u/SerDunkaDook

I’ve posted here a few times over the last few weeks about my incredibly toxic boss/work situation, and I finally hit my limit. Monday night, I called up the executive team and basically said, “Thank you for the opportunity, but I’m done. I’ll send my laptop back in the morning.”

I fully expected that to be it. Instead once they realized I was serious and didnt even have another job lined up they were like "woah..." (they do truly understand they are horrendously toxic), their entire tune changed. They offered to give me great recommendations, keep me on full-time for the next two weeks while I transition, and then move me into a part-time role afterward.

It did not go remotely how I expected it to go, but taking the initiative was 100% worth it. More than anything, I just feel so god damn FREE. I no longer have to spend 12 hours a day sitting on an all-day Zoom call with my camera on for literally no reason, constantly feeling like I’m being watched. (yes, real, we are fully remote with some in office workers - but have to login into an all day zoom call from 8 to 6:30.. camera on, not allowed to use breakout rooms, have to listen to the other 10-20 people on the call... getting sick just talking about it)

I think I had built quitting up in my head as this massive confrontation with all these terrible consequences, and then I actually did it and realized I had more leverage than I thought.

If you’re an EA dealing with a genuinely toxic executive and you’ve been thinking about leaving, sometimes finally drawing the line changes the dynamic more than you expect. But I did get to a point of saying "enough, I have been abused and this workplace is horrific - I am meant for more" - and I am so glad I did something about it. Good luck to all!

LinkedIn reverted their AI Job Search bullshit. A win yes, a cringe horrific company yes, but we move on.

Thanks LinkedIn - Premium Canceled Lmao.

What a HORRIFIC, LOW IQ adjustment to make your job search. It's so bad, I mean so fucking bad - that this is borderline sinister... there is no logical reason unless they want people to have a harder time searching for jobs.

This is some Peter Thiel "end-the-working-class" type level of thinking.

Premium holder of 5 years - instantly fucking canceled. Fire everyone. Good day

I’m currently a Chief of Staff / Executive Assistant to the founder of a small but growing $1B+ AUM hedge fund. I’ve been here about five months, and the job is not what was sold to me. I expected to work on firm initiatives, operations, recruiting, and special projects. Instead, the firm is extremely disorganized, I have basically no authority, and much of my job has become bumping emails and administrative work.

Before this, I worked in HR/talent management at a global sell-side investment bank, after transitioning from pure recruitment. I have also just completed a master’s in Organizational Development. So right now my career looks like:

HR/Talent > Chief of Staff/EA > ???

I’m interested in strategy, operations, business management, or a legitimate Chief of Staff role, not IB or investing. My concern is getting pigeonholed as an EA and figuring out how to make that transition.

Is the MBA path still worth considering as a career reset? Realistically, I’d probably matriculate around age 30-32, year 2029-2030. Or should I focus entirely on finding the right next role and making the transition without one?

I know AI plays a huge part in what happens academically/professionally over the next few years so just looking for any advice, I am all ears. If I need to give more context on test scores or degrees lmk and I will edit

Been a Chief of Staff/EA to the founder at a small investment firm (hedge fund) for about 4 months. $100k base, remote, so obviously there are reasons I don't want to just walk away. But I'm starting to wonder if this is completely insane - and if I am valid in feeling like I am losing my pride and my backbone.

I'm required to sit on Zoom from 8-7 every day with my camera on. Most of the time we're not even interacting, I just have to be there. Immediate repercussions from the COO if you're not. I've also been told 6-11pm is when the founder actually likes to work, except he often doesn't respond during those hours + I have to eat dinner, go to the gym etc. If I speak during the day, I am told it is not priority etc. Then I'll get criticized for not being available enough at night or on weekends. And weekends basically means anytime Saturday or Sunday. Maybe this would all be a little easier to swallow if I wasn't preparing for a verbal beatdown every time I pick up the phone.

More generally, the guy is just incredibly difficult to work for (understatement). Public criticism of anyone in the firm regardless of level or rank, constantly changing expectations/priorities, cussing people out, hurling insults, etc. The firm basically has a culture of public humiliation. If he decides you're wrong about something, he will not let up until you verbally admit "I was wrong" in front of everyone. Executives sit there visibly shaking their heads and talking shit about employees while all 25 of us sit there in silence.

He claims no one can plan or communicate. I've tried being more proactive, more available, documenting things, following up, anticipating what he'll want, etc. Nothing really seems to change it.

I have no peace of mind at this point. I feel like I have to be near my phone 20 hours a day, 7 days a week because it can go off literally anytime.The frustrating part is that the firm actually needs a CoS. There is a ton I could be building/fixing, but I spend more time trying to manage his moods and figure out what he wants than doing the job I was hired for.

For people who have worked directly for difficult/toxic founders, is this just part of the territory at some companies? Did you ever figure out how to manage someone like this? Is there anything I should actually be doing differently?

Or at 4 months in, is it reasonable to just accept that the relationship isn't going to work and start looking?

The $100k + remote + CoS title makes me hesitant to bail this quickly, but I'm starting to question whether any of that is worth working for someone like this. I'm genuinely open to any advice. How you'd deal with the founder, whether I'm doing something wrong, how you'd explain leaving after 4 months to future employers, or whether I should just get out.

TLDR: 4 months into a $100k remote Chief of Staff role at a small hedge fund. Required to be on camera on Zoom 8-7, basically on call nights/weekends, and the founder regularly humiliates and berates employees publicly. I've tried adapting but nothing seems to change. Is there a way to manage someone like this or should I just start looking and throw in the towel?

Been a Chief of Staff/EA to the founder at a small investment firm (hedge fund) for about 4 months. $100k base, remote, so obviously there are reasons I don't want to just walk away. But I'm starting to wonder if this is completely insane - and if I am valid in feeling like I am losing my pride and my backbone.

I'm required to sit on Zoom from 8-7 every day with my camera on. Most of the time we're not even interacting, I just have to be there. Immediate repercussions from the COO if you're not. I've also been told 6-11pm is when the founder actually likes to work, except he often doesn't respond during those hours + I have to eat dinner, go to the gym etc. If I speak during the day, I am told it is not priority etc. Then I'll get criticized for not being available enough at night or on weekends. And weekends basically means anytime Saturday or Sunday. Maybe this would all be a little easier to swallow if I wasn't preparing for a verbal beatdown every time I pick up the phone.

More generally, the guy is just incredibly difficult to work for (understatement). Public criticism of anyone in the firm regardless of level or rank, constantly changing expectations/priorities, cussing people out, hurling insults, etc. The firm basically has a culture of public humiliation. If he decides you're wrong about something, he will not let up until you verbally admit "I was wrong" in front of everyone. Executives sit there visibly shaking their heads and talking shit about employees while all 25 of us sit there in silence.

He claims no one can plan or communicate. I've tried being more proactive, more available, documenting things, following up, anticipating what he'll want, etc. Nothing really seems to change it.

I have no peace of mind at this point. I feel like I have to be near my phone 20 hours a day, 7 days a week because it can go off literally anytime.The frustrating part is that the firm actually needs a CoS. There is a ton I could be building/fixing, but I spend more time trying to manage his moods and figure out what he wants than doing the job I was hired for.

For people who have worked directly for difficult/toxic founders, is this just part of the territory at some companies? Did you ever figure out how to manage someone like this? Is there anything I should actually be doing differently?

Or at 4 months in, is it reasonable to just accept that the relationship isn't going to work and start looking?

The $100k + remote + CoS title makes me hesitant to bail this quickly, but I'm starting to question whether any of that is worth working for someone like this. I'm genuinely open to any advice. How you'd deal with the founder, whether I'm doing something wrong, how you'd explain leaving after 4 months to future employers, or whether I should just get out.

TLDR: 4 months into a $100k remote Chief of Staff role at a small hedge fund. Required to be on camera on Zoom 8-7, basically on call nights/weekends, and the founder regularly humiliates and berates employees publicly. I've tried adapting but nothing seems to change. Is there a way to manage someone like this or should I just start looking and throw in the towel?

Ladies and gentlemen,

It is true - after a week of silence, I had to look it up. Our dear friend and resident Schizophrenic has been removed from the sub and banned. And it only took the mods a couple years.. a part of me will miss him, and I might even pour one out for the homie tonight.

But if anyone misses him.. you can buy his BOOK. THERE IS A BOOK NOW.

https://preview.redd.it/5mmxixi3q0ih1.png?width=674&format=png&auto=webp&s=992b3cf6d0b92b5b6a589d3f0884f374fe07ccd0

I'm curious how admissions work for unfunded PhD program applications compared to funded ones.

For example, could someone be qualified for admission but apply with "no need for funding" and then be less of a burden on the department as a whole?

I realize the answer probably varies by university and field, but I'm interested in the general trend and how admissions committees usually approach this. In my mind, if I apply to a program where I might be a reach, or not as appealing - would committing to being unfunded help my admit chances?

*Just for context - for someone not pursuing MBB, IB or LDP*

I have a great job at a small but flexible and growing fund, that will allow me to return post MBA. What I am trying to figure out is which FT MBA's in the T30 offer the most flexibility in the following:

• How many days a week are you actually on campus?
• Can you choose most of your class times?
• Is attendance generally mandatory, or does it vary by professor?
• Are lectures ever recorded?
• Are there programs where you can realistically stack your classes into fewer days?

TLDR; Since I am 99% remote in my role - I am truly trying to see which programs I could attend while slightly cutting back on hours/continuing to work. And just as a note, I am aware PT MBA's would be a possibility but they do not typically hand out scholarships of any kind.

Thank you all!

Genuinely curious how people read this. I'm eyeing the PhD in Information Science & Learning Technologies at Mizzou - they are an iSchool and R1. I'd be on the online track logistically (not the full-time on campus option), but on campus in Columbia often for conferences, events, and lab access, so not a never-around distance student.

PhD in Information Science and Learning Technologies | Mizzou Online

So, I am looking for any opinions on how is Information Science actually perceived these days, in academia and industry? Or any opinions on this specific program.

Genuinely curious how people read this. I'm eyeing the PhD in Information Science & Learning Technologies at Mizzou - they are an iSchool and R1. I'd be on the online track logistically (not the full-time on campus option), but on campus in Columbia often for conferences, events, and lab access, so not a never-around distance student.

PhD in Information Science and Learning Technologies | Mizzou Online

So, I am looking for any opinions on how is Information Science actually perceived these days, in academia and industry? Or any opinions on this specific program.

This feels like an oddly under-discussed topic so I'm hoping someone here has walked this path.

Most PhD admissions advice assumes you're going full-time, funded, and all-in. But I have a flexible career I don't want to leave, and I'm trying to figure out the part-time route. Specifically:

Which schools / programs actually allow part-time PhD enrollment, and is that something you apply to up front or negotiate after admission? Are there fields or disciplines that are more open to it? My sense is professional/applied fields (info science, education, public admin, engineering management) are friendlier than lab sciences. And how do you even signal part-time intent in an application without torpedoing your chances? Do you say it outright, or work it out with a potential advisor first?

If you did a part-time PhD, I'd love to hear how you actually found the program and how you framed it during admissions. Trying to build a realistic picture here since the usual advice doesn't cover this case at all. Thanks everybody!

Truly curious what people have experienced - hear me out before the downvotes. I have a primarily remote role at small but growing hedge fund with a lot of flexibility and I'm not going the IB/MBB recruiting route via MBA, so no networking dominated schedule. So a huge chunk of the "MBA is a full-time job" intensity doesn't really apply to me. Combine that with the "people skip class alot and homework is easy group work" comments from this sub, it got me wondering two things:

1. Among the T30 full-time programs, which ones are known for a genuinely lighter / more flexible class load? The kind where someone who skips the recruiting grind could realistically keep working in the background. I know plenty of programs technically frown on working during FT I'm more curious where it's actually feasible ( For example can take a morning heavy or evening heavy class load)
2. For part-time programs - which ones give you near-total control over your own schedule? Take 1 class or 4, your call type of flexibility.

Longtime lurker here - closing in on graduating from my master's program before I apply to MBA's.

Just wanted to say that ever since the rankings dropped (last 3 weeks basically) - has anyone noticed how dead this sub has been? I mean its 60% people asking Indian-based MBA questions - 35% people asking completely and totally unrelated questions, and like 5% real accounts.

What is going on lol - I know it is a rough sub regardless but my lord is this sub dead??? At some point this whole sub needs a refresh/revamp, if even possible.

And finally, I have never - ever seen a sub full of so many people that absolutely refuse to use the search bar or ChatGPT for an answer to their question that has been asked 10000 fucking times lmao