Mumbai. Accounts and HR managers from various companies have agreed to make a major policy change that follows from the the observed practice of office romance and flirting.
“We realize that many young men, sometimes old men too, whom we hire, tend to treat the office as a dating zone. They eventually save membership fee that online dating or matrimony websites charge,” a senior accounts manager explained.
“This is a service that the workplaces are providing for free, and there is nothing wrong if we start charging for it,” the manager told Faking News.
“At least we are not banning office romance altogether, as it is done by many companies in the west!” an HR manager jumped in to justify the latest corporate decision.
According to the new rule, women working in any organization would be asked to “rate” men working with them as “Gentleman”, “Hottie”, “Bore”, or “Cheapo”. Those rated cheapos by the majority will have an “accessibility fee” deducted from their salaries.
“The only way such cheapos can hope get near any girl is by begging her out for lunch/dinner, buying gifts, etc. We are making girls accessible to them, that too in air-conditioned premises with free coffee vending machines. They must pay up for these services,” management explained the rationale.
These companies, whether in IT, manufacturing, or media sectors, would be further adding service tax on the accessibility fee deducted from the salaries. Experts believe that cheapos could have almost 15% of their take-home salary deducted after the new rule is implemented.
When asked why only men were being brought under this new law when even women could be using such services as well, the management termed the question “sexist” and claimed that their decision was approved by relevant activists.
While women have welcomed the decision, men are divided. Those men who fear being rated as cheapos are opposing the decision while those who are hopeful of being rated as hotties are demanding that the salaries deducted from cheapos be transferred to their accounts.
No comments:
Post a Comment