Malicious Compliance

19593 readers

1 users here now

People conforming to the letter, but not the spirit, of a request. For now, this includes text posts, images, videos and links. Please ensure that the “malicious compliance” aspect is apparent - if you’re making a text post, be sure to explain this part; if it’s an image/video/link, use the “Body” field to elaborate.

======

We ENCOURAGE posts about events that happened to you, or someone you know.
We ACCEPT (for now) reposts of good malicious compliance stories (from other platforms) which did not happen to you or someone you knew. Please use a [REPOST] tag in such situations.
We DO NOT ALLOW fiction, or posts that break site-wide rules.

======

Also check out the following communities:

!fakehistoryporn@lemmy.world !unethicallifeprotips@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

2271

Work from home (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 months ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to c/maliciouscompliance@lemmy.world

206 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 134 points 4 months ago (2 children)

It really saddens to me see how many managers out there treat their subordinates terribly, and then act surprised when their subordinates do the same - as though employees are meant to greatful for their terrible treatment

[–] ech@lemm.ee 74 points 4 months ago (1 children)

https://files.catbox.moe/odekq1.jpg

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 60 points 4 months ago

Does ring true dunnit?

Sometimes people use "respect" to mean "treating someone like a person" and sometimes they use "respect" to mean "treating someone like an authority"

and sometimes people who are used to being treated like an authority say "if you won't respect me I won't respect you" and they mean "if you won't treat me like an authority I won't treat you like a person"

and they think they're being fair but they aren't, and it's not okay.

[–] ZeroTemp@lemmy.world 19 points 4 months ago (4 children)

I recently was recently reprimanded for using the term "subordinates". I was informed that term has fallen out of favor. Direct Reports is the proper way to say it these days.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 22 points 4 months ago

Sounds good to me, I've never gotten in trouble for indirectreportination.

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What about indirect reports?

[–] toddestan@lemm.ee 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's who you are to all the people who aren't your boss but think they can tell you what to do anyway.

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Or just your direct reports' direct reports.

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 9 points 4 months ago

Honestly calling someone a "direct report" sounds even more dehumanising. At least calling someone a "subordinate" acknowledges that you're belittling their existence. A "direct report" sounds like a piece of paper.

[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Fair enough. Subordinate is the term I've always heard used. Direct reports just sounds like the sugar coated version to me.

[–] ZeroTemp@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Oh yeah it's totally the sugar coated version. It's funny because I was only using the term "subordinates" because that is what the software platform I was training on calls "direct reports".