QF CC CMS/CSS KPI review process......

[Left2assist]

I'd be interested to hear of other's experiences and thoughts re this process.
Mine has been nothing short of de-humanizing.

I've found it to be "subjective" process based not on your operational ability or performance but rather something far more sinister.

It gives ones "manager" the ability to rank you based on what they think your level of engagement is with management.

They have in my instance measured my "engagement" based on my willingness to do unpaid work. Firing emails off to other departments [using my own computer I assume], following operational things that occur in my own time etc. and attending what we are told are voluntary workshops.

Bizarrely, a colleague of mine was even told by their manger [despite their faultless performance] that she/he thought, that they considered management to be some kind of enemy and was marked down because of this unsubstantiated opinion.

This "profiling" being the sort of thing one would expect of some kind of twisted "cult" or Eastern block totalitarian regime.

Perhaps Today Tonight or a Current Affair ought to do an expose???

My overriding concern is that at some stage CSM's and CSS's will be culled based on the results of this grossly flawed and entirely SUBJECTIVE management tool.

I've raised these issues with the Longhaul FAAA and quite frankly it doesn't seem that they share my concerns or those of my colleagues.

As an aside, it's interesting to note that I have had numerous converstaions with crew expressing concerns about the dreadful treatment dished out to Longhaul crew from their "masters".

Specifically concerns that at some point some "unbalanced" or "fragile" individual is going to be bullied, harassed, intimidated and dehumanized to the point where they just "snap".

With possibly tragic consequences that extend well beyond the individual concerned.........

[Pass-A-Frozo]

Fancy a company trying to work out who they are employing / promoting.

Scrap all employment tests! :rolleyes:

[Left2assist]

Ignore the troll.

[Sunfish]

Hmmm, Qantas is obviously in much more trouble than I thought.

I'm sorry to have to confess to having once had to participate in such a scheme from the other side of the table.

The general term for such schemes is "pseudo science" - dressing up entirely subjective evaluations and passing them off is objective.

There are usually half a dozen "dimensions" or "criteria" or "Key perfomance indicators" or sometimes even "Behaviours" for a manager to apply such as "Engagement", "Teamwork", "On time performance", "Helpfullness", "problem solving" and suchlike.

These are dressed up as quantative scores, usually be the manager being required to rank each dimension from One (Doesnt exhibit behaviour) to Five (Always exemplifies behaviour).

These are all written down on a nice expensively printed form, usually with space for comments and a summary.

The hapless victim is then "interviewed" by the manager, shown the form and asked what they are going to do in the next twelve months to remedy the "Gaps" (which invariably exist) in their performance.

These actions to remedy the "Performance Gaps" are then dutifully written next to the comments on each performance dimension and the resulting document is then signed by the manager and the victim.

And Voila! We have a performance assessment!

It has a nice little number (the sum of those one-to-five scores) with which to rank and grade the entire workforce. Bean counters love it because they can analyze the numbers to death.

It lists the weaknesses of each employee - to which the employee has just confessed, by agreeing what he (she) is going to do to remedy them (ie "improve) and signing the form.

The process is completely dehumanising and meaningless. I had one girl, a highly intelligent computer science graduate, in tears over her assessment which computed her to be merely an "average" performer - and that of course was for calculating bonuses.

Its meaningless because its entirely subjective, no matter how many hundreds of thousands of dollars have been paid to Hay MSL or any of the other charletans who sell these schemes, and there are plenty of them.

The minor errors in them include the following. The one big error I'll explain last of all.

- central tendency - some managers are totally insensitive to anything, they grade nearly everyone as "average" (a three on the scale). If you were a cabin attendant who had delivered three babies and performed open heart surgery with a knife and fork one year, you might get a "four".

Conversely, even if you are known for shagging passengers in the toilets, your punishment during your annual review will only be to receive a "Two".

- Systematic bias - No body can ever be good enough to get more than "three", except the Manager of course, in his eyes he is always a "Five".

- Personal bias - he hates you. You get "Two" or "One" in every dimension.

In theory these errors can be compensated for by normalising the results statistically (for another few hundred thousand quid).

You can also dress up the process by having employees rank managers (hardly ever done), peer assessments (snitch on your fellow workers), self assessments (how could you improve your own performance? Come on, tell us your weaknesses) and suchlike.

Now for the one big error. this occurs at Board level. In their wisdom, these fatheads make the assumption that their entire workforce has to be representative of the general population as a whole - which neatly destroys the rationale for having an expensive recruitment and selection process - I mean aren't all pilots superior?

It therefore follows that the entire workforce must be fitted into a standard normal distribution.

It therefore follows that the rankings must be adjusted to fit a normal distribution

This translates into instructions to managers that only say 15% of their staff can be graded "exceptionally good", 60% must be graded "Average" and 15% must be graded below average performers

The uses management can then make of this data are rotten, and it gets worse with each annual review. It sounds like QF is simply doing its best to make all of you simply quit.

The process is often used to determine bonuses - a big reason for shoe horning the staff rankings into the bell curve. Staff will generally put up with this process if its for calculating bonuses.

Sometimes its used in making sacking decisions - which is interesting because I've never heard of this process stacking up in a court of law, but then if Australians are silly enough to vote Howard back in that won't matter.

Simplest and cheapest way of "reviewing" staff is to ask the immediate supervisor and no one else.

[TITTYIMBOBULATOR]

How about the troll manager who claused 11 someone for ICANing and highlighting a word in inverted commas and CAPITALS. He/she didnt like their tone, and thought they were shouting.


(I know caps on the net can be considered by some (ultra geeky sensitive types) as shouting btw)

[mrpaxing]

KPI's or as someone called it,"Keep People Inline", need to be much more agressively challenged. dont let those guys in the office bully you any longer. unfortunalty the faaa lh is not pro active at all on these matter. the upcoming meetings should give csm's/css's an opportunity to voice their anger at these humiliating meetings. i know that many collegues have contacted the faaa but they seem to not listen. take a leaf from the faaa domestic which is taking qf to court over the kpi's.apparently some csm did not meet his kpi they stood him down to "reflect on his position".:ugh:
i would suggest to the resident faaa guys get a survey up on the faaa website for each Senior cabin crew manager/CCM/ CCTM and present the findings to "Il Duce".
FAAA do what you are supposed to do and represent your members;)

[Left2assist]

Thank you so much for your post Sunfish.
I was hoping that you would be able to shed some light on what we are going through.

I'm sometimes criticized for reading too much into the actions and behaviours of our current crop of "managers" but I STILL can't for the life of me imagine that a group of people could be so blindingly stupid.

Their actions over the last few years have done NOTHING other than to disengage the few remaining crew [and other staff] for that matter, that are left.

Let me explain.

NO ONE is disengaged with the company that is Qantas. Our unique heritage and history is something that ALL operational staff feel be it Engineers, Cleaners, Pilots, Bus Drivers, Cabin Crew etc......

It's the faceless goons, masquerading as mangement and employed of late [to do God knows ******* what?] that staff have issues with and it is this corrosive relationship that is at the heart of what is wrong with our company.

The vast majority of them have no airline experience, operational knowledge and from what I have garnered don't give a toss either.

They seem solely preoccupied with the maintenance of their own KPI's which can ONLY be based around their ability to FURTHER disengage as it is all they have EVER done.

Operational staff WANT QF to succeed but they DONT want to be bullied, demeaned, harassed or dehumanised.

Stop the rot you morons and you might just see the kind of results achieved recently at Air New Zealand.

A company that can only be described as having management using worlds best practice.

Note the heading of the article.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out who it is directed towards.........

-----------------------------
Look-listen-learn
Geoffrey Thomas | August 17, 2007
THE New Zealand born-again award-winning airline is rewriting the airline staff management relations book with executives rolling up sleeves and working side by side with staff getting a dose of the "right stuff".
Every month, chief executive Rob Fyfe - and the rest of the airline's executives - don flight attendant uniforms and serve coffee or a fine New Zealand sauvignon blanc or might spend a day on the check-in counters or loading baggage.
And while they are doing that, they are reinforcing Charles Darwin's great quote that "it's not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent but the ones most responsive to change", for they are completely changing the way management deals with airline staff.
Air New Zealand has travelled an extraordinary journey since the bleak days of 2001 and it has all been built on interaction with staff, initially under former chief executive and current Commonwealth Bank chief executive Ralph Norris and now under Fyfe.

The result? Air NZ is now the most admired brand in New Zealand. According to recent survey by Britain-based TNS Global Research, the percentage of customers who would recommend the airline has grown from a paltry 44 per cent across the international network in 2004 to 90 per cent for the first time ever in November last year. "Our people are our brand" is the way Fyfe describes it. Every month or so, Fyfe hosts a staff barbecue for charity on the veranda outside the open-plan executive offices.





When Norris took the reins in early 2002, Air NZ had just written off $NZ1.45 billion - the largest write-off in New Zealand corporate history - after the collapse of its Ansett subsidiary.
A TRULY REMARKABLE STORY

[DEFCON4]

Management have deliberately employed dysfunctional individuals to be Team or CC Managers.
They have little intellect,no compassion and even less remorse.
Most posess little or no interpersonal skills.
The intention is to keep the workforce under pressure and off balance.
Some will fall victim to clause 11s while others will give up and leave.
In short the attrition rate will increase.
A healthy attrition rate in any business is around 10% p.a
Thats fine while ever there are people to replace those leaving.
We have pretty near full employment.
So QF is drawing off a very small base as evidenced by some of the individuals employed recently.Under normal circumstances these people wouldnt even get a look in.
The growing number of airlines in Australia means there is now competition for suitable(unsuitable?) applicants.
Eventually some one will realise that this is having a negative impact on service levels.
Service levels are declining but its the Crews fault.
The fact the wrong people are being employed and that their training is inadequate escapes those above.
What we have here is a recipe for failure.All the experienced people leave and you are left with those who are not bonded to the business,are poorly trained and are not really suitable for the position.
A brilliant plan for being the worlds pre eminent airline.
But hey...the attrition rate is up.
Genius....pure Genius.
Someone is receiving an incentive bonus for this grand plan.
All onboard managers should elect to downgrade at the same time.
Chaos can be so entertaining.

[lowerlobe]

Every month, chief executive Rob Fyfe - and the rest of the airline's executives - don flight attendant uniforms and serve coffee or a fine New Zealand sauvignon blanc or might spend a day on the check-in counters or loading baggage.

...Can you imagine the same happening at QF.....Hell would freeze over before that ever happened.

Cabin Crew management would not even consider that let alone the CEO.

[surfside6]

While fear can be an intention it is also a perception.
My manager intends to instill fear.
I perceive my manager as mildly entertaining and not vey bright.
Try as my manager might I will not be intimidated.
Getting a two or a three is irrelevant.
Provide better resources and performance will improve.
I will not be held accountable for someone elses failures.

[mrpaxing]

S6, but those clowns need to be put in line. and as an individual you cant do much about it, but thats what we pay union fees for. i would sugeest to the resident union guys respective members dont want to see excuses they want to see something done about it. i just sat in on a conversation in lax and the csm's/css's there were prety much on the same page. they want the union to take action.

[surfside6]

These people have a very small impact on my life.To change their approach requires effort .I am not prepared to expend any of my time or energy in an attempt to change their behaviour.
The change needs to come from the Black Widow or the bottle blond Fat Controller.
Go to the organ grinder not the organ grinder's monkeys if its change you require.
They have a brief:
1.Reduce costs.
2.Change the culture
3.Improve service levels
4.Increase attrition rates.
5.Elevate discipline through fear and intimidation
You will note that there is nothing about motivation or engagement.
Its taken Air NZ years to get over the Black Widow legacy.
Grant is like a Starbuck Espresso...lots of froth but very little substance.
Dont expect any innovation from her.
She is clueless
The Chief Executive Orifice leaves in 18 months.A lot of the monkeys will go with him.
We should all concentrate on the upcoming EBA rather than these haemorrhoids.

[prunezeuss]

The EBA First then the anal irritants.
Better still....Howard first

[HotDog]

Can't help yourself, can you prune? Have to bring up the Howard catchcry every time something happens to displease some people. What on earth has he got to do with the subject of this thread.:confused:

[prunezeuss]

Under JWH corporations are able to treat their employees like units of work not human beings.
JWH creates the environment for these swine to subject theire employees to fear and intimidation.
This is exactly what this thread is all about.
If this little fascist gets re elected he will claim it as a mandate to increase exponentially the punitive Work Choices Legislation.
These intimidatory meetings masquerading as armchair chats will become inquisitorial.

[packrat]

It is noted that you are no longer part of the workforce.
You are not subjected to this nonsense.
Ask some of your still employed former colleagues how they are fairing.
Hopefully with a change of government employees will be treated more fairly by employers like QF

[QFinsider]

Yes but don't forget the increased intimidation will maintain sufficient attrition to ensure that the highly paid continue to leave. They will be substituted by AWA's and those of lesser rumeration.

Of course this assumes a coalition victory. The "conservatives" must go. If they do not, watch them continue to throw good money after bad at J*. If they can get it to critical mass with sufficient crew, they will take us all on at the expiration of our next EBA.

If it fails and ASIC grows some balls we may see the repugnant behaviour of "management" taken before the regulator. It is around that time frame the Dixon legacy will be lanced from Qantas, with hopefully enough of the thugs departing with him, be they cabin services, engineering or flight operations.

[DEFCON4]

QF now has a dossier on all its employees.
Management knows who performs and who doesnt.
Those that perform well should be further encouraged.
Those that dont perform should be assisted with further training and the reason for their poor performance identified and corrected.
This just does not happen.
Performance levels particularly in Y/C are dropping.
No one knows why?
So the crew are blamed...thats the easy way out.
Put the fear of God into the on board managers and it will filter through.
A great theory if you are dealing with small children.
There is a failure amongst CC management to accept that they have cut too far into the service bone.
There are not enough well resourced motivated crew to produce outstanding service.
Management receive incentive bonuses to excel.
Employees receive a kick in the rear.
Its not working folks...take a leaf out of the Air NZ book you might be amazed at the results.
While QF is Animal Farm service levels will continue to decline.
KPIs as they are set now are unobtainable.
All the threats in the world will fail to produce the desired results.
Unfortunately nobody is listening.

[captainrats]

These topics are discussed ad nauseam going around and around.
There will only ever be one conclusion.
Poor man management ,lack of motivational protocols and the continued ignoring of poor morale.
It aint rocket science...or is it?

[speedbirdhouse]

however this particular process has not and for those of us that have had to endure it, communicating our experiences is I'm sure, more than a little cathartic.

Sunfish described it perfectly.

A DEHUMANIZING and SUBJECTIVE process dressed up as some sort of " "pseudo science".

The long and short of it is it's BULLS#IT and we all know it.

The effect of it has been in typical QF fashion just another "cluster f#ck".

More crew [MANAGERS, YOU CRETINS !!!!] offside with increased levels of disengagement from the one group QF can I'll afford to lose given their efforts and performance drive the customer's experience.

Reports suggest that sick leave amongst CSM's and CSS's has skyrocketed since the last round of KPI interviews..................

What these clueless individuals don't seem to just "get" is that they are not dealing with an I'll educated, easily intimidated workforce especially when it comes to their on board managers.

There are numerous reports of CSM's being marked down as not having met their KPI's as they have had ONE negative upward feedback survey from a cabin crew member.

Protestations that the individual had to be "performance managed" over an issue and used the "upward feedback" tool to get even, are ignored.

Easy fix, idiots :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh: .

We no longer performance manage :D

[HotDog]

Prunezeuss and Packrat.
Do you honestly believe a change of government will alter Qantas managment practices? All that will happen will be the gates of bludger's paradise being thrown wide open. Who are you going to blame then.:confused:

[prunezeuss]

How do you draw that conclusion?
Perhaps when you were employed and were part of the problem.
Definitely not the case today numbnuts.
Everyone except management is working a damn site harder than ever before.
Try talking about something you have some knowledge of.
Like the amount of fly****e in black pepper.

[mrpaxing]

now go back in your little cockpit and look and keep guessing at technical things. close the door and hang a sign up -do not disturb, trust me, we won't)
You do not understand current qf csm's/css's issues. therefore move on thank you, otherwise we will swipe your next crew meal in the b..l ,again (you know what i mean).:ouch:

[HotDog]

Thank you for the very intelligent replies gentlemen. Pity Mark Latham is no more, you would be without a doubt, on his front bench. I am not trying to defend Qantas managment but what pi$$es me off, is the little people blaming everything on little Johnny.:sad:
By the way mrpaxing, I happen to be married to an ex flight attendant so yes, I know very well what you mean. Service with a smile!

[HotDog]

prunezeuss.
Everyone except management is working a damn site harder than ever before.

SYDNEY, 16 August 2007: Qantas today announced a record profit before tax of $1,032 million for the year ended 30 June 2007, a 53.8 per cent increase on the prior comparative year to 30 June.
I think we should talk about "now and then", rather than "then and now"!

[mrpaxing]

if you read this thread carefully you only find one little mention of JWH, to which you immidiatly respond. kpi's/ cabin crew management is the main issue:ok:

[funbags]

"now go back in your little cockpit and look and keep guessing at technical things. close the door and hang a sign up -do not disturb, trust me, we won't)
You do not understand current qf csm's/css's issues. therefore move on thank you, otherwise we will swipe your next crew meal in the b..l ,again (you know what i mean)."

Very mature mrpaxing.

Just wondering what other flight attendants think of this person's comments re tech crew meals???? :uhoh:

[prunezeuss]

"the little people"....What an absolutley elitist term.
You should apply for a position as a QF Cabin Crew manager.
The "little People" giveth and the "little people"will taketh away.
You and your mate JWH would do well to remember that.
Another member of Animal Farm...The Condescending Elitist Rev

[stubby jumbo]

These Clowns you have been banging on about have not one ounce of credibilty.

Just for starters have a look at some of their initiatives:

LHR base.:mad:
CSM teams of 30, 40, 60 ....now 90 !!!! Thats great for 1:1 relationship building.:zzz:
KPI reviews-:yuk:
Davison/Tree hare assessment-wank !:ugh:
Upline forums-unadulterated pack of lies:\
Harassment of crew over sick leave, rosters, service,chocolates, LSL, seniority, LAX Hotel, ......bored yet ?:*About 2 weeks ago I did a trip with a ex Line Controller-talk about DISENGAGEMENT. This guy almost needs a straight jacket. We all know that the Line Controllers were shafted by Kylie et al ....for what=zip !!

I reckon the Brown Shirts are gearing up to "take on" the CSM's and CSS's over their performance reviews. That is, if they have scored 1's or 2's.......watch out -you're in the "cross hairs"....see you in the Commission !

This period will have to go down as the blackest time of all. Sure we bitched about Roger Burrell, Bee, Nealon, Black Prince...........but Christ these people were at least HUMAN.
The Androids we have now on QCC/1 make the Terminator look like Ken & Barbie dolls.

As someone else has already said -Dixon is out of here in 18 months and so too most of these morons BUT.......what sub species do we replace this lot with ?????
Maybe our mates at Mac bank may have a few "ball breakers " in need of a secondment:D

[HotDog]

You should apply for a position as a QF Cabin Crew manager

Prunezeuss, you should become prime minister. You'll sort it all out, won't you mate.?

[prunezeuss]

They wouldnt be that Stupid...or would they?
There has been no people development for a number of years.
So if you demote managers who will you replace them with?
Yes people with no experience?
Yet again individuals being set up to fail.
So the cycle self perpetuates and in the meantime service levels decline even further.
No one knows how to solve the problem so its more of the same :threats and intimidation....but that doesnt work either.
How about motivating people,bond them to the business.
It wont take much ...everyone wants the business to succeed.
Embrace your employees,provide them with resources and listen to them.
They may just provide solutions.
Afterall.... they spend more time with the customers than anyone else.

[capt.cynical]

Mr. Paxing, you are an embarrassment!:sad::ugh:

[DEFCON4]

Onboard Managers tend to have the most experience.
They tend to have stength of character.
They are critical thinkers.
They are problem solvers who think outside the box.
In short.... they are recalcitrant...they wont toe the line.
They therefore need to be removed and replaced with more compliant people.
So,you attack them and attack them hard.
Some will buckle,most wont.
You then offer a VR package designed specifically for OBMs.
All this before EBA negotiations begin.
The hardnoses are gone...the rest will be more easily intimidated.
A whole new generation of cheaper more compliant CC are put in place.
Get them to stay for 3/5 years,work them hard,burn them out and replace them .
Attrition rates are up and wages are down.
Stafftravel disappears because no one stays long enought to be eligible.
Company Superannuation contributions are reduced to a trickle.
An enormous long term saving.
A bit simplistic...perhaps... but then again look at who is running this charade.
The whole CC management have a collective IQ less than the Black Widow's(Gucci)shoe size.

[stubby jumbo]

......a very thoughtful post DEFCON.:D

Seems to be that something is cooking on the First Floor???

What with Tarantula on a "secret secondment" for 6 months??

mmmmmmmmmmmm-could it be anything do do with that big 4 engined thing that hits the pavement in 12 months time.:oh:

[lowerlobe]

It's interesting isn't it?

I mean the pool of talent that the company has in it's CC so called management.

In the old days that pool was fairly deep with experience and expertise but now that pool is looking very much like the drought has all but dried it up.Perhaps the company can blame global warming on it's inability to source real leaders.

For a service industry the people in the office (I refuse to think of them as management) exhibit none of the qualities that you would expect.

When I started as a CSM we were encouraged to fix problems 'ON BOARD', to think outside the box and everyone basically was looked after.That meant the company,the pax and the crew for the main part were happy.

The dobbing culture that Winnie instigated was the start of the cancer that today pervades all of the so called management team in CC.No one can do their job properly if they are always looking over their shoulder or waiting for their next 'counselling session'.

Now the 'OFFICE' wants or at least feels that it needs to know even the most miniscule piece's of information.The only reason I can think of for this is that they are insecure and understand how little they really know.They are like an over dominant parents who by having no real idea decide to over manage the situation.

Until the people at the top decide to work with employees instead of against them this will not change.

[Sunfish]

Sorry guys, but nothing will change until their is action at the very top.

Senior management sets the culture of the company and nothing will change until the shareholders act.

Defcon and Zuess have got it in one. ignorant managers with no industry experience respond to more experienced subordinates questioning their decisions by labeling them as "troublemakers" and removing them as quickly as possible.

In fact, the conflict is between "formal" leaders who have the title but no expereince, and informal or group leaders who have the experience but no title. That is the whole rationale behind the "Dilbert" cartoons - "dilbert" always knows that his boss is irrational because he has no experience.

It is deeply unsettling for Formal Managers to be in the position being nominally in charge of a work environment they have no "hands on" experience of, and their natural response is to remove that experience as quickly as possible to create a "blind leading the blind" situation which is infinitely more comfortable for them.

My prediction, by the way, is that Airbus are going to run into problems with the 380 - but they won't be technical problems - they are going to be group dynamics problems. It will be interesting to see how an inexperienced and minimal cabin crew contend with the first "Air rage" riot involving dozens of pax.

[mrpaxing]

:D:D:D:ok::ok:

[DEFCON4]

I just hope the groundhogs read these threads and realize what contempt CC have for them.
They should also realize that their nonsense doesn't work anymore.
Thanks again Sunfish for your insight.

[RedTBar]

They should also realize that their nonsense doesn't work anymore.

But thats the problem defcon they do know.We know that they know and they know that we know that they know that they are useless.Sorry the only thing we can do is laugh at all of this because if we don't we might as well go and get hammered down the pub.

[surfside6]

Sunfish old sun you are right again.
500 or so people in a large Aluminium Can with a minimal inexperienced crew is a recipe for disaster.
CC was once an acronym for Cabin Crew.
It now is applicable to "Crowd Control"
Wiil they be issued with Mace and a baton?
Will they be sufficiently trained?
If it costs more than a $1.50/person it wont happen.
God I hope the domestics get the A380.
Oops..... here come the small barking dogs.

[twiggs]

God I hope the domestics get the A380.

What hope have we got when some longhaul crew are already hoping we lose more international flying?

[RedTBar]

twigs,
Wasn't it you who was talking about sarcasm a few weeks ago or is it only you who can claim or is allowed to use that.:yuk:

What time is it in QCC,yes that's right just after knock off time.:bored:

[prunezeuss]

Questionaire:
1.Do you ever experience remorse?
2.Are you lacking in compassion?
3.As a child you did not play well with others?
4.Do you like inflicting pain on small animals?
5.Were you an abused child?
6.Do you crave recognition and approval from your father?
7.Were you bullied at school?
8.Did your mother ever dress you up in clothing of the opposite sex?
9.Are you toilet trained?
10.Is your IQ conversely proportional to your shoe size?
11.Do you understand question 10?
If you answer yes to more than 6 of these questions you will be Group General Manager Customer Service within two years of commencing your employment.
If you are successful with your application you will given no training in people managment and you will be provided with thumb screws and a cat o'nine tails.
At a small nominal charge of course.
Those candidates who are able to provide proof of incarceration for extortion and assault occasioning grievous bodily harm(in a group) will be given preference.
Being diagnosed as a sociopath will also be viewed favourably.

[packrat]

Fat Boy slim and the Terminator would have to be the poster boys for that application.
The Fat Controller wouldnt be too far behind.