Term limits would probably help with that legislative influence. Both state and federal. Keep em rotating and it takes a lot more effort to make an impact on the "new guy". And if things go badly, then they'll be force to be done soon anyway.

-Term limits would probably help with that legislative influence. Both state and federal. Keep em rotating and it takes a lot more effort to make an impact on the "new guy". And if things go badly, then they'll be force to be done soon anyway.

As is so evident by the great strives the State of Oklahoma has made since they went with the term limit game!

Yeah, hard disagreement on that. I think we've all seen from Oklahoma's experiment with the concept that you don't get legislators that aren't susceptible to industry influence, you just get ones that are simultaneously industry influenced and clueless newbies.

Yeah, hard disagreement on that. I think we've all seen from Oklahoma's experiment with the concept that you don't get legislators that aren't susceptible to industry influence, you just get ones that are simultaneously industry influenced and clueless newbies.
Agreed.

Term limits would probably help with that legislative influence. Both state and federal. Keep em rotating and it takes a lot more effort to make an impact on the "new guy". And if things go badly, then they'll be force to be done soon anyway.

Huh? Term limits have helped lobbyists and political influencers. Its much easier to make an impact on the new guy for lobbyists. They come in not knowing how things work and its easy for them to be lobbied, also because they want to make friends to help keep their seat. The guy thats been in office for 20 years doesnt care about that as much.

How did this even become a part of this thread? I don't think even I am as bad at posting random segue non-sense.

Are you freaking kidding me?

Mr Paycom is one of the worst cases of this. Only caveat that i'll add here is that this didn't personally happen to me (i would never apply there), but friends/co-workers have had these experiences there.
Forcing employees to work 60 hours a week or else they aren't team players (and they're salary so they don't get overtime). Get the flu and miss one day of training when you first start and you're fired. They put on this public face of how awesome the company is, but it's a VERY different story inside. If you're not one of the workers that have drank the kool-aid and prefer to never see your home/family, then it's a crap hole. Yes, they are building a fast growing company...but on the backs of the employees that are being worked to death. They also dont advertise their screw-ups. Got one story for a employee that in an unrelated way, left just after Paycom lost the payroll for a couple million employees. No backups either. Do you think that an overworked staff might have had something to do with that?

As for private equity, i've lived that for 10 of my 13 years at my employer. I can tell you that through having different private equity firms involved over the years, this is ABSOLUTELY the case. The private equity/board plan has been around for 100 years. Hell, go watch how much private equity was screwing around with Henry Ford when he first started. He's not a very good person (on many levels) but in his weird way he did try to help his employees. That can be unpacked a lot in a positive/negative way but the point being the private equity wasn't interested in the employees or the product, they wanted their money. We've since gone public and the world has become a lot brighter for us.

So yeah, i'll stick with my view.

I have no dog in this fight, but I'd like to point out that everything you've described above is literally the world of technology. In any IT operation, there are easy 8-5 jobs, and then there are groups that are worked to death, especially DBAs (most maintenance and upgrades have to be done at weird hours) and Developers/Engineers. If you think Paycom is operating on slave labor, I promise you will never want Amazon or really any major tech player to come here.

Nothing you've stated above is uncommon. A ton of places fire employees for missing mandatory training in the first two weeks. NO ONE advertises their screw-ups.

Counter: Lots of companies also manage to treat their employees with respect, reasonable hours and benefits, and understand success holistically (which can be a great way to attract and retain quality employees). Just because it's common in an industry doesn't mean it's okay. Any CEO and company can choose a model their business model. The root of "wealth" has nothing to do with money, but instead with wellness.

I have no dog in this fight, but I'd like to point out that everything you've described above is literally the world of technology. In any IT operation, there are easy 8-5 jobs, and then there are groups that are worked to death, especially DBAs (most maintenance and upgrades have to be done at weird hours) and Developers/Engineers. If you think Paycom is operating on slave labor, I promise you will never want Amazon or really any major tech player to come here.

Nothing you've stated above is uncommon. A ton of places fire employees for missing mandatory training in the first two weeks. NO ONE advertises their screw-ups.

Overall the tech industry, other than lots of hours being required, treats employees VERY well, much better than other industries. Amazon is an outlier and is well known to be terrible to work for, one of the worst in any industry.

i would like to state that no matter how well you know someone, always take their opinions of places they worked with a grain of salt, i have been in both situation... my experience working for OU was one of the worst job experiences i have ever had, but i know that is not everyones experience, and then places were i felt they treated their employees well, and have seen situations were someone left and bad mouthed that company and they were never a good employee at said company, or sometimes were just never a fit for a given job/position.

Overall the tech industry, other than lots of hours being required, treats employees VERY well, much better than other industries. Amazon is an outlier and is well known to be terrible to work for, one of the worst in any industry.

I know 15-20 people who work for Paycom who love it there and can't say enough good things about it. All they talk about is the endless perks and employee appreciation that they receive. Purely from the perspective of great hours and work-life balance, ambitious companies like Paycom generally don't promise such things. Also, those companies who "treat their employees well" tend to hire outside consultants (at double the price + travel costs) for major projects. The money is still being spent and the work is being done, but that knowledge leaves with the consulting firm.

In other local offices like Hertz, Loves, or even the O&G firms, IT is just a means to an end, not the product. Their end product is retail. Go to a Hertz or Loves location and ask their retail employees about their work life balance. For Paycom, software and innovation IS the product, thus most of the pressure is concentrated there.

Again, I'm not here to defend Paycom to the death. I agree that Amazon is an outlier in terms of abuse, but what was described does not sound at all like an oppressive environment.

i would like to state that no matter how well you know someone, always take their opinions of places they worked with a grain of salt, i have been in both situation... my experience working for OU was one of the worst job experiences i have ever had, but i know that is not everyones experience, and then places were i felt they treated their employees well, and have seen situations were someone left and bad mouthed that company and they were never a good employee at said company, or sometimes were just never a fit for a given job/position.

For sure. Also, in any big organization, departments can have completely different vibes and cultures. There can be a lot of variation within a company or institution.

Disclaimer: I work for Paycom. However, I don't think the following is really colored at all by that fact, and seems to me to be the most level-headed, logical approach to this discussion as it relates to Chad Richison:

He does not belong among a discussion of Oklahoma Billionaires in this context. He only became a billionaire this year. He also does not have real access to most of that wealth as he's not in a position to sell much of his holdings without seeing a severe drop in the price (a Founder-CEO selling off even 1% of their holdings not even 5 years into public trading would be alarming for shareholders). He's still very much in the throws of "building a company" that has grown faster than anyone could have possibly imagined and (hopefully) is far more focused on that objective rather than any pursuits in philanthropy.

Whether or not he will be philanthropic or a good steward of the personal reward he will gain from Paycom is entirely outstanding given how young he is to the game - so you couldn't possibly make an assessment of where he will stand in relation to Kaiser or Hamm or Green or McClendon etc. Now 5/10 years from now, he will be completely fair game to be judged in that context.

I also believe that as it pertains to him as a benefactor of the community he should neither receive praise for his employees who love working at "his" company nor criticism for the employees who hate it. The experience of someone(s) in an organization the magnitude of Paycom is far more affected by the day-to-day operations which, though a CEO/President may impact, has really nothing to do with her/him. More importantly, the organization is not the community and has a wholly separate set of rules by which it should function - excellence on one side means nothing on the other.

I have no dog in this fight, but I'd like to point out that everything you've described above is literally the world of technology. In any IT operation, there are easy 8-5 jobs, and then there are groups that are worked to death, especially DBAs (most maintenance and upgrades have to be done at weird hours) and Developers/Engineers. If you think Paycom is operating on slave labor, I promise you will never want Amazon or really any major tech player to come here.

Nothing you've stated above is uncommon. A ton of places fire employees for missing mandatory training in the first two weeks. NO ONE advertises their screw-ups.

I think you actually made my points for me. I wasn't actually referring only to the technology employees, but they would be included. The fact that this behavior is being considered normal, IS the problem. Just because a lot of companies do this, it doesn't make it right. It doesn't mean it HAS to be this way. It just means people have become resigned to those "norms" that the penny-pinchers have forced on them. I dont feel like that is an ok thing. Treating people with proper respect should be a higher priority rather than just the bottom line. Sometimes the cheaper thing isn't the right thing (just look at any company that outsourced IT to contracting firms and then ask accounting/employees how that worked out).

:yeahthat:

Worked in IT at many places in many industries in many states over the past 30+ years, and just want to say that working for IBM at Hertz (who outsourced to IBM a few years before I hired on in 2009) was one of the worst IT jobs I've ever had. Hired on to BOK's IT group about 5 years ago and it's the best place I've worked, hands-down. We actively try to do things not at "weird times" and everybody covers for everybody else, no silo/empire-building, no "I'm the only one that can know this so I have job security", everybody I work with has one purpose - keep the lights on, keep things going, work with/help anybody that needs it, and do it with as best a work-life balance (yeah, I know, overused, but they actually do try to keep a healthy balance) as possible.

Glad to hear TheTravelers! I feel like our new public owners are trying to get us there, we're optimistic that we'll see some positives in 2019. Now, if only more companies would go this route.

And just for record, im in IT as well.

I think you actually made my points for me. I wasn't actually referring only to the technology employees, but they would be included. The fact that this behavior is being considered normal, IS the problem. Just because a lot of companies do this, it doesn't make it right. It doesn't mean it HAS to be this way. It just means people have become resigned to those "norms" that the penny-pinchers have forced on them. I dont feel like that is an ok thing. Treating people with proper respect should be a higher priority rather than just the bottom line. Sometimes the cheaper thing isn't the right thing (just look at any company that outsourced IT to contracting firms and then ask accounting/employees how that worked out).

I'm going to drop it because I think we're talking apples and oranges, and also getting off topic.

Teo put this argument into perspective fairly well. Paycom's rise is fairly new so I don't think they should be judged on the same level as the Kaiser or Hamm empires.