Can't really blame us as this is in florida, so we're not familiar with the writers, sources, or this news itself. This writer just left out a lot.
you can't really blame y'all for wondering why an organization wouldn't keep paying employees to do nothing?
I really do not understand all the LeBron hate. He is a basketball player, not Benedict Arnold. It's obvious from all your whining that his move has impacted financially. Maybe his departure to Miami caused you to lose your job, sacrifice your kids, burn your hand on the grill while making hot dogs. Point is. He's a basketball player. And remember. Cleveland is pretty far from Houston distance-wise and we are not even in the same conference as any of the teams that were improved through the FA.
That was the thing that set off my "common sense" alarm. The article didn't seem like it explained the whole story. An earlier poster commented that they should offer the laid off workers other jobs within the organization. My thoughts to that were: they probably will do exactly that if they can, despite the fact that this article doesn't mention anything about that. That seemed like common sense to me. Took me 10 seconds in Google to confirm that assumption. It just bothers me when people don't scrutinize their media. The fact that most news media leaves out important information is like the first thing you learn in Media Scrutiny 101. It just makes me shake my head that this board usually carries a premium on critical thinking. I'm all for affixing blame when warranted, but it sounds like the Heat did a tremendous job of taking care of their employees: paying for a job placement service, severance packages (some up to a year worth of salary!), extended benefits, and rehiring where feasible. And as for Lebron and Bosh, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the employees wanted to personally thank them since they probably made 1+ years commission in a matter of days.
I bet you can start selling tickets for the 2011-2012 season, you can call all the people who was in the waiting list for this season, and ask them if they want to buy tickets for the 2011-2012 season. Why fire them? Hey, good job! now you're are fired!
No. For thinking that the employees were let go without any further compensation. I understand why they were let go, and if we were dealing with a company who wasnt doing well and therefore had no business, then that's just a tough break and everyone has to understand....but this was strictly caused by 2-3 guys, who profited tremendously from their decision and will continue to do so. Anyway, with the new info it doesnt really matter anymore.
Spoiler I'm not saying Yao does nothing. I'm demonstrating the flaw here. Teams know injury is a risk when they sign people to absurd contracts that they should not get.
Seems kind of silly, you get 100% sales 3 months out, the incompetent is the person setting the prices for the tickets, they're losing their jobs because someone higher up is stupid.
Honestly, they'll need them next year when they set a proper price, so will probably keep them on doing something in the meantime, at least that's how i'd figure it will be done.
LeBron is a douchebag, but what he did makes sense. Maybe this decision was actually his way of telling Cleveland to go **** themselves. Maybe there were more problems between LeBron and the front office than otherwise advertised. LeBron probably made his decision a long time ago, and he chose to go out with a bang. Sure. It was poor for his public image. But I hate Cleveland anyway. I laughed.
you mean besides all of the commissions on season tickets they were never going to sell until they signed lebron? maybe i don't understand the point of a season ticket sales staff. i was under the impression they sold season tickets. if there are none to sell, why do i need a sales staff? apparently you don't understand why they were let go because you think if a company is doing well, no one can be laid off. are there any jobs/tasks around your home or apartment you don't need done? because it only seems fair that you give me any extra money you have to not do them. otherwise, it seems like you're just being kind of greedy. yes, 2-3 guys who increased sales and commissions far beyond previous years and put money in the salespeople's pockets that wouldn't have otherwise been there. and was this the first trade/free agent signing in history or something? guys change teams (often times making lots of money ) and then make selling tickets easier. why should the miami salespeople reap the benefits of that decision through no extra effort of their own? "y'all did absolutely nothing but got way more in commissions than you could have imagined a few months ago. now there's no work left for you to do, we have to let you go." to me, the story isn't letting them go for nothing. that would be perfectly reasonable. the story is the heat seemingly being very generous and giving them a year's severance after giving them a bunch of commissions for basically picking up a phone as the orders poured in. and i'm not sure why people suggest the heat should give them other jobs in the organization. should they fire the people currently doing those jobs to move the salespeople into them?
Organizations often have open positions outstanding. If they have employees in the workforce that they already know are good and can do the work they need, it'd make sense to move that employee over before going to the market to hire someone. Besides normal open positions, every organization has work that should be done but gets neglected because of workforce and money constraints. The Heat now have more money from increased sales and have freed up some time in the workday for 30 employees. They could be reassigned without stealing anyone's job. In fact, because they will have more operational load from nightly sellouts, they'll probably want more people anyway. Of course, the sticking point is still going to be matching skills to needs. Putting sales guys into accounting or the concession booth probably won't work out too well. And, the administrative difficulty would make absorbing 30 people into another part of the organization hard anyway -- assessing where you could use each guy, how the team would react, etc. So, laying off most of them is probably the wisest thing for the organization and they seem to have taken care of those employees anyway. But, to say they couldn't or shouldn't move them around the company isn't right either.
