Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Microsoft

Steve Ballmer Reorganizing Microsoft 387

Posted by timothy
from the seat-of-power-chairs-of-strength dept.
Nerval's Lobster writes "Microsoft's big reorganization has begun. Rumors had persisted for weeks that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer was planning a massive, once-in-a-lifetime reorganization of the company he's been running for quite some time. Now the plan is out in the open, and things are going to change in huge ways. Microsoft will coalesce around 'a single strategy as one company,' CEO Steve Ballmer wrote in a really lengthy memo posted on Microsoft's Website, 'not a collection of division strategies.' The company's product portfolio — from Windows and Xbox to enterprise applications — will be regarded and operated upon in a holistic manner. Ballmer wants this 'one company' approach to extend how Microsoft handles its advertising, marketing and consumer-service operations. Ballmer also wants to knock down the walls that have slowly grown between Microsoft's various divisions, at least as far as engineering's concerned. The new 'engineering culture' will apparently facilitate collaboration 'across the company,' with an emphasis on cross-group contributions (and maintaining secrecy, of course, for the giant projects). Read on for much more on how Microsoft is reorganizing all its internal groups, as well as a rundown of who's in and who's out on the executive level."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Steve Ballmer Reorganizing Microsoft

Comments Filter:
  • Fixed that for you (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tom229 (1640685) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @10:56AM (#44250639)

    Microsoft's big reorganization has begun. Rumors had persisted for weeks that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer was planning a massive, once-in-a-lifetime reorganization of the company he's been ruining for quite some time.

  • Executive summary. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 11, 2013 @10:56AM (#44250647)

    He's an idiot.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:00AM (#44250725)

    More tablet interfaces on the PC, more attempts to lock on the tablet as TV, more stupidity around attempting to turn a Gaming Console into a Media Center that replaces the tablet, the PC and everything else.

    Or does he surprise us? Nope. He won't. We have seen what the plan with Windows 8 and instead of understanding that move was stupid they are going to attempt to force it in with all the power they can muster.

  • by QuietLagoon (813062) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:00AM (#44250729)
    Microsoft's Board of Directors need to fix the root cause of Microsoft's problems.

    .
    Unless and until Mr. Ballmer is shown the door, he will just continue re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, and Microsoft will continue its slow voyage to the bottom...

  • by h4rr4r (612664) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:06AM (#44250809)

    Ballmer wants this 'one company' approach to extend how Microsoft handles its advertising, marketing and consumer-service operations.

    Ballmer showing what parts of the company he thinks are important is what this looks like to me.

    I rag on MS a ton, sometimes unfairly, but even they don't deserve to be stuck with Ballmer.

  • Good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hsmith (818216) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:17AM (#44250935)
    Most of the posts are hate, but good for Microsoft. It is a step in the right direction. Anyone who works/worked there will tell you the organization is very segregated. Business units fight one another and things aren't done in a cohesive manner.

    But, Apple is very segregated as well and they seem to do alright. Perhaps it is just the culture at Microsoft that is the issue.

    Perhaps they will finally end their silly employee review process as well - as people I know at MS absolutely hate it.
  • by Jeff Keenan (2965465) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:18AM (#44250941)
    If they want the "engineering culture" to "facilitate collaboration across the company", they can start by getting rid of the Stack Rank review process. Why would I want to collaborate with someone who I'm competing for a top spot on the review chart with?
  • by SoupGuru (723634) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:19AM (#44250959)

    I know it's popular to predict doom and gloom for Microsoft but I really don't understand what Balmer is thinking.

    If they are transitioning to a devices and services company that kind of means they are transitioning away from the things that have made them successful.

    I'm actually kind of giddy at the thought of some real competition in the corporate arena, seeing as how Microsoft continues to drop the ball.

  • by Picass0 (147474) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:20AM (#44250969) Homepage Journal

    Knocking down the silos in an organization is generally a good thing. That said I doubt Ballmer knows what to do next. The smartest thing he could do is choose a successor.

    Ballmer doesn't have vision. He doesn't understand the mobile market. Windows 8 was a disaster and MS continues to lose ground to Apple. The introduction of XBoxOne couldn't have been worse - great hardware crippled by licensing BS. Surface is overpriced and underselling next to Ipad and Android tablets.

    I'm only suprised he hasn't been forced out.

  • by KernelMuncher (989766) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:21AM (#44250993)
    Any reputable consulting company would start with the suggestion that Ballmer fire himself.

    Microsoft has been technically stagnant for most of the thirteen years since Ballmer took over (which is reflected in the company's flat stock price since 2002). The string of product failures under Ballmer is cringe worthy: Vista, Kin, Zune, Windows 8, Windows phone, Surface, never-ending security problems, etc. Almost every major computing trend during that time (portable music, phones, tablets, social media, etc) under Ballmer has been mishandled. About the only thing the company has done right is the Xbox and I don't think that makes them any money. It's only the legacy of the corporate purchases of the Windows OS and Office that keep the Microsoft going. And that trend was started long before Ballmer ever took office.
  • by NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:26AM (#44251059)
    Well, Windows 8 is such a train wreck because they wanted to exploit the "synergy" between your PC, tablet and phone - even if/though your tablet runs iOS and your phone runs Android. This "re-org" is just more of the same kind of thinking.
  • by ackthpt (218170) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:31AM (#44251113) Homepage Journal

    Microsoft's big reorganization has begun. Rumors had persisted for weeks that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer was planning a massive, once-in-a-lifetime reorganization of the company he's been ruining for quite some time.

    To be fair, the company once had a rather singular approach the the market, but through expansion and growth it ended up looking like bloated octopus.

    Expect some housecleaning to be a part of this re-org as redundancy is cut out, empires reigned in.

  • by RichMan (8097) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:32AM (#44251135)

    If they were not MS with a huge pile of cash Xbox would have been a failure. The initial hardware failure rate on shipped product was staggering. A lesser company would have been destroyed by that.

    Xbox should have been a hard lesson that MS management did not know anything about shipping physical units instead of software. Instead they learned "hardware reliabilty is important". They did not learn the marketing and usability stuff that Apple has hands down.

    Microsoft is so big it can bull through mistakes which lead to the Windows 8 "issue". Which is about 3 or more problems all in one.

  • by Samantha Wright (1324923) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:34AM (#44251155) Homepage Journal
    I wouldn't be so sure—Microsoft's terrible internal organization and infighting have been discussed at length in the past [slashdot.org], and it's quite reasonable to say that this is the exact problem that makes their products what we despise. One tiny example: PowerShell was supposed to be an update for the Command Prompt, but because the group that wrote PowerShell wasn't the group in charge of the core system, it had to be shipped as a separate product. The fiefdom regime essentially makes it difficult or impossible to contribute to projects that aren't your own, creating huge barriers to contributing bugs; everything is its own little cathedral. Here's [zorinaq.com] a more detailed rant on the technical consequences from an anonymous MS employee.
  • by milbournosphere (1273186) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:35AM (#44251157)

    Microsoft will consolidate all its major operating systems, including Windows, Windows Phone and the software that powers the Xbox, under Terry Myerson, who handled engineering for only Windows Phone before.

    I wonder if this will lead to any significant rethink of things on the desktop side. Windows 8 has a bit of an identity crisis going on; perhaps Win9 or whatever they decide to call it will solve that problem now that all of the OS design groups are under one tidy grouping.

  • How will he do it? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by 140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:37AM (#44251177) Journal
    Word Star had more users than the population of Bangladesh, Word Perfect was loved by the secretaries and Lotus 1-2-3 was worshiped by the accountants. Still Microsoft won them all, by hook or crook. Even if it is mostly by crook, it won. It needed employees with intense competitive focus to achieve that. All the people in the early days who had the fire in the belly to make their company succeed have all either burnt out, cashed out, shut out.

    People who are left behind all came of age when Microsoft had almost mythical powers. It could squelch competition by FUD, All it took was an announcement of vaporware and the funding for start-ups who could compete would just evaporate. These guys simply are not capable of competing on a level playing field. And the playing field is tilted against Microsoft now. The earlier era minions of Gates have earned the enmity of vast sections of the computer professionals. And so many of their partners fear them and do not trust them.

    Unless it is something radical like splitting the company into an OS division, a consumer products division, corporate server products division and all competing at full throttle it is not going to work.

  • by goruka (1721094) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:38AM (#44251201)
    Nowadays, most of the software industry works together in open technologies that are widely used, like Linux, BSD, Apache, Webkit, Firefox, LLVM, PHP, OpenGL, Freetype, Android, etc. This is one of the reasons about why we've seen so many amazing products come out in such a short time the past decade.

    Microsoft still believes they can do everything by themselves and they are starting to really fall behind. They were never a very efficient company, as their products reached maturity by iterating several years over several versions. Now, instead of accepting that the world has decided to embrace open technologies as foundation to most products, they are desperate to find ways to stay competitive with their current business model, and aggressively go after those who use open technologies to get patent money.

    Why is it so difficult for Ballmer and Gates to admit that they can't compete anymore, no matter how many times they restructure their company? It's one company vs the world at this point.
  • DOJ, pay attention (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Thud457 (234763) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:44AM (#44251283) Homepage Journal

    Windows isn't done until Lotus won't run.

    Expect to see more undocumented syscalls for Office Apps, IE, SQL Server, SMB, etc, etc.

  • by sl4shd0rk (755837) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:57AM (#44251459)

    FTFA: "launching Windows 8 and Surface, moving to continuous product cycles, bringing a consistent user interface to PCs, tablets, phones and Xbox "

    I've never heard so much Fail mentioned in one sentence before. If those are supposed to be the largest representative of Microsoft's successes in the past decade, they are really, really, really screwed.

  • by hairyfeet (841228) <bassbeast1968@NOspaM.gmail.com> on Thursday July 11, 2013 @11:59AM (#44251503) Journal

    Well if the rumors that have been "surfacing" (pun intended) lately are true I owe a big "Sorry about that dude" to Sinofsky as rumor has it he wanted Windows 8 to really be 7.1 and he wanted Metro to be the new mobile and he got cockblocked by Ballmer who probably wears an "I heart Apple" shirt to work.

    At the end of the day its business 101, give folks what they want to buy or they'll take their business elsewhere. Instead what we have is TBB (Typical Ballmer behavior) where he goes "Ohh you don't like our walled gardens and cellphone UIs? well fuck you will make it twice as nasty!". See win 8.1 having a "start button" that takes you back to the fucking Metro UI the user wants to get the hell away from in the first place for an example. I just hope when win 8.1 shits itself and bombs that the board will fire his fat ass and the other rumor,that ballmer can NEVER be fired thanks to gates backing his Little buddy" aren't true, or else by 2020 when Win 7 reaches EOL it'll see MSFT reach EOL with it and like 'em or hate 'em they are pretty much the only game in town unless you want a dumb terminal (Google) or an overpriced iToy that you can't upgrade or fix shit on.

  • by Nerdfest (867930) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @12:18PM (#44251735)

    You don't lead customers, you lead followers.

  • by CadentOrange (2429626) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @12:22PM (#44251785)

    I would have thought that Microsoft's biggest problem at the moment is that all the different divisions are not separate enough. The biggest thing holding Microsoft back is their seemingly inexplicable need to make everything run on Windows only (Office is the notable exception).

    This blind adherence to making everything run on Windows may have been a strategic move in the 90's but it's really doing them no favours today. Take SQL server for example. It's a very good database product, but it only runs on Windows. While Windows has a large share of the server market, Linux (and other flavours of *nix) is just as large if not larger. If they were serious about pushing SQL server, they'd do what other database companies do and release their product on multiple platforms. Oracle/Postgres/DB2/etc all run on Window and common flavours of *nix. It makes no sense to hold SQL server back unless it's to give Windows a unique selling point.

    The same can be said of a lot of their other products. Visual Studio is IMHO the best IDE out there, yet it's Windows only. MS Office is the standard office suite, yet it's not available on the major mobile operating systems (Android and iOS). Not releasing MS Office for iOS/Android is as ridiculous as not releasing it for the Mac. They've clearly decided that the Mac market is targeting and it's worth noting that Microsoft's Mac Business unit is doing well financially.

    Making their other products run on non-Windows platforms may jeopardise the sales of Windows licenses, but it's almost certain to improve the sales of everything else. The question is whether the increase in sales will offset the loss of Windows licenses, and I'm in no position to answer that. My gut feeling is that it will be better for the company in the long run as they will no longer be tied to the fortunes of Windows. This separation may also benefit Windows in the long term as it won't be able to use the other MS products "exclusives" as a crutch and will have to stand on its own merits.

    This is the sort of shake-up of Microsoft that I think is necessary. Anything else is just a waste of time and akin to rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, as others have alluded to.

  • by dkleinsc (563838) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @12:24PM (#44251809) Homepage

    Hard to get rid of a guy who's fired or run-off all his potential replacements.

    Really? I can think of a guy who could credibly take over without any difficulties if he wanted to, some fellow named Bill Gates.

    And I should point out that in most corporations the purpose of a re-org is not to actually improve the running of the company, it's to create an opportunity for someone further up the food chain to reward buddies and punish enemies. I wouldn't be surprised if the point of this re-org was to run off potential replacements.

  • by kimvette (919543) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @12:38PM (#44252025) Homepage Journal

    No wonder you posted AC - you're blatantly wrong (reined in this sense means brought under control, not reigned as in ruled) as well as homophobic and resorting to ad-hominem attacks.

  • by Dcnjoe60 (682885) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @12:42PM (#44252067)

    I wouldn't be so sure—Microsoft's terrible internal organization and infighting have been discussed at length in the past [slashdot.org], and it's quite reasonable to say that this is the exact problem that makes their products what we despise.

    Except that Ballmer has been at the helm for most of that time and ultimately responsible for the organization and infighting as it is part of the corporate culture at Microsoft. That is why most boards bring in a whole new management team when such a top down re-organization is required. Most boards realize that you only get one chance to get it right. That's why you don't let the fox who has been raiding the hen house be the one who reorganizes the hen house. Leaving Balmmer and the rest of the management team in place means that board believes that management isn't the problem, but the workers are. That doesn't bode well for the future of Microsoft as the workers aren't the ones who have created the corporate culture nor are they the ones who have made the company a shadow of what it once was or could have been.

  • by Barlo_Mung_42 (411228) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @12:48PM (#44252143) Homepage

    Powershell is also a good example of how they have recognized the problem and are starting to fix it. PS comes install on Win8 and on Win8.1 it is the default on the command menu (Winkey+X -> A). MS is far from sinking as GP would have us believe and I think with these changes it will perform even better.

  • by Austerity Empowers (669817) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @12:55PM (#44252255)

    And I am thrilled that he's running MS. If they had someone smart in there, things would be really horrifying in computer-land.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 11, 2013 @01:11PM (#44252503)

    Which is entirely what Kinect is being packed into the Xbone.

    It's no secret from their own press releases and some of the patents they've filed, they want to use Kinect to provide metrics on individual homes that could never have been provided before. How many people are in the room? For how long? Were they the same as the last time or unique, were they smiling while the ad was playing, were they looking toward the TV, so on and so forth... That's the kind of raw statistics that advertisers would droll over, and exactly why Ballmer's "triad" of reorganization is entirely advertising related. "Advertising, marketing and consumer-service operations." Boiled down into plain English that basically reads, "advertising, advertising and offering services to consumers that are paid for by advertising."

    I'm seriously hoping he reorganizes the company out of existence this time, leaving him in charge for this long I think they deserve a crash-and-burn like Windows 8. The problem is that people are still essentially forced to pay their $300 for a license when they buy a new PC... Microsoft might deserve a disaster of an OS but we certainly don't.

  • SharePoint (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dosun88888 (265953) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @01:21PM (#44252637) Homepage

    Aside from Windows itself, I'd offer SharePoint as the most wide-reaching product that the company produces. To deploy and work with a SharePoint installation crosses all boundaries between servers to end-user software.

    This being the case, a brief examination of a few pieces of it can illustrate the walls between the various groups.

    Firstly, there are around 6 distinct People Picker controls in use through the product. That's the dialog where you pick a user from AD or whatever authentication provider you're using to either give them rights or attach them to something. All do exactly the same thing, some look exactly the same, and some look different. But there are 6 of them.

    Interface customization in SharePoint is a huge mess. You can create an application page and deploy it to the server. You can customize other page types with SharePoint Designer. You can use InfoPath to customize list forms. Now you can even take some random HTML you made in a text editor or dreamweaver and run a process to create a new layout from that as a template. I could keep going about the various customization vectors (if you can think of another manner, I've probably done that too). Even the pages making up the functionality that ships with the product don't follow any sort of reasonable pattern. Sometimes you're looking at an InfoPath form, and sometimes an HTML form, and sometimes you're kicked to an application page that looks distinct from other application pages doing the same thing for other services. Some functionality is in web parts, and some are in delegate controls.

    Go to the administration settings for PowerPivot, and you get something that looks different than the settings for Excel Services. Then look at PerformancePoint. All are serving very similar functions, and providing very similar settings, but it's like learning Mandarin and then needing to also pick up Cantonese to set up the next thing that is ostensibly part of the same product.

    They've taken some steps to unifying parts of the product in SharePoint 2013, but there is still a long way to go before it can be called cohesive. If they can break down some of these walls for Microsoft as a whole, then maybe it'll make SharePoint more solid as an offering.

    Then again, if it wasn't a mess and made sense I'd be an order of magnitude less valuable as a SharePoint guy.

  • by Chris Mattern (191822) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @01:25PM (#44252675)

    Which is why Apple's strategy works so well for them, but won't work for Microsoft. Apple has followers, Microsoft has customers.

  • Re:Good (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 11, 2013 @01:30PM (#44252747)

    I've been working with computers since the early 1970s. I've worked on mainframes, minis, micros, tablets, FPGAs, everything. I don't (and didn't) dislike Microsoft for their monopoly, I HATED Microsoft for the flaky, faulty, poorly-designed and apparently untested software they extorted their customers ( AKA "collateral damage") into buying. Microsoft had the money, the personnel, and the time to correctly do software, but they didn't and I have far too many professional scars on my body due to their "we don't care, we're Microsoft" attitude toward QA and product release.

    Remember how "well" Windows 95 worked when it came out? No excuse for releasing that buggy POS. Windows NT is known by all the Spanish-speaking IT pros I know as "Windows Non Terminado", that is, "Windows Not Finished". No excuse for releasing that buggy POS, either. MS Word almost destroyed my career as a tech writer when it turned out that almost none of what Windows promised me it could do was possible (I did a lot of research and discussion with MS sales and tech reps before committing the department to the tool); what they promised was either broken in the software or simply not possible. There is no way to excuse or explain away an OS that will blow up two, three, four, etc. times a day for no apparent reason (and through no fault of the operator).

    It isn't the monopoly I hate (although I'm generally against them), it's the abuse the entire computer world took from MS. If MS had properly designed, built, and tested their SW before release, imagine how much further along humans could be because of all the TIME WE WOULDN'T HAVE WASTED ON THEIR BUGGY CRAP.

    can't make this up: captcha is "impede"

  • by lgw (121541) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @01:36PM (#44252819) Journal

    exploit the "synergy" between your PC, tablet and phone

    That is a great idea IMO, they just got it backwards. Dev tools that would let me write against one system library and have something that runs with a device-appropriate UI on PCs, phones, and consoles? Huge win. Forcing the same UI on all, but having different system libraries for each? Not so much.

  • by Princeofcups (150855) <john@princeofcups.com> on Thursday July 11, 2013 @01:41PM (#44252923) Homepage

    If they want the "engineering culture" to "facilitate collaboration across the company", they can start by getting rid of the Stack Rank review process. Why would I want to collaborate with someone who I'm competing for a top spot on the review chart with?

    Never. Ballmer and similar sociopaths have no concept of cooperation. They get to where they are by back stabbing and brown nosing, and expect everyone else to do the same. The strong survive, and the rest are so much offal to be thrown away.

  • by Princeofcups (150855) <john@princeofcups.com> on Thursday July 11, 2013 @01:44PM (#44252961) Homepage

    If they are transitioning to a devices and services company that kind of means they are transitioning away from the things that have made them successful.

    By gaining a monopoly through the good graces of IBM, backstabbing every partner along the way, and paying off half of congress to keep them there? That's how Microsoft became successful. Or has this all been wiped from our collective memories?

  • Obligatory Quote (Score:4, Insightful)

    by apcullen (2504324) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @01:51PM (#44253053)

    We trained hard ... but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be reorganized. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing; and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization.

    --Gauis Petronius Circa 50AD

  • she's horrible... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by globaljustin (574257) <justinglobal.gmail@com> on Thursday July 11, 2013 @02:44PM (#44253649) Homepage Journal

    I hate the 'ribbon'...

    Metro and Windows 7 were "Her idea" as well...

    Her career represents all that causes otherwise good developers to make total crap and eventually quit the industry in disgust.

    She's the Sarah Palin of computing.

  • by SuperKendall (25149) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @02:51PM (#44253739)

    "important" should not be a matter of opinion, but of objective profit measurement.

    But what if you have something that is making good money now, but another division that could be making an amazing amount of money if managed differently?

    If you just base things on objective profit measurements, you'll never undertake the risky projects that can also have order of magnitudes better reward.

  • by dtjohnson (102237) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @02:54PM (#44253779)

    ...because organization is not the problem. Microsoft has operated under the 'look out for number 1' principle for so long that it permeates their culture. Every employee, manager, executive, and group ruthlessly guards their own self-interests at the expense of everything else...corporate goals, customer needs, company reputation, and so on. The general company principles appear to be a) gouge customers, b) drive competitors out of business, and c) undermine partners. These are the principles that built Microsoft and they probably can never be changed. Operating in this way has smothered innovation to the extent that computers pretty much operate exactly as they did 20 years ago other than being faster and more powerful (thanks to hardware innovation out of Microsoft's purview). If it were not for Steve Jobs and Apple, we would still be using cellphones that made calls and played simple games, we would be listening to music on CDs that had to contact a central server run by Microsoft before they could be played, and laptops would be the size of a countertop pancake griddle and put out about the same amount of heat.

  • by plover (150551) on Thursday July 11, 2013 @03:36PM (#44254265) Homepage Journal

    The memo specifically called out Office365 and Azure, which is the foundation of their plans to extract an annual tithe from all the copies of Office in the world.

    They've been seeing this day come for over a decade, and it's been their number one concern. How do they keep selling something that isn't improving as much as its price tag might suggest? Office 2010 had only one real competitor, Office 2007, which in turn had only Office 2003 to beat. Since Microsoft has turned the corner on code quality, their latest products are so well written that the users have stopped clamoring for a not-broken version. They aren't putting out an Office 2013 because even their thickest users no longer see any value in upgrading.

    The thing Microsoft believes users really want these days is multiple-device integration and someone else to manage their systems. Users want their documents at home, at school, on the road, at the office, and on their phone (specifically on their iPhones and Androids, screw you Windows phone.) And they don't want to back up their stuff any more, they'll pay someone else to back up their stuff. This move lets them give away Office for free, because they get to collect the rent on your files forever.

    Oh, and did we tell you what happens if you stop paying? Nahh...

  • by jcr (53032) <[jcr] [at] [mac.com]> on Thursday July 11, 2013 @04:21PM (#44254677) Journal

    There's a difference between falling in line and paying lip service to the plan.

    -jcr

Uncompensated overtime? Just Say No.

Working...