The Little Sins We Commit at Work—and the Bosses Who Are Cracking Down
Kanebridge News
    HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $1,736,779 (+1.11%)       Melbourne $1,057,340 (+0.67%)       Brisbane $1,151,226 (+0.91%)       Adelaide $1,015,559 (-0.31%)       Perth $1,005,131 (+1.51%)       Hobart $796,466 (+0.04%)       Darwin $882,186 (+3.28%)       Canberra $964,108 (-3.09%)       National $1,143,418 (+0.66%)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $795,054 (-0.05%)       Melbourne $519,602 (-0.44%)       Brisbane $725,709 (+0.28%)       Adelaide $576,859 (+0.27%)       Perth $556,364 (-0.30%)       Hobart $539,090 (+1.17%)       Darwin $431,601 (-3.46%)       Canberra $496,653 (+1.87%)       National $602,168 (+0.09%)                HOUSES FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 12,039 (+174)       Melbourne 12,993 (-35)       Brisbane 7,289 (-39)       Adelaide 2,335 (-40)       Perth 5,251 (-17)       Hobart 827 (+11)       Darwin 144 (+1)       Canberra 937 (+12)       National 41,815 (+67)                UNITS FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 9,101 (+9)       Melbourne 6,848 (-50)       Brisbane 1,320 (-17)       Adelaide 358 (+2)       Perth 1,221 (-32)       Hobart 171 (+4)       Darwin 244 (+4)       Canberra 1,120 (+13)       National 20,383 (-67)                HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $800 ($0)       Melbourne $580 ($0)       Brisbane $670 ($0)       Adelaide $630 (-$10)       Perth $700 ($0)       Hobart $600 (+$8)       Darwin $750 ($0)       Canberra $690 (-$10)       National $685 (-$2)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $750 (-$10)       Melbourne $599 (-$1)       Brisbane $650 ($0)       Adelaide $535 (+$8)       Perth $650 (-$25)       Hobart $460 (-$5)       Darwin $595 (-$5)       Canberra $570 ($0)       National $612 (-$6)                HOUSES FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 5,374 (-74)       Melbourne 7,632 (-176)       Brisbane 3,997 (+12)       Adelaide 1,498 (-8)       Perth 2,385 (-46)       Hobart 156 (-18)       Darwin 100 (+7)       Canberra 417 (-34)       National 21,559 (-337)                UNITS FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 7,991 (-97)       Melbourne 5,949 (-41)       Brisbane 1,977 (-78)       Adelaide 411 (-13)       Perth 729 (-25)       Hobart 70 (-7)       Darwin 149 (+12)       Canberra 680 (-44)       National 17,956 (-293)                HOUSE ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 2.40% (↓)       Melbourne 2.85% (↓)       Brisbane 3.03% (↓)       Adelaide 3.23% (↓)       Perth 3.62% (↓)     Hobart 3.92% (↑)        Darwin 4.42% (↓)     Canberra 3.72% (↑)        National 3.11% (↓)            UNIT ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 4.91% (↓)     Melbourne 5.99% (↑)        Brisbane 4.66% (↓)     Adelaide 4.82% (↑)        Perth 6.08% (↓)       Hobart 4.44% (↓)     Darwin 7.17% (↑)        Canberra 5.97% (↓)       National 5.28% (↓)            HOUSE RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 2.0% (↑)      Melbourne 1.9% (↑)      Brisbane 1.4% (↑)      Adelaide 1.3% (↑)      Perth 1.2% (↑)      Hobart 1.0% (↑)      Darwin 1.6% (↑)      Canberra 2.7% (↑)      National 1.7% (↑)             UNIT RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 2.4% (↑)      Melbourne 3.8% (↑)      Brisbane 2.0% (↑)      Adelaide 1.1% (↑)      Perth 0.9% (↑)      Hobart 1.4% (↑)      Darwin 2.8% (↑)      Canberra 2.9% (↑)      National 2.2% (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL HOUSES AND TREND       Sydney 26.8 (↑)        Melbourne 27.0 (↓)       Brisbane 29.6 (↓)       Adelaide 24.7 (↓)       Perth 34.3 (↓)       Hobart 27.7 (↓)       Darwin 25.7 (↓)       Canberra 26.9 (↓)       National 27.8 (↓)            AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL UNITS AND TREND         Sydney 27.1 (↓)       Melbourne 27.4 (↓)       Brisbane 29.3 (↓)       Adelaide 26.8 (↓)       Perth 34.5 (↓)       Hobart 26.7 (↓)     Darwin 31.3 (↑)      Canberra 39.7 (↑)        National 30.4 (↓)           
Share Button

The Little Sins We Commit at Work—and the Bosses Who Are Cracking Down

Companies are strictly enforcing rules to show who’s in charge and control expenses

By CALLUM BORCHERS
Fri, Nov 1, 2024 8:43amGrey Clock 4 min

Ever used the office printer for your kid’s homework assignment or scrolled Facebook Marketplace during an all-hands Zoom meeting? Fair warning: Your employer may be paying close attention.

Big companies on the hunt for efficiency are deploying perk police to bust employees for seemingly minor infractions that, by the letter of company law, can result in termination.

“We have had lots of requests for new controls,” says Katie MacKillop, U.S. director of Payhawk, which administers company credit-card accounts and watches for misuse.

Clients are asking Payhawk to restrict when and where company cards work. For example, a company can limit a lunch allowance to be available only on weekdays from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. and be usable at Chipotle but not at Kroger . In partnership with Visa and Mastercard , Payhawk is developing a feature that sends real-time spending alerts to corporate finance teams and allows them to instantly block suspicious transactions by employees.

MacKillop’s firm doesn’t track what happens to employees who violate company policies, but she says there is little doubt employers are taking codes of conduct more seriously.

That helps explain reports of crackdowns at Meta , where employees were fired for spending $25 meal allowances on other items, Ernst & Young dismissing workers who watched multiple training videos at the same time, and Target canning employees who jumped the line to buy coveted Stanley water bottles ahead of the general public. The companies declined to comment on the incidents.

As the employer-employee power struggle tilts in companies’ favour, some businesses are using strict rules enforcement to make an example of rule-breakers or reduce payroll without having a real layoff. An employer feeling buyer’s remorse after a post pandemic hiring spree can use the company handbook to push out unwanted employees, says human-resources consultant Suzanne Lucas.

“When you are desperately hiring, you’re definitely overlooking things,” says Lucas, who cheekily brands herself the Evil HR Lady. “When you need to cut head count, you tighten up the rules.”

Workers argue many so-called perks are designed to increase productivity. A free meal is an enticement to stay at your desk. A recorded HR tutorial is less a reprieve from the awkwardness of in-person, sexual-harassment training than an invitation to keep plugging away while paying half attention to a video on your second monitor.

Why gin up excuses to fire people instead of simply announcing a round of job cuts? A few reasons, Lucas says.

Layoffs imply a business is struggling, and companies may want to avoid shaking the confidence of customers or investors. Employers often feel obligated—or are contractually bound—to offer severance packages to laid-off workers. Firing people for cause can save money, she says.

Then there’s the effect on a company’s remaining employees. Few things put workers on notice like seeing colleagues pink-slipped for minor offences. And, as a matter of principle, stealing is stealing even if it is a small amount of company money or time.

Warning shot

If a goal of harsh consequences is to keep people in line, then it’s working on Matt Tedesco.

When he read a Financial Times report that Meta fired employees who spent Grubhub meal allowances on things like acne pads and laundry detergent in a saga dubbed “Grubgate,” he flashed back to a similar episode at a defunct company where he used to work. He says a half dozen colleagues in sales were shown the door because they used meal stipends to buy groceries.

Tedesco, 47, describes himself as a rule follower in general and says he is doubly sure to do everything by the book in the current climate. He started this fall as a sales account executive at Hearst after being laid off by S&P Global last year.

“It’s hard to get a job right now—it took me months,” he says. “From an employee standpoint, my takeaway is don’t abuse any privilege because it’s not worth the risk.”

People in a range of industries admitted to me privately that they’ve broken rules like these in the past but said they’d never cop to it publicly. One likened today’s workplace to a street with a 30 mph speed limit, where you routinely get away with driving 37 mph and feel blindsided when you’re pulled over and ticketed. Enforcement levels fluctuate, this person said, and seem to be high right now.

Cracking down is a time-honoured tactic when companies feel financial pressure. In 2009, in the teeth of the Great Recession, a former private-client relationship manager at Fidelity told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram that he and three colleagues lost their jobs for running fantasy-football leagues at work, in violation of a corporate policy against gambling. The stakes in his league: $20. Fidelity had laid off 1,700 employees earlier that year.

And in 2018, when Wells Fargo announced significant head count cuts, the bank fired or suspended more than a dozen bankers who put dinners on the company tab and doctored the receipts. The bank said at the time that it pays for meals when employees work late, but some ordered takeout before the allowed hour and changed the timestamps on the bills.

Without knowing all the details, it can be hard to understand why companies police small dollars when they appear to spend freely on pricier items, says Jennifer Dulski , chief executive of Rising Team, a maker of employee-engagement software. She notes Meta offices are known for vending machines stocked with headphones, keyboards and other electronics available to employees free of charge, yet the company is getting serious about lunch money.

“They’re either weeding or just trying to make an example of behaviour they think is inappropriate,” Dulski says.

Employers have good reasons to be sticklers in some cases, says Cedar Boschan, a forensic accountant in Culver City, Calif. Companies can invite tax trouble if money earmarked for perks and business expenses is misspent on other things.

So, don’t put all of the blame for policy crackdowns on human resources. Save some for the one department that HR might beat in a popularity contest: accounting.



MOST POPULAR

A divide has opened in the tech job market between those with artificial-intelligence skills and everyone else.

A 30-metre masterpiece unveiled in Monaco brings Lamborghini’s supercar drama to the high seas, powered by 7,600 horsepower and unmistakable Italian design.

Related Stories
Money
In a Sea of Tech Talent, Companies Can’t Find the Workers They Want
By CALLUM BORCHERS 02/10/2025
Money
Murdoch Family Settles Battle Over Trust
By JEFFREY A. TRACHTENBERG 09/09/2025
Money
What We Know About America’s Billionaires: 1,135 and Counting
By INTI PACHECO & THEO FRANCIS 04/09/2025
In a Sea of Tech Talent, Companies Can’t Find the Workers They Want

A divide has opened in the tech job market between those with artificial-intelligence skills and everyone else.

By CALLUM BORCHERS
Thu, Oct 2, 2025 4 min

There has rarely, if ever, been so much tech talent available in the job market. Yet many tech companies say good help is hard to find.

What gives?

U.S. colleges more than doubled the number of computer-science degrees awarded from 2013 to 2022, according to federal data. Then came round after round of layoffs at Google, Meta, Amazon, and others.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts businesses will employ 6% fewer computer programmers in 2034 than they did last year.

All of this should, in theory, mean there is an ample supply of eager, capable engineers ready for hire.

But in their feverish pursuit of artificial-intelligence supremacy, employers say there aren’t enough people with the most in-demand skills. The few perceived as AI savants can command multimillion-dollar pay packages. On a second tier of AI savvy, workers can rake in close to $1 million a year .

Landing a job is tough for most everyone else.

Frustrated job seekers contend businesses could expand the AI talent pipeline with a little imagination. The argument is companies should accept that relatively few people have AI-specific experience because the technology is so new. They ought to focus on identifying candidates with transferable skills and let those people learn on the job.

Often, though, companies seem to hold out for dream candidates with deep backgrounds in machine learning. Many AI-related roles go unfilled for weeks or months—or get taken off job boards only to be reposted soon after.

Playing a different game

It is difficult to define what makes an AI all-star, but I’m sorry to report that it’s probably not whatever you’re doing.

Maybe you’re learning how to work more efficiently with the aid of ChatGPT and its robotic brethren. Perhaps you’re taking one of those innumerable AI certificate courses.

You might as well be playing pickup basketball at your local YMCA in hopes of being signed by the Los Angeles Lakers. The AI minds that companies truly covet are almost as rare as professional athletes.

“We’re talking about hundreds of people in the world, at the most,” says Cristóbal Valenzuela, chief executive of Runway, which makes AI image and video tools.

He describes it like this: Picture an AI model as a machine with 1,000 dials. The goal is to train the machine to detect patterns and predict outcomes. To do this, you have to feed it reams of data and know which dials to adjust—and by how much.

The universe of people with the right touch is confined to those with uncanny intuition, genius-level smarts or the foresight (possibly luck) to go into AI many years ago, before it was all the rage.

As a venture-backed startup with about 120 employees, Runway doesn’t necessarily vie with Silicon Valley giants for the AI job market’s version of LeBron James. But when I spoke with Valenzuela recently, his company was advertising base salaries of up to $440,000 for an engineering manager and $490,000 for a director of machine learning.

A job listing like one of these might attract 2,000 applicants in a week, Valenzuela says, and there is a decent chance he won’t pick any of them. A lot of people who claim to be AI literate merely produce “workslop”—generic, low-quality material. He spends a lot of time reading academic journals and browsing GitHub portfolios, and recruiting people whose work impresses him.

In addition to an uncommon skill set, companies trying to win in the hypercompetitive AI arena are scouting for commitment bordering on fanaticism .

Daniel Park is seeking three new members for his nine-person startup. He says he will wait a year or longer if that’s what it takes to fill roles with advertised base salaries of up to $500,000.

He’s looking for “prodigies” willing to work seven days a week. Much of the team lives together in a six-bedroom house in San Francisco.

If this sounds like a lonely existence, Park’s team members may be able to solve their own problem. His company, Pickle, aims to develop personalised AI companions akin to Tony Stark’s Jarvis in “Iron Man.”

Overlooked

James Strawn wasn’t an AI early adopter, and the father of two teenagers doesn’t want to sacrifice his personal life for a job. He is beginning to wonder whether there is still a place for people like him in the tech sector.

He was laid off over the summer after 25 years at Adobe , where he was a senior software quality-assurance engineer. Strawn, 55, started as a contractor and recalls his hiring as a leap of faith by the company.

He had been an artist and graphic designer. The managers who interviewed him figured he could use that background to help make Illustrator and other Adobe software more user-friendly.

Looking for work now, he doesn’t see the same willingness by companies to take a chance on someone whose résumé isn’t a perfect match to the job description. He’s had one interview since his layoff.

“I always thought my years of experience at a high-profile company would at least be enough to get me interviews where I could explain how I could contribute,” says Strawn, who is taking foundational AI courses. “It’s just not like that.”

The trouble for people starting out in AI—whether recent grads or job switchers like Strawn—is that companies see them as a dime a dozen.

“There’s this AI arms race, and the fact of the matter is entry-level people aren’t going to help you win it,” says Matt Massucci, CEO of the tech recruiting firm Hirewell. “There’s this concept of the 10x engineer—the one engineer who can do the work of 10. That’s what companies are really leaning into and paying for.”

He adds that companies can automate some low-level engineering tasks, which frees up more money to throw at high-end talent.

It’s a dynamic that creates a few handsomely paid haves and a lot more have-nots.

MOST POPULAR

When the Writers Festival was called off and the skies refused to clear, one weekend away turned into a rare lesson in slowing down, ice baths included.

ABC Bullion has launched a pioneering investment product that allows Australians to draw regular cashflow from their precious metal holdings.

Related Stories
Lifestyle
One Night. One Chef. One Chance: Join Dan Arnold for Michelin-Inspired Dining
By Staff Writer 15/09/2025
Lifestyle
DIVE INTO LUXURY WITH FIJI’S CORAL GARDENER EXPERIENCE
By Jeni O'Dowd 02/09/2025
Property
Salute to a Randwick Icon
By Kirsten Craze 29/09/2025
0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop