-manages multiple, large, multi-year projects across multiple time zones -is a filter for the shit that rains down from upper-management (the most important role of a manager) -if any of these projects fail, he gets blamed (and most likely fired)
- Is responsible for managing large multi-year projects across multiple timezones and basically offloads all of his responsibilities to his direct reports and just asks for status reports now and then
- Is not just not filtering the shit from above but is also a source of shit from above
- diffuses blame downwards instead of taking any for himself, cuts people under him and is never disciplined when projects fail.
He makes as much or more than the guy you report to.
Who holds him accountable? His other buddies in upper management? Maybe eventually, but let's be real here. If he ever does get fired he gets a golden parachute and worms his way in at another company in no time.
Maybe this isn't true at the middle manager-y layer, but it's definitely a pattern we've seen plenty of examples of with executives and other upper management types.
This sounds like /antiwork fan fiction.
Some bosses encourage it, some bosses try to discourage it (and fail), some bosses don’t even notice.
Been on both sides. In the end, the ‘hero’ is usually the one that is the actual problem, unfortunately, and can’t stop.
If it works well enough though, he’s fine.
A lot of folks don’t realize their value when they’re burning themselves out making your case look good, which enables it, and not even getting paid for the effort.
Those people often rant the exact same way you are, while not changing their behavior.
They also tend to be the most angry when their part is make clear though. So I guess it’s a good thing it’s at least semi anonymous here?
If they leave and things blow up, then that impacts things no? Accountability is about ensuring someone gets held to account for the results of their actions.
Accountability doesn’t mean ‘they pay because I’m unhappy’. It means ‘if they break the law, they get punished’. Or ‘if they break the org or don’t deliver results their bosses want they get fired.’.
Being a dick of a boss isn’t illegal. Burning people out (when they do it voluntarily) isn’t illegal. Things they may be doing that cause that tend to be purely subjective and individual, and many people will disagree it’s even happening!
Punishing them for those may be vengeance, or revenge, lashing out, or whatever.
And since no one can make someone happy (or unhappy), and there isn’t even an objective measure of it, society generally doesn’t care about that legally. What would accountability mean in those cases then?
Going to jail because people don’t like you as a boss?
Making a hostile work environment is already against the law and actionable, if it can be proven. It’s a reasonably high bar though, and most environments people are pissed about around here likely don’t meet it.
It’s up to everyone individually to make those decisions and tradeoffs. They’re accountable for the results of continuing to work somewhere, or not, for instance.
It’s a two way street. In the sense of;
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.” ― Anatole France
It may not be great, but other alternatives are so prone to abuse and shittiness that I personally haven’t seen many better alternatives.
Someone with experience in a higher level role can make it look easy, and it is objectively 'easier' than a lot of jobs. 'Easy' discounts the work someone has often had to do to get into those roles, but it also highlights how privileged some of these people are.
Having a family that prioritizes education, the education actually being good, having the ability to focus on studies instead of needing money or to take care of family, the ability to go to college without worrying about finances... All these are huge levers that get people into these director+ roles, and those are things that aren't available to the wide swath of humanity. People do amazing things despite these challenges, but it's clearly harder to do.
There are definitely crappy managers who don't bring much to the table, but a good manager does those same things but is a lever for their teams (and are invaluable as a result).