Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider  (Read 20674 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 46902
  • Reputation: +27764/-5163
  • Gender: Male
Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
« Reply #75 on: January 12, 2024, 09:15:55 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • So Blabbermouth needs you to defend his indiscretion. Of course, there is altogether too much guessing, and now you are guessing the motives of one anonymous joker.  This thread should disappear out of sight.

    Anyone who's capable of English comprehension can see the envy/jealousy in the repeated taunts about OP's salary.  There's very little guesswork involved.  But many individuals here lack basic reading comprehension skills.

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #76 on: January 12, 2024, 10:22:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Anyone who's capable of English comprehension can see the envy/jealousy in the repeated taunts about OP's salary.  There's very little guesswork involved.  But many individuals here lack basic reading comprehension skills.
    Now that's the funniest thing I've read on this thread yet.  Talk about other's comprehension when you get snarky when people give a Catholic response to what you wrote because you couldn't articulate what you meant.
     You wrote:
    "go in late"... can only mean to leave your place and advance elsewhere
    "go in late"... can only mean there was an expected/anticipated time of arrival
    "leave early ... can only mean leave place of employment before expected/usual time
     




    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #77 on: January 13, 2024, 06:07:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Nonsense.  You act as if 1) that money is tax-free and 2) the individual has no expenses.  Depending on where you live, how many children you have, etc. ... one is not necessarily "filthy rich" from $145K per year.  That's nothing in a place like California, where a tiny 3-bed 1-bath home can cost close to a million dollars.  You can't make that judgment without any additional knowledge other than base salary.  Not to mention, that's probably a reflection of OP's current salary, and salaries have been rising with inflation, so I would imagine that the average over 30 years was more like $75-$100K tops.  30 years ago, PMs were lucky to make $30K entry level.  I started as an entry-level developer myself about 25 years ago now, and I was making $30K at the time.  Took me several years before I got into the mid-$50K range, etc. etc.
    Well you're not as special as the OP who is obviously not only legendarily talented, but also rich from such a high paying job and could retire now on the $4.35 million. The op would however need to budget to live on $145k / year for the next 30 years! If he's still alive after that well who knows? Heck, the OP would never have to worry about making ends meet on meager social security checks every month. I mean, how much money does the OP need anyway? Retire already!

     

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #78 on: January 13, 2024, 10:42:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You know absolutely nothing of OP's expenses, cost of living (can change dramatically depending on which part of the country you live in), number of children, possible medical issues, caring for elderly parents (contributing to them financially) ... and have not factored in that the 145K salary was not consistent for the 30 years, and 30 years ago was probably closer to 30K, perhaps averaging 75-100K over the years, not counting taxes, which would chew up a significant part of that.  You have a real problem here making snap judgments while knowing almost nothing about OP's situation.

    For all you know, OP could live in California, where decent homes cost a million dollars, have 12 children, 6 of whom are in college, and need automobiles, having to pay large medical bills that weren't covered by college, and paying for the care of parents who may need medical or nursing care.  In other words, you know zilch and are making snap judgments.
    You are projecting.

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #79 on: January 13, 2024, 10:49:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You are projecting.
    Said the kettle to the pot.


    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #80 on: January 13, 2024, 10:49:52 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I may be in a similar situation soon.  Millions will be.  All over the country.  Big companies know the economy is going to shrink and they will cut jobs to save their bottom-line. 

    God has a plan.
    Thank you for keeping an eye on the bigger picture.

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #81 on: January 13, 2024, 11:35:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well you're not as special as the OP who is obviously not only legendarily talented, but also rich from such a high paying job and could retire now on the $4.35 million. The op would however need to budget to live on $145k / year for the next 30 years! If he's still alive after that well who knows? Heck, the OP would never have to worry about making ends meet on meager social security checks every month. I mean, how much money does the OP need anyway? Retire already!
    The above quote demonstrates a capacity for elementary maths of 30 years x 145K per year, but not elementary common sense that OP wasn't making 145K each of those years from year 1, nor that OP stashed all that cash and somehow lived for 30 years miraculously without using any of it. Retire already from this argument!

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #82 on: January 13, 2024, 11:48:53 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Lad is correct here.  We don't know all of the OP's economic statistics or where they live.  145K a year is 45K a year in some places.  Where I'm from it's a lot but it's considered middle tier middle class in some areas.  OP was coming off as a pretentious jerk but to grill on them about the money they make and the way it is being done does come off as envy of what they are making.  


    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #83 on: January 13, 2024, 11:52:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If you give people advice in areas beyond your experience, then you aren't being helpful.  Bad advice, even if given in charity, is still bad advice.
    This. Gold star comment. People who know what it's like to have to work 20 hour days staring at a computer screen in order to meet a deadline, and then be able to log out for a week to recuperate, IYKYK. But the moment the OP said "tech project mgmt" then basic Catholic humility means that anyone who has no knowledge of tech project mgmt should hold off on irrelevant attention-grabbing opinions. Do show concern and offer a prayer, then decently step aside.

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #84 on: January 13, 2024, 11:58:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This. Gold star comment. People who know what it's like to have to work 20 hour days staring at a computer screen in order to meet a deadline, and then be able to log out for a week to recuperate, IYKYK. But the moment the OP said "tech project mgmt" then basic Catholic humility means that anyone who has no knowledge of tech project mgmt should hold off on irrelevant attention-grabbing opinions. Do show concern and offer a prayer, then decently step aside.
    Please do share the "attention grabbing opinions".  And do be ready to prove that they were "attention grabbing".

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #85 on: January 13, 2024, 12:07:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The above quote demonstrates a capacity for elementary maths of 30 years x 145K per year, but not elementary common sense that OP wasn't making 145K each of those years from year 1, nor that OP stashed all that cash and somehow lived for 30 years miraculously without using any of it. Retire already from this argument!

    This!


    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #86 on: January 13, 2024, 12:09:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Actually, OP could have retired early with that income and number of years working. It's called reducing your living expenses.

    Unless the $145K was only because they lived in a high cost-of-living area, like California. You can't get California or even Big City income while living in rural Kansas or a flyover state with a low cost-of-living. That would be a sweet deal, but it's not possible. Flyover states and rural areas are great to live in, but the incomes are going to be lower to match.

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #87 on: January 13, 2024, 12:15:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Please do share the "attention grabbing opinions".  And do be ready to prove that they were "attention grabbing".
    :jester::facepalm::fryingpan::pray:

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #88 on: January 13, 2024, 12:18:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • :jester::facepalm::fryingpan::pray:
    I see you are unable/want to point out the so-called attention-grabbing posts, so you resort to making fun.  Such Catholic humility!    

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46902
    • Reputation: +27764/-5163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
    « Reply #89 on: January 13, 2024, 12:21:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The above quote demonstrates a capacity for elementary maths of 30 years x 145K per year, but not elementary common sense that OP wasn't making 145K each of those years from year 1, nor that OP stashed all that cash and somehow lived for 30 years miraculously without using any of it. Retire already from this argument!

    Precisely.  I know from personal experience that 25 years ago I was making $30K as an entry level developer, and it took many years to work my way up to where I'm at, and, by the way, had 6 children, many expenses, experienced some adversities, etc.  I would imagine that the average salary over the 30 years would be more like $75K-$80K, and then you factor taxes into that, and living expenses, which vary depending on the part of the country you live in, how many children you have, other issues you might face (things breaking).  One tiny example is that I've had to get a new washer-dryer set every 4 years.  With all our kids, the thing is constantly running.  I was able to make basic repairs, of course, but then the main computer board would fry, and the cost of just the part was 80% of a new one.  I've also had lots of issues with cars, things like my furnace, a/c, roof, etc. ... all the while dealing with very large food expenditures, etc.