What you should never say is, “Why don’t you simply fire us then,” which is similar to saying, “If you don’t do this, I quit,” or “Why don’t you just leave if you don’t like it.” One makes such threats when they believe they are in a position of authority. To coerce a subordinate (or someone you have authority over) into accepting the terms you are offering is a power play and manipulation technique. Giving them an “exit” allows the person in charge to psychologically manipulate them into quitting and cooperating with their demands. Thus, when the client himself suggested that the trucking firm terminate the client, it forced the trucking company to consider and decide that they’d rather no longer provide service to this client.
Read on to see screenshots of this story that Reddit user u/Wildcatb shared to the r/MaliciousCompliance subreddit this week. We’ll be on the lookout for it because they’ve said they’ll publish an update as events develop. Aiming towards worse compliance, keep visiting us. Below is the story by OP in her own words. Dont forget to read till the very end and submit your feedback as well. Scroll down to have a good time.
1. OP and his family run a good delivering business where they work for shippers to deliver things to people that are not too small or not too big. They have a good relationship with old business owners
2. Their company has a long-time shipper who often visits them and they have had a business relationship for 50 years now.
3. For that one client, OP’s company has done a lot in field reps. The latest rep OP got was very rude and difficult to work with, the work was also getting challenging
4. The shipper’s demand was increasing, and inventory and system were harder to navigate and control. one day, the shipper got annoyed at how one email replied and asked OP’s company to quit if the work is not smooth.
5. This caused a toll on OP company as the client was decades old, and they decided to fire them by writing a polite letter. A 60 day’s notice was given to make amends from their side and they did not
6. It had to be done and this is not OP’s company whose at fault but the shipper who had a business relationship of several years with this company and failed to keep it
Not everything is said straight. Sometimes, people use different tactics to make others do something. The shipper used one of these tactics for asking OP’s company to resign. What is your take on the story? We want to know your thoughts in the comment section down below. if you have any similar story to be shared with us. Do share, and keep supporting.
Time for a wholesome bonus dog tax for all of you.