The BBC reported last week that 49% of workers in the UK would leave their jobs if it meant working for someone that didn’t make bad decisions.
As we’ve noted, the Brits seem to be less hung up on money than us but that still doesn’t mean you wouldn’t leave for less money if you could get away from that boss who can fuck up a cup of coffee not to mention every decision that affects your work directly.
So we have a simple question for you. Under normal circumstances, would you leave your high paying job if it meant you didn’t have to work for an idiot boss?
Related Posts
Rihanna Mistakes Her “Stupid” Accountant For Financial Wizard
- Adrienne Gonzalez
- February 13, 2014
Rihanna, sweetheart, I'm not sure accountant means what you think it means. Just because the […]
Cash and Cash Equivalents, Insolvent State Version
- Adrienne Gonzalez
- August 31, 2009
Is your state broke? Suffering from liquidity issues? Desperate to buff up municipal coffers? Worry no more, dear resident, if your state is anything like mine, they’ve got one hell of a plan up their sleeve.
Lots of bright ideas, after the jump
NYT:
With the economy floundering and tax revenues falling, governments and public authorities have tried to patch holes in their tattered budgets by charging new or higher fees for a broad range of services — including taking a civil service exam and operating a nuclear power plant.
The purpose of the many microcharges is to help avoid, or at least limit, broader tax increases. But with escalating fees for things like tanning bed inspections, pistol permits and marriage certificates, daily life can start to seem like a labyrinth of public-sector panhandlers.
There are increased payments required from cradle (birth certificates) to grave (plots in municipal cemeteries); in the workplace (licenses for private investigators, lifeguards and tax preparers) and at leisure spots (entrances to parks and public golf courses).
It doesn’t end there. Municipalities will have to make their pennies up wherever they can – this affects everything from parking meters to licenses (yes, even your precious CPA, little beancounter!), booze to license plates. “Fee-based government” is the new “tax and spend” and you can pretty safely bet that you’re going to get it squeezed out of you everywhere you turn. States argue that the policy allows them to make up vulgar budget shortfalls in the least offensive way possible, applying increased fees to specific services instead of vague, across-the-board tax increases.
We are used to this when it comes to the CPA exam as NASBA has increased fees every August as far back as I can remember (thankfully a beer is now $96 in California so my short term memory has increased as I’ve cut out discretionary spending and at the same time unintentionally solved my drinking problem that came as a result of my accounting job) and 2009 is no exception. It cost $809.71 in 2008 and is now $822.73. Putting this into perspective, just Audit would have cost you $159.25 in 2006. By 2008, it was up to $226.28 – keeping in mind that this is only the fee paid to NASBA and does not include re-exam fees and/or applicable State Board of Accountancy/Prometric fees.
Ouch. Don’t expect this to get better any time soon.
Bonus Watch: Follow-up on Grant Thornton
- Caleb Newquist
- October 21, 2009
According to a tip we received, less than “special” people at GT are receiving bonuses too:
Based upon my salary [the bonus is] about 2%….[I’m] assuming the criteria for a bonus wasn’t as stringent as Nusbaum made it out to be, or the pool was larger than we were led to believe. Based upon the call with Nus, I figured only 5.0 would get a bonus.
A pleasant surprise for some. This particular tip came out of the Southeast region. Apparently these conversations are occurring circa now so continue to keep us updated for your city or region.
