ADVERTISEMENT

Kevin O' Leary proves again he's a douche bag

lonestar50

HB All-American
Sep 3, 2007
4,720
12,691
113
If there's such an emergency after hours, you know who can fix it? How about the ****ing boss? You don't pay me to be on call 24 hours a day 7 days a week. I punch out, I don't even think about work until I punch back in again.


Is your boss texting you after work? Do you get a “please fix” email while you’re on vacation? In some countries, you can now simply ignore all of these notes once you’re off the clock.

Australia recently joined the ranks of countries like France, Spain and Belgium by passing a “right to disconnect” law, which came into effect on August 26. This legislation allows employees to step away from work-related communications outside their official working hours, ensuring that personal time remains personal.

While this development is welcome news for many workers in Australia, not everyone is on board. “Shark Tank” personality and investor Kevin O’Leary is one of the outspoken critics of the legislation.

“This kind of stuff just makes me crazy. It’s so dumb. Who dreams this crap up is my question. And why would anybody propose such a stupid idea?” he said in a clip he shared of a recent interview with Fox News.

O’Leary’s concerns
As an investor and entrepreneur, O’Leary places great importance on the seamless operation of a business, even outside of regular working hours. He has voiced strong concerns about employers’ ability to reach their employees in urgent situations, highlighting potential issues with the “right to disconnect” laws.

“What happens if you have an event in the office and it’s closed? Or you have an emergency somewhere, and you have to get a hold of them at two in the morning because it affects the job they’re working on?” he questioned.

If employees start ignoring their boss’s calls, texts, and emails outside of work hours, an after-hours emergency might have to wait until the next business day, which O’Leary finds unacceptable.

When asked whether he ever encounters employees who silence their phones outside of work, O’Leary didn’t hesitate with his response: “The next moment is — I just fire them.”

Clocking off used to mean something’
While O’Leary’s criticism is rooted in the risk of not being able to contact staff during critical moments, proponents of the “right to disconnect” argue that such laws are essential for establishing clear boundaries between professional duties and personal well-being.

In a statement about the new legislation, Australia’s Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations Murray Watt said, “Clocking off used to mean something in this country. It meant time with your kids, time with your friends or just time to yourself to relax.”

Watt highlighted how technology has blurred the lines between work and personal life, leaving many Australians feeling pressured to stay connected to emails and calls even after their workday is over. He asserted that, “It should not be controversial that workers shouldn’t be required to do unpaid overtime.”

While the U.S. doesn’t have "right to disconnect" laws at the federal level, California made an attempt to introduce such legislation. Assembly Bill 2751, spearheaded by Assembly Member Matt Haney, was designed to establish this right for employees across the Golden State.

According to the Legislative Counsel’s Digest, “This bill would require a public or private employer to establish a workplace policy that provides employees the right to disconnect from communications from the employer during non-working hours, except as specified.”

Despite the potential impact of this legislation, it did not come to fruition. The bill was shelved for the 2024 legislative session, putting a temporary halt to the push for a formal “right to disconnect” in California.

 
If there's such an emergency after hours, you know who can fix it? How about the ****ing boss? You don't pay me to be on call 24 hours a day 7 days a week. I punch out, I don't even think about work until I punch back in again.


Is your boss texting you after work? Do you get a “please fix” email while you’re on vacation? In some countries, you can now simply ignore all of these notes once you’re off the clock.

Australia recently joined the ranks of countries like France, Spain and Belgium by passing a “right to disconnect” law, which came into effect on August 26. This legislation allows employees to step away from work-related communications outside their official working hours, ensuring that personal time remains personal.

While this development is welcome news for many workers in Australia, not everyone is on board. “Shark Tank” personality and investor Kevin O’Leary is one of the outspoken critics of the legislation.

“This kind of stuff just makes me crazy. It’s so dumb. Who dreams this crap up is my question. And why would anybody propose such a stupid idea?” he said in a clip he shared of a recent interview with Fox News.

O’Leary’s concerns
As an investor and entrepreneur, O’Leary places great importance on the seamless operation of a business, even outside of regular working hours. He has voiced strong concerns about employers’ ability to reach their employees in urgent situations, highlighting potential issues with the “right to disconnect” laws.

“What happens if you have an event in the office and it’s closed? Or you have an emergency somewhere, and you have to get a hold of them at two in the morning because it affects the job they’re working on?” he questioned.

If employees start ignoring their boss’s calls, texts, and emails outside of work hours, an after-hours emergency might have to wait until the next business day, which O’Leary finds unacceptable.

When asked whether he ever encounters employees who silence their phones outside of work, O’Leary didn’t hesitate with his response: “The next moment is — I just fire them.”

Clocking off used to mean something’
While O’Leary’s criticism is rooted in the risk of not being able to contact staff during critical moments, proponents of the “right to disconnect” argue that such laws are essential for establishing clear boundaries between professional duties and personal well-being.

In a statement about the new legislation, Australia’s Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations Murray Watt said, “Clocking off used to mean something in this country. It meant time with your kids, time with your friends or just time to yourself to relax.”

Watt highlighted how technology has blurred the lines between work and personal life, leaving many Australians feeling pressured to stay connected to emails and calls even after their workday is over. He asserted that, “It should not be controversial that workers shouldn’t be required to do unpaid overtime.”

While the U.S. doesn’t have "right to disconnect" laws at the federal level, California made an attempt to introduce such legislation. Assembly Bill 2751, spearheaded by Assembly Member Matt Haney, was designed to establish this right for employees across the Golden State.

According to the Legislative Counsel’s Digest, “This bill would require a public or private employer to establish a workplace policy that provides employees the right to disconnect from communications from the employer during non-working hours, except as specified.”

Despite the potential impact of this legislation, it did not come to fruition. The bill was shelved for the 2024 legislative session, putting a temporary halt to the push for a formal “right to disconnect” in California.

I have had email off my phone for a decade. I ignore most of my email even when on the clock, and screen calls that aren’t from clients. France took a lesson from me
 
Most enterprise IT jobs include an on-call requirement. That's part of why those jobs pay so well, on average.

You now have young people demanding the high pay while wanting the on-call duties removed unless they are paid "extra".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Old_wrestling_fan
Most enterprise IT jobs include an on-call requirement. That's part of why those jobs pay so well, on average.

You now have young people demanding the high pay while wanting the on-call duties removed unless they are paid "extra".
My first job out of college was brutal. Mid-aughts. I made $50k, only $30k of it guaranteed. I worked 10-12 hour days in the office, and since all my clients were hospitals I was supporting, I had to roll the office lines to my mobile phone when I went home. I would get calls at 2-3am and would have to get up and work for a bit. It paid off for me, I made 3x that in my second year, no longer had to be-on call, and it carved a path to relative financial freedom.

I had it easy, some of my coworkers had contracts managing unskilled labor. They’d be up all night getting hassled and have to come in the next day on time. Working 100+ hour weeks for median wages.
 
Nah. He’s built businesses, is an avid investor, and is worth nearly half a billion dollars. Not like the guy has no authority on the business world.
But that describes a LOT of people who no one is actively asking for opinions and broadcasting their opinions. I think the differentiator is that he's on a TV show, so his voice becomes louder than others.
 
Most enterprise IT jobs include an on-call requirement. That's part of why those jobs pay so well, on average.

You now have young people demanding the high pay while wanting the on-call duties removed unless they are paid "extra".
I think if you have a role (and job specifications) that require you to be available after hours, that should be fine, but those should be clearly defined, and built into the salary calculation. For me the problem is if you take a role that really only needs to be 830-530 M-F, but you've got bosses that expect/demand that you be available when they're available and get mad when they send you an email at 11pm on Saturday and don't get a response from you until Monday morning - esp when it's nothing time critical, and it's just a matter of when they were working.
 
I’m 67 years old and in my entire adult life I’ve never had a vacation where I didn’t have to check my emails daily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crafty Beaver
I suspect that O'leary's position is that this isn't really a problem to be addressed with legislation,.. Government involvement isn't required for every little issue in life...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crafty Beaver
I suspect that O'leary's position is that this isn't really a problem to be addressed with legislation,.. Government involvement isn't required for every little issue in life...
No I suspect his position is my workers work for me 24/7 or I will fire them. Since you know..... That's what he said
 
But that describes a LOT of people who no one is actively asking for opinions and broadcasting their opinions. I think the differentiator is that he's on a TV show, so his voice becomes louder than others.
Most people in their spot don’t want to do it and he does. He’s turned wealth into fame which will create more wealth. Can’t blame him in this media whore landscape
 
  • Like
Reactions: NDallasRuss
No I suspect his position is my workers work for me 24/7 or I will fire them. Since you know..... That's what he said
I’ve had bosses like this and it’s shitty. I’ve had to call my people off-hours for things, but I do my absolute best to 1) make sure it’s a real emergency that can’t wait and 2) that they’re the right person to help
 
It’s good that workers are pushing back. But I also don’t think it needs to be addressed with legislation. Eventually the best employees will just stop working for the least flexible companies.

I say let capitalism do its thing in this case.
 
If it's something that someone else f'd up or came up after you already quit for the day, the boss can go f themselves. If it's something that was your responsibility while you were working that you didn't do or f'd up yourself, don't be a dick and leave others to clean up your miss just because you're 'off the clock'
 
he doesn't want bosses bothering workers while they are off the clock and this makes him a d-bag?
 
he doesn't want bosses bothering workers while they are off the clock and this makes him a d-bag?
I'm not sure how you got that he DOESN'T want bosses bothering workers from this:

"If employees start ignoring their boss’s calls, texts, and emails outside of work hours, an after-hours emergency might have to wait until the next business day, which O’Leary finds unacceptable.

When asked whether he ever encounters employees who silence their phones outside of work, O’Leary didn’t hesitate with his response: “The next moment is — I just fire them.”"
 
My notifications for Outlook are set to only send during business hours. I didn't even look at Outlook while on vacation last month. If it's an emergency they know how to reach me, otherwise I don't want to hear it after 5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McLovin32
Most enterprise IT jobs include an on-call requirement. That's part of why those jobs pay so well, on average.

You now have young people demanding the high pay while wanting the on-call duties removed unless they are paid "extra".
I'm in IT and spent a chunk of the holiday weekend cleaning up the mess after a major power outage and failure of our generator.
It comes with the territory in IT, been my experience.
 
If there's such an emergency after hours, you know who can fix it? How about the ****ing boss? You don't pay me to be on call 24 hours a day 7 days a week. I punch out, I don't even think about work until I punch back in again.


Is your boss texting you after work? Do you get a “please fix” email while you’re on vacation? In some countries, you can now simply ignore all of these notes once you’re off the clock.

Australia recently joined the ranks of countries like France, Spain and Belgium by passing a “right to disconnect” law, which came into effect on August 26. This legislation allows employees to step away from work-related communications outside their official working hours, ensuring that personal time remains personal.

While this development is welcome news for many workers in Australia, not everyone is on board. “Shark Tank” personality and investor Kevin O’Leary is one of the outspoken critics of the legislation.

“This kind of stuff just makes me crazy. It’s so dumb. Who dreams this crap up is my question. And why would anybody propose such a stupid idea?” he said in a clip he shared of a recent interview with Fox News.

O’Leary’s concerns
As an investor and entrepreneur, O’Leary places great importance on the seamless operation of a business, even outside of regular working hours. He has voiced strong concerns about employers’ ability to reach their employees in urgent situations, highlighting potential issues with the “right to disconnect” laws.

“What happens if you have an event in the office and it’s closed? Or you have an emergency somewhere, and you have to get a hold of them at two in the morning because it affects the job they’re working on?” he questioned.

If employees start ignoring their boss’s calls, texts, and emails outside of work hours, an after-hours emergency might have to wait until the next business day, which O’Leary finds unacceptable.

When asked whether he ever encounters employees who silence their phones outside of work, O’Leary didn’t hesitate with his response: “The next moment is — I just fire them.”

Clocking off used to mean something’
While O’Leary’s criticism is rooted in the risk of not being able to contact staff during critical moments, proponents of the “right to disconnect” argue that such laws are essential for establishing clear boundaries between professional duties and personal well-being.

In a statement about the new legislation, Australia’s Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations Murray Watt said, “Clocking off used to mean something in this country. It meant time with your kids, time with your friends or just time to yourself to relax.”

Watt highlighted how technology has blurred the lines between work and personal life, leaving many Australians feeling pressured to stay connected to emails and calls even after their workday is over. He asserted that, “It should not be controversial that workers shouldn’t be required to do unpaid overtime.”

While the U.S. doesn’t have "right to disconnect" laws at the federal level, California made an attempt to introduce such legislation. Assembly Bill 2751, spearheaded by Assembly Member Matt Haney, was designed to establish this right for employees across the Golden State.

According to the Legislative Counsel’s Digest, “This bill would require a public or private employer to establish a workplace policy that provides employees the right to disconnect from communications from the employer during non-working hours, except as specified.”

Despite the potential impact of this legislation, it did not come to fruition. The bill was shelved for the 2024 legislative session, putting a temporary halt to the push for a formal “right to disconnect” in California.

That's why you are and always will be a low level dweeb. If your company is paying you to do a job, a responsible person does it.
 
That's why you are and always will be a low level dweeb. If your company is paying you to do a job, a responsible person does it.

You do a job for the # of hours you agree to, during the time frame agree upon. If I'm paid to work 40 hours, Mon-Fri 7-3:30 (w/30min lunch) and you try to call me at 9pm with an "emergency", either I'll get paid overtime or that call will not be answered. And if you try to fire me or punish me over it, you'll get a call or visit from a lawyer. And I'll win
 
oops my bad, I was reading something else apparently but still, he doesn't want LAWS about it. I agree. maybe laws about harassing strangers at 3 am , but we probably have those. I also think if you are on call, you should have an "on call" pay.

I just don't see him as a d-bag but to each his own.
 
If there's such an emergency after hours, you know who can fix it? How about the ****ing boss? You don't pay me to be on call 24 hours a day 7 days a week. I punch out, I don't even think about work until I punch back in again.


Is your boss texting you after work? Do you get a “please fix” email while you’re on vacation? In some countries, you can now simply ignore all of these notes once you’re off the clock.

Australia recently joined the ranks of countries like France, Spain and Belgium by passing a “right to disconnect” law, which came into effect on August 26. This legislation allows employees to step away from work-related communications outside their official working hours, ensuring that personal time remains personal.

While this development is welcome news for many workers in Australia, not everyone is on board. “Shark Tank” personality and investor Kevin O’Leary is one of the outspoken critics of the legislation.

“This kind of stuff just makes me crazy. It’s so dumb. Who dreams this crap up is my question. And why would anybody propose such a stupid idea?” he said in a clip he shared of a recent interview with Fox News.

O’Leary’s concerns
As an investor and entrepreneur, O’Leary places great importance on the seamless operation of a business, even outside of regular working hours. He has voiced strong concerns about employers’ ability to reach their employees in urgent situations, highlighting potential issues with the “right to disconnect” laws.

“What happens if you have an event in the office and it’s closed? Or you have an emergency somewhere, and you have to get a hold of them at two in the morning because it affects the job they’re working on?” he questioned.

If employees start ignoring their boss’s calls, texts, and emails outside of work hours, an after-hours emergency might have to wait until the next business day, which O’Leary finds unacceptable.

When asked whether he ever encounters employees who silence their phones outside of work, O’Leary didn’t hesitate with his response: “The next moment is — I just fire them.”

Clocking off used to mean something’
While O’Leary’s criticism is rooted in the risk of not being able to contact staff during critical moments, proponents of the “right to disconnect” argue that such laws are essential for establishing clear boundaries between professional duties and personal well-being.

In a statement about the new legislation, Australia’s Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations Murray Watt said, “Clocking off used to mean something in this country. It meant time with your kids, time with your friends or just time to yourself to relax.”

Watt highlighted how technology has blurred the lines between work and personal life, leaving many Australians feeling pressured to stay connected to emails and calls even after their workday is over. He asserted that, “It should not be controversial that workers shouldn’t be required to do unpaid overtime.”

While the U.S. doesn’t have "right to disconnect" laws at the federal level, California made an attempt to introduce such legislation. Assembly Bill 2751, spearheaded by Assembly Member Matt Haney, was designed to establish this right for employees across the Golden State.

According to the Legislative Counsel’s Digest, “This bill would require a public or private employer to establish a workplace policy that provides employees the right to disconnect from communications from the employer during non-working hours, except as specified.”

Despite the potential impact of this legislation, it did not come to fruition. The bill was shelved for the 2024 legislative session, putting a temporary halt to the push for a formal “right to disconnect” in California.

His concerns are legit, there should just be a designation for essential personnel, so emergencies don't fall through the cracks.

The whole reason this is an issue is because managers either a) don't pay attention to who's OOO, or b) think too many things are emergencies.

It's a reasonable and necessary concept IMO. In America it would lead to a whole new line of business for lawyers!!
 
You do a job for the # of hours you agree to, during the time frame agree upon. If I'm paid to work 40 hours, Mon-Fri 7-3:30 (w/30min lunch) and you try to call me at 9pm with an "emergency", either I'll get paid overtime or that call will not be answered. And if you try to fire me or punish me over it, you'll get a call or visit from a lawyer. And I'll win
Only if you are an hourly employee.
 
That's why you are and always will be a low level dweeb. If your company is paying you to do a job, a responsible person does it.
Good grief, why are you such an insufferable twat with your takes on every topic on this board? If I met you IRL I'm highly certain I'd do this...
family guy school GIF
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT