Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Nov 28, 2012 3:51 pm

I saw this article bandied about lately in several different places. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... uses-labor

I read it carefully and fully, although it is a fairly long article.

I must say, I was left with distinct impression that work ethic has changed since I was learning to work a paying job, about 30 years ago. Well, at least if this author is representative of what a significant percentage of the work force thinks about the issue of work.

I work for myself now, so I do what I want and I tend to do a lot of my work in odd hours. But, what I learned as a young lad:

Show up to work on time, which generally means getting there a little early, like 10 or 15 minutes. You don't pull in the parking lot when you're supposed to be at work. You get to your work station by the time your appointed shift starts.

During your work day, you work. Whether you're having fun on long breaks, or standing and chatting during work time, really isn't the point. If you have a job to do, do it. Get it done, and then go ask your supervisor for more to do. I had some hourly jobs -- roofing, interior trim, laborer, painter, gas station attendant, fry cook, bus boy, retail stock clerk in a 7-Eleven type store, an the like. You show up, you work.

The funniest thing in the article, though, was this thing about people "being mean" to the workers. I mean -- the examples given don't sound mean at all. It sounds like the supervisors are just asking "why didn't you make your goals?" and such. No examples of yelling, berating, or harassing were given there. It's as if "Being mean" means "pushing the workers to work hard."

I don't get it. The description of the warehouse store sounded to me like an efficiently run organization that demands that when you work, you work, and you're not to slack off. What does the author want to see? Slow down? Take it easy? Take a break when you want to, and don't worry about mistakes in filling orders?

There are many articles out there lately where employers are finding that young folks from 18 to 25 just don't know what it means to work, and they're hypersensitive and lazy. I think this trend may have something to do with it. I mean, I recall being 18 and working hard as a roofer and we didn't have time to sit and chat either. We got up on the roof early -- like at 7am, and you worked 4 hours and got a lunch break. You could, of course, grab gulps of water, but you didn't chum around with folks until lunch and then you had time to sit an eat food out of a cooler. Then another 4 hours or so, and you pack it in. Then, if you want, you have some beer.

Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 19007
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by Sean Hayden » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:11 pm

You worked with a good crew, I used to catch guys doing brick work and such smoking joints on their breaks. :hehe:

I started working young as a helper in an electric motor shop, and that's pretty much what I remember too. There was plenty of horsing around, but you showed up early and worked at something at all times.

I bet not a lot has actually changed.

User avatar
klr
(%gibber(who=klr, what=Leprageek);)
Posts: 32964
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:25 pm
About me: The money was just resting in my account.
Location: Airstrip Two
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by klr » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:18 pm

I'd give a detailed answer to the OP, but I'm working right now ...
God has no place within these walls, just like facts have no place within organized religion. - Superintendent Chalmers

It's not up to us to choose which laws we want to obey. If it were, I'd kill everyone who looked at me cock-eyed! - Rex Banner

The Bluebird of Happiness long absent from his life, Ned is visited by the Chicken of Depression. - Gary Larson

:mob: :comp: :mob:

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:20 pm

Sean Hayden wrote:You worked with a good crew, I used to catch guys doing brick work and such smoking joints on their breaks. :hehe:

I started working young as a helper in an electric motor shop, and that's pretty much what I remember too. There was plenty of horsing around, but you showed up early and worked at something at all times.

I bet not a lot has actually changed.

That is true, there were always slackers. We had a guy who could sometimes be counted upon to not even come to work. The boss would pick this guy up in the van on the way to the job, and sometimes he would just not be at home at 6am when we dropped by. But, that sort of thing certainly wasn't openly permitted by the bosses.

I just can't see what the writer of the article is really complaining about -- I mean - it boils down to, "My boss tells me to show up on time, not be absent from work, and when I'm there, he/she wants me to work the whole time I'm being paid to work." Am I missing something from the article? I mean -- the argument seems to be that the goals that are set for the employees are unreasonable. They can't be met. Maybe -- I don't know. It seems as if implicit in the article is that the goals were being met, an that even when they weren't all you had to do was say you'd keep trying and they wouldn't fire you for it. The supervisor just finds out why you didn't meet the goal -- the purpose of that is normally to see if there is something the supervisors or management can do to make sure the goals get met or to increase efficiency. How is it "mean" to say "how come you aren't retrieving the items on time," or "don't be absent from work?"

User avatar
Tyrannical
Posts: 6468
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:59 am
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by Tyrannical » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:32 pm

Mother Jones bitches about people not being able to smoke pot at work.
A rational skeptic should be able to discuss and debate anything, no matter how much they may personally disagree with that point of view. Discussing a subject is not agreeing with it, but understanding it.

User avatar
Svartalf
Offensive Grail Keeper
Posts: 41178
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:42 pm
Location: Paris France
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by Svartalf » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:39 pm

Iz funny... I had good work ethics until I had a new boss who started making my life hell... After that, btween boss driven unpleasantness and the fact I never liked mmy job in the first place, my zeal never was the same. and when I fell into deep depression and came to realize that the job I hated was part of the problem, so going back to work definitely did NOT help feel better, I was in a handbasket and headed straight for hell.

My ethics are good, as I tried to do the job as well as I could no matter how boring and unpleasant it was, it was the bosses who conspired to make my life there hell that eventually managed to break me and make me unable to work, I suspect ANY job, my inability to concentrate on anything for more than a few minutes precludes my being efficient even at stuff I like now.
Embrace the Darkness, it needs a hug

PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping

MrJonno
Posts: 3442
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:24 am
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by MrJonno » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:41 pm

Got the impression when I've spoken to older people that in the past there was an assumption you have semi-permanent long term work and even if you started at the bottom if you worked hard you would rise (slowly) through the system.

Now my committment to any job is directly proportional to my employer 's commitment to me. If they pay me minimum wage they will get a minimum wage level of commitment (which is still a reasonable amount). I have a pretty good well paid job but know full well even if I work my arse off I could be laid of in 6 months as could anyone so my priorty is always going to be me not the future of the organisation
When only criminals carry guns the police know exactly who to shoot!

User avatar
klr
(%gibber(who=klr, what=Leprageek);)
Posts: 32964
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:25 pm
About me: The money was just resting in my account.
Location: Airstrip Two
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by klr » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:41 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote: ...
Show up to work on time, which generally means getting there a little early, like 10 or 15 minutes. You don't pull in the parking lot when you're supposed to be at work. You get to your work station by the time your appointed shift starts.
...
I hope that's because it takes that amount of time to get from the parking spot to your desk (or clocking-in place, or whatever). Where I work, you don't get paid a red cent for starting work before the earliest possible time (8 am), or for staying beyond the latest possible time (7 pm) - unless there's a specific agreement to work some overtime for reason X. That would normally result in time in lieu, not extra pay.

Not only do you not get any extra pay for working more, you never get any thanks either. So no real change then from the days when we had no clocking in at all. There used be some overtime pay then, but my general impression was that if you worked above and beyond (as I often did), it really didn't matter in the long run. That would be a general impression based on years of experience.

Am I a tad cynical? I prefer to call it realistic. Am I right to be? Damn straight. I'm all eager to work the best that I can, the problem is a dysfunctional system devoid of coherent management (let alone leadership). Unfortunately, I suspect many other organisations are not much better than this, and some might be even worse.
God has no place within these walls, just like facts have no place within organized religion. - Superintendent Chalmers

It's not up to us to choose which laws we want to obey. If it were, I'd kill everyone who looked at me cock-eyed! - Rex Banner

The Bluebird of Happiness long absent from his life, Ned is visited by the Chicken of Depression. - Gary Larson

:mob: :comp: :mob:

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:52 pm

klr wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote: ...
Show up to work on time, which generally means getting there a little early, like 10 or 15 minutes. You don't pull in the parking lot when you're supposed to be at work. You get to your work station by the time your appointed shift starts.
...
I hope that's because it takes that amount of time to get from the parking spot to your desk (or clocking-in place, or whatever). Where I work, you don't get paid a red cent for starting work before the earliest possible time (8 am), or for staying beyond the latest possible time (7 pm) - unless there's a specific agreement to work some overtime for reason X. That would normally result in time in lieu, not extra pay.
Yes, well, the idea is that if you want to be a successful employee, you make sure you get there in time to start work on time, and that you don't include as part of your paid work time things like making coffee, arranging your personal things, an getting situated. There was an old guy "back in the day" that used to do some odd jobs and deliveries for one of the places I worked for as a fresh out of high school kid. He was a great guy, and he recommended always showing up for work 15 minutes early and leaving 15 minutes late. That single piece of advice did nothing but help me over the years.
klr wrote: Not only do you not get any extra pay for working more, you never get any thanks either. So no real change then from the days when we had no clocking in at all. There used be some overtime pay then, but my general impression was that if you worked above and beyond (as I often did), it really didn't matter in the long run. That would be a general impression based on years of experience.
Is this in the US? If so, then any work that you do that they know about they have to pay you for, if you're an hourly nonexempt employee. So, even if you're working overtime without their express agreement, but they "suffer or permit" you to do it, then you are owed compensation for it. And, for overtime pay, that is anything over 40 in a week and is paid at time-and-one-half.

But, my suggestion was more for work ethic wise. If you're not concerned about good letters of reference, help in advancing when you move on, getting raises and such, then quibbling over a few minutes before an after one's shift is certainly understandable. As a kid, though, I wanted to be thought well of, to get a raise an be able to tell my next employer during the application process that I got that raise or promotion. And, I always looked to have a good relationship with the boss so as to get a letter from them when I moved on that verified employment an recommended me.
klr wrote:
Am I a tad cynical? I prefer to call it realistic. Am I right to be? Damn straight. I'm all eager to work the best that I can, the problem is a dysfunctional system devoid of coherent management (let alone leadership). Unfortunately, I suspect many other organisations are not much better than this, and some might be even worse.
Well, if you work for total dicks, then you may want to look for another job anyway. But, it's always good to make yourself as valuable as possible. Nobody is indispensable, but I'd rather not be the person they think of first when it's time to let someone go.

User avatar
Azathoth
blind idiot god
blind idiot god
Posts: 9418
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by Azathoth » Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:00 pm

Do you seriously not see anything wrong with the working conditions in that place? It goes slightly beyond expecting employees to be there on time and do their jobs while they are there.
Outside the ordered universe is that amorphous blight of nethermost confusion which blasphemes and bubbles at the center of all infinity—the boundless daemon sultan Azathoth, whose name no lips dare speak aloud, and who gnaws hungrily in inconceivable, unlighted chambers beyond time and space amidst the muffled, maddening beating of vile drums and the thin monotonous whine of accursed flutes.

Code: Select all

// Replaces with spaces the braces in cases where braces in places cause stasis 
   $str = str_replace(array("\{","\}")," ",$str);

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:16 pm

Elif air ab dinikh wrote:Do you seriously not see anything wrong with the working conditions in that place? It goes slightly beyond expecting employees to be there on time and do their jobs while they are there.

What specifically do you think are the worst things?

I'm going by her description -- but, the overall feeling I get from it is that she isn't someone who really wants to work hard to begin with. That's fine and all, but the company is in a highly competitive market and needs to move.

And, the things she complained about by way of specifics don't seem that bad to me. I mean -- they're "mean" to her? Yet she gives no examples of anyone actually being mean. It's like she thinks pushing her to work hard is "mean." And, the example about how she went to the warehouse and the item she was looking for was not in the box where it was supposed to be. She bitches about having to scan all the items in the box when the item she needs is not there. Not sure why that is a big deal.

User avatar
klr
(%gibber(who=klr, what=Leprageek);)
Posts: 32964
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:25 pm
About me: The money was just resting in my account.
Location: Airstrip Two
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by klr » Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:34 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
klr wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote: ...
Show up to work on time, which generally means getting there a little early, like 10 or 15 minutes. You don't pull in the parking lot when you're supposed to be at work. You get to your work station by the time your appointed shift starts.
...
I hope that's because it takes that amount of time to get from the parking spot to your desk (or clocking-in place, or whatever). Where I work, you don't get paid a red cent for starting work before the earliest possible time (8 am), or for staying beyond the latest possible time (7 pm) - unless there's a specific agreement to work some overtime for reason X. That would normally result in time in lieu, not extra pay.
Yes, well, the idea is that if you want to be a successful employee, you make sure you get there in time to start work on time, and that you don't include as part of your paid work time things like making coffee, arranging your personal things, an getting situated. There was an old guy "back in the day" that used to do some odd jobs and deliveries for one of the places I worked for as a fresh out of high school kid. He was a great guy, and he recommended always showing up for work 15 minutes early and leaving 15 minutes late. That single piece of advice did nothing but help me over the years.
I clock in, and twenty seconds later I should be at my desk, deciding the first thing to do. Or maybe I already know it, but I have to check my inbox first to see if there's anything that takes priority. No messing about, no twiddling thumbs. I leave my PC switched on when I leave every evening, because I don't want to have wait around every morning for an eternity for the thing to boot up, me to log in and it to settle down and become usable. That takes about 5-7 minutes or so ...

Speaking of which: There's a replacement PC waiting for me for the past few weeks - it was just my "time" to get one. Typical mindless process. No-one thought to ask if I really needed a new machine at this point, or if I did, what non-standard requirements I might have. :roll:

BTW, I don't drink tea or coffee, but I do take a 20 minute "coffee" break in the morning as per normal practice, and can sometimes be seen nearly dragging others back to work. :hehe:

Oh, and we have to take a 30-minute lunch break each day. It's another rule, and a good one for once.
Coito ergo sum wrote:
klr wrote: Not only do you not get any extra pay for working more, you never get any thanks either. So no real change then from the days when we had no clocking in at all. There used be some overtime pay then, but my general impression was that if you worked above and beyond (as I often did), it really didn't matter in the long run. That would be a general impression based on years of experience.
Is this in the US? If so, then any work that you do that they know about they have to pay you for, if you're an hourly nonexempt employee. So, even if you're working overtime without their express agreement, but they "suffer or permit" you to do it, then you are owed compensation for it. And, for overtime pay, that is anything over 40 in a week and is paid at time-and-one-half.
It's most definitely not in the US. The ban on overtime is partly due to the state of the Irish economy, but it's also down to the absurd and mindless bureaucracy that dominates here.
Coito ergo sum wrote: But, my suggestion was more for work ethic wise. If you're not concerned about good letters of reference, help in advancing when you move on, getting raises and such, then quibbling over a few minutes before an after one's shift is certainly understandable. As a kid, though, I wanted to be thought well of, to get a raise an be able to tell my next employer during the application process that I got that raise or promotion. And, I always looked to have a good relationship with the boss so as to get a letter from them when I moved on that verified employment an recommended me.
I've heard a rumour that we don't actually "do" references anymore at the institutional level. Like a lot of things about this place, the truth is probably more complex and quite murky. I see no relationship between the quality of work and commitment and opportunities for advancement. The two seem to be utterly unconnected. And yes, I'm being deadly serious about that. We have performance reviews, which are worse than a joke - more like a surreal form of choreography.

I got promoted up through pay scale points for years, and then that stopped when I reached the top of the scale. At no stage was there any proper evaluation - to decide if I should get a scheduled rise, or if I should get one now.

Worse still, being an IT person, I'm also have to live with the current outsourcing / shared service /cloud mania, all of which would be tolerable if it were done properly, and for the right reasons. Officially, the University doesn't think that someone with my skills set should be paid any more than I currently am, so there are zero opportunities for advancement. At one of these pointless seminars that we sometimes have to attend (HR ticking the boxes so the University can say it's looking after it's employees, yada, yada), I made my feelings known about this. It will do no good whatsoever.
Coito ergo sum wrote:
klr wrote: Am I a tad cynical? I prefer to call it realistic. Am I right to be? Damn straight. I'm all eager to work the best that I can, the problem is a dysfunctional system devoid of coherent management (let alone leadership). Unfortunately, I suspect many other organisations are not much better than this, and some might be even worse.
Well, if you work for total dicks, then you may want to look for another job anyway. But, it's always good to make yourself as valuable as possible. Nobody is indispensable, but I'd rather not be the person they think of first when it's time to let someone go.
My last line manager left the University to join a small company a few months ago, mainly because he couldn't stand the stifling mulch-layered bureaucracy here. And the politics ... :banghead:

But the sort of work he's into is definitely not my scene. I'm getting pretty disillusioned with the entire IT industry TBH.

As for nobody being indispensable: That should indeed be the case in any well-run organisation, but such things are a rarity. If they want to let me go, I'd take the money and run, and watch the fun. Actually, knowing this place, they mightn't want to let me or certain other people go, but they wouldn't have a choice. You couldn't withhold a redundancy offer from some employees just because you needed them more than others. That would be downright illegal - the rules would work for me n that case.
God has no place within these walls, just like facts have no place within organized religion. - Superintendent Chalmers

It's not up to us to choose which laws we want to obey. If it were, I'd kill everyone who looked at me cock-eyed! - Rex Banner

The Bluebird of Happiness long absent from his life, Ned is visited by the Chicken of Depression. - Gary Larson

:mob: :comp: :mob:

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:00 pm

klr wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
klr wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote: ...
Show up to work on time, which generally means getting there a little early, like 10 or 15 minutes. You don't pull in the parking lot when you're supposed to be at work. You get to your work station by the time your appointed shift starts.
...
I hope that's because it takes that amount of time to get from the parking spot to your desk (or clocking-in place, or whatever). Where I work, you don't get paid a red cent for starting work before the earliest possible time (8 am), or for staying beyond the latest possible time (7 pm) - unless there's a specific agreement to work some overtime for reason X. That would normally result in time in lieu, not extra pay.
Yes, well, the idea is that if you want to be a successful employee, you make sure you get there in time to start work on time, and that you don't include as part of your paid work time things like making coffee, arranging your personal things, an getting situated. There was an old guy "back in the day" that used to do some odd jobs and deliveries for one of the places I worked for as a fresh out of high school kid. He was a great guy, and he recommended always showing up for work 15 minutes early and leaving 15 minutes late. That single piece of advice did nothing but help me over the years.
I clock in, and twenty seconds later I should be at my desk, deciding the first thing to do. Or maybe I already know it, but I have to check my inbox first to see if there's anything that takes priority. No messing about, no twiddling thumbs. I leave my PC switched on when I leave every evening, because I don't want to have wait around every morning for an eternity for the thing to boot up, me to log in and it to settle down and become usable. That takes about 5-7 minutes or so ...
Whatever works -- the 15 minute thing is just a rule of thumb. The thing is, most people in the workforce are slackers, and the bosses are used to people taking advantage when they can, calling in sick, coming in late, an all this sort of thing. So, to do a couple basic things -- always being on time (which is more easily guaranteed if you plan to be there a few minutes early), and not ducking out early (which becomes obvious if you don't race to the door right at quittin' time), and if while you're at work you, well, work.
klr wrote:
Speaking of which: There's a replacement PC waiting for me for the past few weeks - it was just my "time" to get one. Typical mindless process. No-one thought to ask if I really needed a new machine at this point, or if I did, what non-standard requirements I might have. :roll:
So, speak up. If you don't need the computer, you may go to your boss, sit down and say "you know, I think it could save the company money if we didn't get me and others a new computer..." and "there are some nonstandard items that would improve productivity." Stay away from the "I need" type words, and rephrase to "...this would benefit the company" type words. Maybe you already have done that, and if so, I apologize for bringing it up. Some people don't think of the obvious. And, maybe your managers are such dicks an idiots that they don't listen to reason like that, in which case, you may be stuck.
klr wrote:
BTW, I don't drink tea or coffee, but I do take a 20 minute "coffee" break in the morning as per normal practice, and can sometimes be seen nearly dragging others back to work. :hehe:

Oh, and we have to take a 30-minute lunch break each day. It's another rule, and a good one for once.
Nothing wrong with taking your assigned breaks and lunch.
klr wrote:

Coito ergo sum wrote: But, my suggestion was more for work ethic wise. If you're not concerned about good letters of reference, help in advancing when you move on, getting raises and such, then quibbling over a few minutes before an after one's shift is certainly understandable. As a kid, though, I wanted to be thought well of, to get a raise an be able to tell my next employer during the application process that I got that raise or promotion. And, I always looked to have a good relationship with the boss so as to get a letter from them when I moved on that verified employment an recommended me.
I've heard a rumour that we don't actually "do" references anymore at the institutional level. Like a lot of things about this place, the truth is probably more complex and quite murky. I see no relationship between the quality of work and commitment and opportunities for advancement. The two seem to be utterly unconnected. And yes, I'm being deadly serious about that. We have performance reviews, which are worse than a joke - more like a surreal form of choreography.
Well, I hate settings that become bureaucratic like that. I worked for a very large finance company in my early days. I was never absent. I was always on time or early. I did my job and did not bitch about nonsense, or join in employee grousing. I remember that I did well there, and people thought I was a good worker, and I could have advanced, but I hated the career path an saw it as a dead end. I wanted to become a professional, which I ultimately did. So, I reenrolled in an academic program and I gave my notice. I gave them a month notice, an I gave them a letter of resignation with glowing reviews of the company (even though I was exaggerating) and expressed the hope that one day I could rejoin the organization in a different capacity. I delivered it personally to the branch manager and I sat and had a professional conversation with him about it. Not only did I leave with a good letter of recommendation, I left with the suggestion that during my new academic program I contact a different department in the organization and see if they had space for me there part-time where I could work in the area that I was studying for. I got in. It's that kind of stuff that helps -- those little things. No matter how bad an employer is, don't burn the bridge.

Well, one time I seriously burned a bridge. But, I had been working for and seeking a good raise and promotion, and my boss was fucking around with me. After 2 years of nose-to-the-grindstone I got sick of things. I found a new job paying me a lot more money. I ended up going in and in a very sugary fashion I told my dick boss that I needed $X raise or I would be moving on. My boss came back with a lower offer, and I said "not good enough" and move on, and I let him know exactly what I thought of being strung along, etc. He was unhappy about that, but I bet he thought twice with the next employee.

It sounds like your place is a bureaucratic hell. I feel for you. That's why I love being the boss. I treat people nice. I close up shop when I want. I do a lot of my work sitting on the couch at home or in odd hours. I don't sleep much, so often I have hours to spare. I'll put 3 hours in on Saturday or Sunday morning before SWMBO'd gets out of bed.

User avatar
klr
(%gibber(who=klr, what=Leprageek);)
Posts: 32964
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:25 pm
About me: The money was just resting in my account.
Location: Airstrip Two
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by klr » Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:47 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote: Whatever works -- the 15 minute thing is just a rule of thumb. The thing is, most people in the workforce are slackers, and the bosses are used to people taking advantage when they can, calling in sick, coming in late, an all this sort of thing. So, to do a couple basic things -- always being on time (which is more easily guaranteed if you plan to be there a few minutes early), and not ducking out early (which becomes obvious if you don't race to the door right at quittin' time), and if while you're at work you, well, work.
I hardly missed a day's work for - oh - 15 years or so. I'd come in when most other people would have cried off sick. I'm still very reluctant to take time off sick, but no longer will I take it to extremes.
Coito ergo sum wrote:
klr wrote:
Speaking of which: There's a replacement PC waiting for me for the past few weeks - it was just my "time" to get one. Typical mindless process. No-one thought to ask if I really needed a new machine at this point, or if I did, what non-standard requirements I might have. :roll:
So, speak up. If you don't need the computer, you may go to your boss, sit down and say "you know, I think it could save the company money if we didn't get me and others a new computer..." and "there are some nonstandard items that would improve productivity." Stay away from the "I need" type words, and rephrase to "...this would benefit the company" type words. Maybe you already have done that, and if so, I apologize for bringing it up. Some people don't think of the obvious. And, maybe your managers are such dicks an idiots that they don't listen to reason like that, in which case, you may be stuck.
I'd already discussed it with the staffer whose job is to roll out new PCs. He agreed with my points*, and said he'd take them to his line manager. That was ... weeks ago. I've been too busy myself in the interim to tolerate the disruption that comes with switching PCs and re-loading and configuring everything, much of which is not your common-or-garden office software. But that's no excuse for them not getting back to me. When I bring it up again in the next couple of days, I will have on my side the fact that another part of the same office is spectacularly unresponsive.

*As in I need a bigger screen to work effectively with all the reports, tables of query results and spreadsheets that I work with day in day out. The standard screen that this new PC comes with is about the same physical size as the old one, but has a much lower resolution. And the "secondary" display port on the new system unit is compatible with very, very few monitors, if I wanted to go that route. If they genuinely cared about these things ...

Re the old monitor: It's a CRT that I specifically asked for about 7 or 8 years ago, for the same reasons as stated above. It was better than any LCD monitor available at the time, at least in terms of value for money. Things have just gotten much worse since then in terms of bureaucracy though, so what was an "obvious" business case then could just be fobbed off this time for no good reason. But it gets better: They were throwing out old equipment a few months ago, and let anyone rummage through it before it went for recycling. I "liberated" a very nice LCD panel with a full swivel option for my personal use. I would have killed for something as good as that at one time, and it's still nice to have, even as a spare. But because it was 6-7 years old, it was considered to be of no further use at work. :dunno:

And that's just hardware. Software - that's much worse. :lay:
Coito ergo sum wrote: ...
Well, I hate settings that become bureaucratic like that. I worked for a very large finance company in my early days. I was never absent. I was always on time or early. I did my job and did not bitch about nonsense, or join in employee grousing. I remember that I did well there, and people thought I was a good worker, and I could have advanced, but I hated the career path an saw it as a dead end. I wanted to become a professional, which I ultimately did. So, I reenrolled in an academic program and I gave my notice. I gave them a month notice, an I gave them a letter of resignation with glowing reviews of the company (even though I was exaggerating) and expressed the hope that one day I could rejoin the organization in a different capacity. I delivered it personally to the branch manager and I sat and had a professional conversation with him about it. Not only did I leave with a good letter of recommendation, I left with the suggestion that during my new academic program I contact a different department in the organization and see if they had space for me there part-time where I could work in the area that I was studying for. I got in. It's that kind of stuff that helps -- those little things. No matter how bad an employer is, don't burn the bridge.

Well, one time I seriously burned a bridge. But, I had been working for and seeking a good raise and promotion, and my boss was fucking around with me. After 2 years of nose-to-the-grindstone I got sick of things. I found a new job paying me a lot more money. I ended up going in and in a very sugary fashion I told my dick boss that I needed $X raise or I would be moving on. My boss came back with a lower offer, and I said "not good enough" and move on, and I let him know exactly what I thought of being strung along, etc. He was unhappy about that, but I bet he thought twice with the next employee.

It sounds like your place is a bureaucratic hell. I feel for you. That's why I love being the boss. I treat people nice. I close up shop when I want. I do a lot of my work sitting on the couch at home or in odd hours. I don't sleep much, so often I have hours to spare. I'll put 3 hours in on Saturday or Sunday morning before SWMBO'd gets out of bed.
Yup, that's the sort of life I'd like to lead. How to do it though ...
God has no place within these walls, just like facts have no place within organized religion. - Superintendent Chalmers

It's not up to us to choose which laws we want to obey. If it were, I'd kill everyone who looked at me cock-eyed! - Rex Banner

The Bluebird of Happiness long absent from his life, Ned is visited by the Chicken of Depression. - Gary Larson

:mob: :comp: :mob:

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Changing Work Ethic, or Changing Work Requirements?

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:30 pm

klr wrote: Yup, that's the sort of life I'd like to lead. How to do it though ...
You have a skill - a profession. As an IT guy you have an opportunity to hang out your own shingle (name plate) and just go to work. At least, you can still do that here in the States.

Example: data recovery. Get into data recovery, and you have people with crapped out computers coming to you every two seconds to save their non-backed-up tax records and such. Small businesses have disasters and need you to save their data, etc. That's just an example. Figure out what you can offer as a service -- go online and download a "business plan builder" -- put together a written plan for what you'd need to get started, and such. Then figger a way to get started.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 30 guests