and supported him and that's class.

11-03-2018 10:30pm

Your Face wrote: »

Well, I don't know. I would like more details too but in a way it doesn't matter.
His colleagues and HR manager stepped in and supported him and that's class.

Agreed it was class.

Irish Guitarist · 11-03-2018 11:27pm

The man took a year off and other people did his job for him. Fair play to them but I don't see what the company owners did that's so great. They still got the same amount of work done and didn't lose out on anything.

endacl · 11-03-2018 11:28pm

Hector Bellend wrote: »

I agree that it a phenomenal gesture but what would have happened if it was purely voluntary.

I'd like to think there'd be 100% participation, because I like to believe the vast majority of people aren't cnuts.

Five hours over two weeks? Half an hour a day? Given the opportunity to participate in making a profound difference to somebody's life by the equivalent of donating a couple of Late Late Shows? Only a prick would refuse. Only a contrarian prick would refuse 'on principle'. And I'd have no issue with a contrarian prick being called out if I was ever in the same situation.

Kudos to a creative HR department for imagining the not immediately obvious.

seamus · 12-03-2018 11:09am

Tell me how wrote: »

What's going in in your head that you see an uplifting story and look for a negative angle?

To be fair, it can come across as, "Hey lads, Andreas has run out of Annual Leave and might lose his job. If you all chip in to cover his hours, he'll be set".

Which sounds uplifting until you remember that with the stroke of a pen the company can just pay the guy his salary, give him the time off and nobody has to do any overtime.

I applaud the guy's co-workers for all stepping in and giving him a dig out. It's truly noble what they've done.

Especially considering that they have a crap employer who won't even give a break to a single father with a critically ill child.

_Dara_ · 12-03-2018 11:14am

Tell me how wrote: »

What's going in in your head that you see an uplifting story and look for a negative angle?

Because there always has to be the devil’s advocate view, no matter what the topic. Very tiresome.

Tell me how · 12-03-2018 11:23am

seamus wrote:

Especially considering that they have a crap employer who won't even give a break to a single father with a critically ill child.

I don't think there's any evidence that the company is a crap employer.
In fact, a company where the staff have such a culture would indicate to me a sense of good community spirit likely influenced by it being a good place to work.

It's a good news story. Anything can be analyzed to death, why not read something, smile at the thought of it and carry on your day in maybe a little better form than a minute ago.

Neyite · 12-03-2018 11:30am

seamus wrote: »

Which sounds uplifting until you remember that with the stroke of a pen the company can just pay the guy his salary, give him the time off and nobody has to do any overtime.

With many companies still struggling after some very difficult years they may not have had that luxury. They would have been contracted to meet deadlines in production.

It's possible that the company might have paid him the salary regardless had the staff not mobilised to help first. And this way, people who wished they could help a bereaved struggling dad were able to do so in a way that cost them so little but meant everything to their colleague.

professore · 12-03-2018 11:46am

Neyite wrote: »

With many companies still struggling after some very difficult years they may not have had that luxury. They would have been contracted to meet deadlines in production.

It's possible that the company might have paid him the salary regardless had the staff not mobilised to help first. And this way, people who wished they could help a bereaved struggling dad were able to do so in a way that cost them so little but meant everything to their colleague.

I am not saying they had to pay all his salary for a year. I'm just saying they could have contributed to the fund at the very least. Or even organise a holiday for him and his son. Or anything really. Even from a purely selfish perspective, it would have been great PR and generated 10 times the positive marketing and team building any amount of paid marketing could generate. Now they look like scrooges. Bad bad business. I have a business myself and it always astonishes me how many companies would rather fatally damage their reputation than spend a relatively small amount of money - and think nothing of spending large amounts on ridiculous things. Quite frankly there are some business owners who are just (insert expletive here). No other way to describe it. Not saying it's true in this case, as the papers are highly unreliable in reporting these stories.

And this is thankfully a rare occurrence. If the next employee stubbed their toe, and looked for a year off they could tell them to go jump.

Foxhound38 · 12-03-2018 11:49am

RoYoBo wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/widower-father-thanks-colleagues-who-worked-3000-hours-of-overtime-so-he-could-look-after-sick-son-36690711.html

This just made my day! What a wonderful example of human kindness.

What a team - huge fair play to all of them and a great idea by the HR manager.

Tell me how · 12-03-2018 11:58am

professore wrote:

I am not saying they had to pay all his salary for a year. I'm just saying they could have contributed to the fund at the very least. Or even organise a holiday for him and his son. Or anything really. Even from a purely selfish perspective, it would have been great PR and generated 10 times the positive marketing and team building any amount of paid marketing could generate. Now they look like scrooges. Bad bad business. I have a business myself and it always astonishes me how many companies would rather fatally damage their reputation than spend a relatively small amount of money - and think nothing of spending large amounts on ridiculous things. Quite frankly there are some business owners who are just (insert expletive here). No other way to describe it. Not saying it's true in this case, as the papers are highly unreliable in reporting these stories.

We don't know that the company didn't provide some significant assistance.

If they did, I would understand that they would keep it quiet but I'm inclined to believe that staff like that are a sign of a good workplace, ergo, a good company.

Foxhound38 · 12-03-2018 11:59am

kneemos wrote: »

Couldn't very well refuse could they.
Wouldn't be a fan of this kind forced charity.

There's always one :rolleyes:

Bob Gray · 12-03-2018 12:52pm

The same happened to my mate, his son was very ill (a condition stemming from the first trimester) and his colleagues at work (including management, office, admin etc) all gave a day from their annual leave to allow him to get back and forth to Crumlin when needed and also to be able to do the overnight stays in hospital when needed too.
Sadly the young lad passed away last year but my friend still talks about how he wouldn't have been able to provide the same level of support for his family if not for it.

Overtime hours donated to help widowed father.

Comments