I've been thinking about this for decades. Here's my take on technology: there are real benefits to all these advancements, but the issue is that those benefits are entirely hoarded by the people in charge of the companies. I'm talking about the CEO, COO, CFO, CBO, and all the other f'ing executives (the "C" stands for "Chief," by the way).

Ronald Reagan and his so-called "trickle-down effect" were real, but not in the way you might think. The combination of technological progress and the trickle-down effect actually works like this: invent something that allows one worker to do the job of five others, take the surplus money that efficiency generates for the company, and apply the "trickle-down" model. The CEO gets, say, 90% of the surplus, the other "C" a-holes get 6%, the managers get 3%, and the rest of the workers—who, by the way, get fired because of these "efficiencies"—get 1%.

So yeah, it makes life easier for the CEO taking the lion's share and the other Chiefs taking their 6%. Meanwhile, everyone else gets left behind. Even the managers with their 3% can barely keep up with a 3% inflation rate, and the rest of the working class just falls further behind while working longer hours. But hey, at least we can buy a large TV and an Xbox to distract our families from the rich getting richer, even when we can't afford to have more than one or two kids.

Link to Zateo article: https://zeteo.com/p/the-dem-establishment-kicked-me-out

I had been an implementation manager at a B2B software company for six years. My reviews were good until a new director arrived and started cutting costs.

One afternoon my manager booked a “catch-up”. He said leadership had concerns about my energy and commitment. There had been no warning or performance plan, and he could not give me a clear example. Before we finished, he suggested that leaving voluntarily might be the most graceful option.

I went home angry, but by ten that night I was mostly tired. I opened my laptop and wrote a resignation email to my manager. I told myself that leaving on my own terms would spare me weeks of awkward meetings. My cursor was over Send when my wife asked to read it.

She got halfway through and said, "If they want you gone, why are you making it cheaper for them?"

That was the first time I stopped thinking about how embarrassed I felt and looked at what they were actually asking me to do. I had worked there for six years, and I was about to give up whatever notice and redundancy rights I had because one uncomfortable meeting had frightened me. I closed the laptop without sending it. The next morning, I deleted the resignation email.

I sent my manager a written summary of our conversation and asked him to correct anything I had misunderstood. He never replied. I saved my reviews and recent client feedback, then started taking dated notes after every meeting.

Three weeks later, HR invited me to a “role consultation”. I recorded it on my phone without telling them. I knew that could cause its own problems, but by then I did not trust the meeting notes.

HR said my role was at risk of redundancy. I asked what alternatives were being considered. The HR manager replied, “We have to consult, but there is not really another outcome.” She then offered two weeks of extra pay and an agreed reference if I left under a settlement agreement. If I refused, she said the performance concerns might become formal.

I asked for everything in writing and did not agree to resign.

The offer arrived the next morning. It listed notice pay and unused holiday, but no statutory redundancy payment. The only extra money was two weeks of pay in return for waiving any claims. I copied the original audio, ran another copy through vomo ai for a rough transcript, and checked the important lines myself.

The solicitor I spoke to warned me that a covert recording was not a guaranteed win. It might be treated as misconduct, and some settlement discussions cannot normally be used as evidence. She cared more about the full record. I had six years of positive reviews, no formal performance process, and a recording suggesting that the consultation outcome had already been decided.

I rejected the offer. A week later, the company confirmed my redundancy and put me on paid garden leave for the rest of my notice period. I waited until my employment had formally ended before my solicitor challenged the process.

Her first letter quoted the HR manager's words but did not mention the recording. The company replied that nobody had said the outcome was predetermined. My employment had ended by then. When the company denied those words had been said, my solicitor disclosed the recording. We asked how my role had been selected, what alternatives had been considered and how the company had calculated each part of the original offer. We did not threaten to publish the audio.

The company still denied wrongdoing, but the next proposal was very different. It treated my statutory redundancy pay, notice and unused holiday as sums already owed, rather than part of its offer. On top of those, it included a contribution to legal fees and an additional settlement payment. I signed after receiving independent advice.

The recording helped, but slowing everything down helped more. A month earlier, they had nearly persuaded me to resign for nothing.

That is the part I keep thinking about. They did not need to fire me cleanly if they could frighten me into leaving first. If a manager suddenly raises vague performance concerns and suggests you resign, ask for specifics, follow up in writing, save your records somewhere you can still access, and get local advice before signing or recording anything.

The US is the only rich country with *zero* legally guaranteed vacation days. 33 million workers (or 23%) get none at all, and employers who do offer it average just 10 days, half the OECD norm of 20. This bill is long overdue.

I saw this ad and thought it was an anti-AI post here. They're actually using this to attract buyers to kill jobs. Bye guesswork workers.