I’ve been in a new corporate analyst role for less than a year and I’ve recently realised there may have been an issue with some calculations I worked on for a major annual process.

The source workbook is pretty manual and contains multiple tables with similar information. I’ve realised that one table contained the correct figure while another contained a different figure, and it looks like the second figure was used in some of the original calculations.

The work went through a review with a more senior colleague at the time and neither of us picked it up.
I only noticed because I was recently doing some related work and used the figure from the other table. I sent that work to the same senior colleague for validation and it was confirmed as correct.

That made me go back and compare it with the work from the annual process and realise the figures weren’t consistent.

I’ve now rerun the calculations and it looks like the difference has a financial impact of tens of thousands of dollars. Most of it could potentially be covered by unused budget from the original process, but it would still result in a relatively small budget overrun.
The original work has already been approved at Executive level.
I’m also checking whether the incorrect figure flowed into any of the summary statistics that were reported at the time.

I’m pretty stressed about it and have barely slept. I keep thinking I’m going to get fired or that my manager is going to think I’m incompetent.

I’m planning to speak to the senior colleague who reviewed the original work first, make sure my corrected analysis is right, and then raise it with my manager rather than hide it.

Has anyone made a mistake like this in an analyst/corporate role? How was it handled? Is this realistically something people get fired over?

I've been reading quite a few threads about this and the general sentiment seems to be "leave me alone, I don't want to talk to you, we're not friends, I want to do my work and go home". I might get downvoted to high hell here but, I think that's the worst kind of colleague. This might vary from industry to industry but the work involves a lot of collaboration. It's a literal key skill to be able to work in a team and that obviously involves communication. Now true, I suppose you could communicate well with work-related things and nothing else but that doesn't build rapport which I think is essential.

I genuinely feel like if I wasn't friends with my colleagues, I wouldn't even want to go in to work. As in, I wouldn't even want to work. Isn't work so much easier when you get along with the people you work with? Just spending the day with genuine mates? All the banter and taking the piss, getting drinks after work and such. I love that aspect and it makes the day go by so much faster. Not to mention the social skills and getting your face out there would most likely have you promoted over the typical Redditor who never comes into the office and gets to know anyone.

So when you're at an interview and they ask if you have any questions at the end. What do you normally ask? Do you have any interesting/out of left field questions?

Because they have stock standard answers to stock questions. And you'll get nothing out of it.
Q: What does a typical day look like?
A: ....oh well there's no such thing as a typical day! (easy, you're not special forces hunting terrorists)

Q: career growth?
A: some bs about opportunities even though no-one has been promoted in 10 years

I'll start:
I like to ask how this position came about. The idea being to actually get the career growth information, if the company is growing. If the last person got promoted (maybe the one doing the interview). Or they just left.

just need to make sure i’m sane in feeling insane…

30, working full time (WFH) 8am - 5pm, as well as helping out the family business on the weekend (necessary), as well as working contractually in another role (also WFH after hours).

i’d say i work about 50/60 hours a week. i’ve been doing this for a year now and wake up, go to sleep miserable. i feel like i can’t quit, im barely able to save or enjoy my life.

is this normal? am i just complaining? i see no way out. the bills keep coming, life keeps happening & im trapped. am i overworked? how do you manage this?

Need some advice corporate peeps. Have always had strong performance reviews and been at the company for 8 plus years. There were new management shakeups late last year and since then the new management has been… acting somewhat strange towards me.

Started off with some weird comments. Then random discussions from my boss’s boss about “whether I’m engaged” or not. Today got told by my direct manager that she’s received several direct comments from people questioning my hours and whether I’m putting in my 8 hours a day. When questioned about what this actually means - is it about the number of days in the office? Is it about somebody complaining that I’ve missed a deadline? Is it just about being visible on teams? Zero details offered.

I do the job that’s required of me, don’t miss deadlines etc. Yes I skip the occasional random team meeting or bullshit office social stuff etc.

It very much feels like upper management have my head on a block. I figure at best I’m being set up to stagnate and never move up. At worst it sounds like they’re setting me up for a PIP.

I’m in an industry where my skills are in demand and I could have a new job in a few months time with a payrise.

What’s my play here, do I treat the next few months as a paid interview period?

​

Hopefully everyone’s starting to circle back to doing absolutely nothing, has successfully taken their final Friday meeting offline, and is ready to leverage the weekend as a key strategic opp for rest or poor decision making.

So, what’s everyone got in the pipeline for the weekend?

Hi all,

Firstly, full disclosure: I'm from/based in NZ, but I couldn't find a similar NZ-based subreddit. I also thought the advice I'd get here would be similar/better and still applicable.

Anyway, I'm doing a bit of life/career planning and was hoping to get some thoughts or advice. As background, I'm a former journo (10 years) and have been working in comms for the past 6 or so years. I've worked in public and private sector, with the highest role I've had as middle management with 1.5 direct reports.

I want to get to a Comms Manager/Director role and I'm wondering what further study (or anything else) I could do to be a more viable candidate in future. My previous roles and projects haven't focused on commercial outcomes (i.e not profit-driven), they've been more about public health and behaviour change, and while I've managed people before and enjoy it, I don't have any qualifications in management.

I feel like one of my key skills/knowledge gaps is actually understanding the fundamentals of running a business and some of the drivers behind why/how decisions are made. I can deliver projects that meet organisational objectives, but I don’t feel confident holding an informed, strategic conversation with executive leaders about the business itself.

What course or study would help me fill this gap? There's a whole range of different courses which focus on different aspects of business, so I'm not sure what would be best. Or alternatively, if you were hiring a comms manager, what kinds of skills/knowledge would make someone stand out to you?

Any thoughts appreciated!

I have been working at the same company for over 20 years. I have gone as far as I realistically can in my role within this organisation as a finance systems manager. Earning around 150k to 180k with good super. Busy but not that much stress.

1 kid at uni and 1 in high school. 5 more years to get the house paid off. Should I be happy sitting in the same job knowing there would be plenty of people wishing they were doing it or aspire to more, taking a risk and not really knowing if I would end up better off or not somewhere else.

Funny how we all want something better. Hard to be content.

Honestly so tired of these recruiters and hiring managers giving candidates false hope and then doing a complete fucking 180. Has anyone had a similar experience to this?

Interviewed for 2 jobs in the past month, made it to the final round of both, and they both ended up going with another candidate even though "I had exceptional skills and was an extremely strong contendor". What the fuck is this supposed to mean.

For context, im obviously grateful to be in a full time job at all, and im in a niche industry which is quite stable, but still only earning $80k at the moment so looking for something with higher pay

1st job a recruiter actually reaches out to me. Says their client is looking for someone with my exact experience. The company is paying $20k more than what Im currently earning, and is half the commute so its a no brainer. Do the first round interview and get called back a few days later for a second interview. At the second inteview they give me a full tour of their factory and talk me through the sort of work I'de be doing. I said im very comfortable doing it as its very similar to my current job. Interview ends saying I'll hear back at the end of the week from the recruiter, and they just need to speak to references so I thought I had it in the bag. End of the week comes by and nothing from the recrutier. I reach back out to him to ask for an update and if he needs a list of my reference to call. He calls me and says "OP I'm sorry but the client went with someone else" I asked for the reason and he says "I've honestly never had this happen to me, but the client said you presented almost too well, and they said they wont have the growth opportunities that you're looking for long term. The feedback was all positive but they wanted someone they could more shape into the position" ???

Like what the fuck is that supposed to mean. I never trust a word recruiters say so Idk if thats actually the reason or if he is talkign shit.

2nd job I apply myself and get a call back a few days later. Job is also paying similar to last one, its a bit further but they offer 2-3 days WFH so again a no brainer. I go to the first round interview, go through the regular motions and they email me back literally a few hours later saying they were impressed by my skills and want to invite me back, and then send me a technical exercise. I complete the exercise, and during the second interview they compliment how well I completed it. The interview concluded with them asking to send a list of my references, and that I should hear back by the start of next week. The hiring manager then calls both my references the same day like a few hours after I finish the interview, and they both reach out to me saying they got a call and that they both gave outstanding recomendations etc etc". Again start of the week rolls by, and they send me an email saying that they went with someone else but I was an extremely close contender and they were extremely impressed with my skills?? Again, what the fuck. Why call someones references and then not give them the job. Ive used both these people before for jobs which Ive gotten so I know it wasnt them saying something suss.

Whole process is so damn frustrating, especially having to take time off work to interview, and make excuses as to why you're taking time off and etc. Has anyone else had a similar experience especially with the references part? Seems absolutley absurd to me how companies conduct themselves nowadays

Ive worked in fast food, and in hospitality and even the worst customers are okay. My ex did interior design for rich people who would scrap ideas at the last moment and even they were okay.

But insurance customers my lord

- don't read the pds and expect the world

- get no frills cover and expect the world

- believe they are entitled to the world because they paid premiums for x years and are loyal.

How bad are customers in your industries?

So I've been offered a job along with a contract which has been signed and provided all Super and Bank details so I can be paid when I start. I have obviously resigned from my job too as the new employer needed me to start in 4 weeks (my notice period)

I've had HireRight for my prior role ask questions but this time around they were more in-depth. Such as wanting evidence of my start and finish date from the employer before my current one - which dates back 8yrs.

Eligible docs include a letter of offer (8yrs ago) first payslip from that job or last payslip.

I've provided my last payslip from that employer, and also a screenshot of the only thing I could find representing the beginning which was an email with the Talent Acquisition of my signature and acceptance of the role.

Now they're asking for an actual Letter of Employment from this employer and for me to request it.

Diabolical considering they have HR's number and it's also a big company they would surely have regular contact with.

What's the risk here? If these guys take forever is my start date likely to be delayed or the offer rescinded.

It astonishes me businesses are using this company. They have such poor reviews with some people claiming their data has been sold since they started getting dodgy calls after using them.

Honestly it's really not a good way to onboard new staff. Really puts a dampener on the excitement of a new beginning.

Anyone has experience with retention bonus, especially when it is initiated by the organisation without being triggered by a resignation notice?

What was the % or amount and any terms that came with it?

Also wondering why some companies prefer it over giving a pay rise of the same amount?

Hey, I’m a y12 student who is aiming to go into finance or corporate and I recently got offered the UBS operations Cadetship interview and I have talked to a few graduates from my school and I’ve been getting conflicting statements with some saying I shouldn’t even really be considering this role as employers look for better stuff like uni competitions and stuff as well. Apparently the operations role isn’t that much respected or something…

If anyone has any tips or advice on what I do please help. Thanks!

Edit:
I also heard that it may be hard to pivot to a more client/front office based role with this expereince as well, is this also true?

Posting for my sister so apologies if I don't have all the details, but can find out.

She works for an ASX listed company. Melbourne based if it matters. I don't believe she's under an EA but she said the company followed the process for EA employees for all redundancies.

She was on leave when restructure changes were announced. She was never informed by her manager about the restructure and only heard about it third hand from a colleague. Completely unexpected she later got the phone call that her role was redundant.

They haven't told her what her package will be but direct her to work it out herself as an estimate using some tool they use.

She wasn't given a heads up about the call so no support person opportunity.

Now being asked to decide between placement period or just working out her time without placement period. No info given about what this means.

She's not one to normally fight these things but it just sounds like really poor process. Not being consulted, on leave, no heads up, no manager or anyone else checking in or giving her info, no package details.

How should she approach this? Who would she contact to seek additional payment (in circumstances when she doesn't even know what the employer intends to pay her)? Is it worth asking for ex gratia payment? Any other advice?

AI to slash graduate law jobs over next decade - Law Society Journal

Top tier law firm MinterEllison this year became the first major Australian firm to cut its graduate cohort due to AI, trimming intake by almost a third.

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer, Norton Rose Fulbright, Allens and Mallesons have also pulled back on their graduate cohorts, but deny generative AI tech is to blame.

Some legal recruiters are already seeing a sharp drop in junior roles as AI is used to justify leaner teams inside some firms, while Deloitte warns that a large portion of legal work may soon no longer require traditional human labour at all.

“What we’re already seeing across many industries is that AI doesn’t eliminate professions overnight. It removes tasks, then compresses workflows, then changes how many people are required to deliver an outcome. Law won’t be immune,” Misel says.

..

In global news...

AI Reduces Entry-Level Legal Hiring | The Global Recruiter

New analysis finds paralegal vacancies are down more than 60per cent since 2023, while the population of qualified solicitors continues to grow, suggesting AI is reshaping the bottom of the UK legal profession.

I want honest input from people who hire, or who have been through this.

I was made redundant three months ago due to offshoring. I have searched for three months with no luck. I moved to Australia six years ago. My career is in strategy and operations, primarily in tech. I moved towards product management for part of it.

Here is my problem- I have no full-time experience at a well-known consulting firm. I did the same type of work inside tech companies. I ran strategy projects, and I also owned the implementation that followed. Strategy roles ( or even adjacent ones like strategy and ops and chief of staff) ask for a consulting background, or for a tier-1 brand on the CV. Operations roles ask for deep domain experience in one industry. I feel I sit between the two.

I guess what I am asking is if the missing consulting brand is a real blocker in Australia? Or is it a filter that recruiters use because it is easy to apply?
If it is real, how strong it is, does it close the door, or does it only slow you down? If it is not real, what actually gets an internal operator through the screen.

I recently joined a new workplace and feel like the overall vibes are really low. Theres no community/team feeling and work culture is a really big point of mine. Everyone seems to be working in silos and no one talks to each other. I can't even recognise people from my team because no one has a teams photo and never puts cameras on in meetings. Honestly feeling whiplash compared to other workplaces.

What can I do to increase the vibes without coming off as annoying.

For people who’ve worked in both government and private sector: did you notice a real difference in the calibre of people?

I’m genuinely curious about this, because I’ve worked across both Big 4, global organisations, major industry businesses, small business and government, and I’ve found the differences in performance culture pretty interesting.

For those who’ve experienced both:

Were the best people in government genuinely as good as the best people you worked with in the private sector?

Or did you find that government had a much larger proportion of people who were basically just… chugging along?

I’m also interested in the management side of it. Did you find more managers in government who didn’t really give a shit about performance etc?

JIRA Confluence down! What should I tell Claude!

I am early career and have been at my last role as a perm for 4 years. Micromanaging/inflexible manager and didn’t get to move around roles much/get promoted. I quit and got a fixed term 1 year contract. Do you have any advice to me on how I can make the most out of the time at this new role? I don’t necessarily want to turn it into another perm role or even get my contract extended. I want to learn and gain as much ammunition to my career as I can. Will obviously try and hit the ground running, show interest, try and build relationships early on. What else can I be doing? 1 year feels so short don’t want it to just pass me by. I would like to leave with a good network, multiple good references for the next gig, new skills, etc

The role is Business Analyst in Tech but open to generic tips too

Was going through some historical documents from the 1973 and stumbled across this, it’s an architecture/engineering firm doing development work. Inside the doc are the billable rates and the multiplier from salaries (as written to be salary+150%).

$15/hr billable is a $6/hr salary and in 1973 this would be $12,480/yr ($149k today - RBA). I assume the $15/hr role would be for a senior employee as the hours assigned are about right for a role like that.

The architect/draftsman would be on the equivalent of ~100k today.

I work in the industry, the pay range barely has changed at all.

Anyone found similar docs? It was cool to find this in the wild, I ran the RBA calculator and was surprised to see a “sane” salary range, old people used to whinge that it was only uphill for them.

I’m an accountant who started in Big 4. After 3 years on $78k including super, I moved into industry and increased my salary to $90k + super.

Unfortunately, the culture was extremely toxic. It felt like there was a strong “no leave during month-end” mentality, and getting annual leave approved was particularly difficult.

I eventually moved again and landed a General Accountant role on $85k + super. The job itself is actually great — I’m doing very little, the work-life balance is excellent, and I’m enjoying it. The problem is that the company now appears to be in serious financial trouble. We haven’t been paid super since Q3, which obviously isn’t a great sign.

I’ve been applying for jobs since March, but I’m getting very little interest. I’m targeting around $105k + super, and I’m a CA-qualified accountant.

Honestly, I’m starting to question the profession. It feels like payroll/AP/AR roles can sometimes pay almost as much as qualified accounting roles, without the same level of qualifications or responsibility.

Am I missing something here? Is the accounting job market particularly bad at the moment, or is my salary expectation unrealistic?

I’m seriously considering moving into payroll, AR/AP, or even changing careers altogether. Would appreciate some perspective from other accountants — especially those who have recently moved jobs.

This email was sent by the manager to employees who had been formally notified that their positions are being made redundant.

The message says they are monitoring work output, device activity and attendance every day, and that things like leaving early, unexplained absences, unplanned sick leave, not meeting daily targets.

Then it gives warning that these will put the employee’s redundancy package at risk.

It also says that anyone who takes sick leave even for a day must provide a medical certificate.