Posted on 02/01/2024 12:29:09 PM PST by Red Badger
“... so, who do YOU think is right?..”
The ones who are still employed..,the older ones.
Ok, knock yourself out leaving for everything an hour before you need to.
When I went to the office every day it was a 45-60 minute drive each way. Some accidents closed freeways for 2-3 hours.
“A Gen Z employee”
A Gen Zero employee
There fixed it
Perhaps “they” may have a case for getting paid in the singular while identifying in the plural.
It is a colloquialism…not wokeism.
People these days write the way they speak. That’s all this is. Proper grammar is hardly enforced these days. It is a primary reason there are so many misunderstandings.
I think the whole situation depends upon the nature of a particular employer/employee relationship. Work is at its core just a transaction, so many hours and/or such and such a product in exchange for so many dollars. A company that only treats its relationship with its employees in a cold transactional manner should expect that the employees will reciprocate and take a strict “9 to 5” attitude.
However, good companies that go out of their way to balance their employees’ personal lives (otherwise known as “lives”) with the needs of the business will generally find that those employees are willing to be flexible themselves and go far beyond the minimum required. I’m not talking crazy Google-level coddling, just basic respect for the fact that work should not be the be-all-end-all of a person’s existence (with the acknowledgement that money is necessary to exist and work is necessary to acquire money). Make no mistake, as an employee it is imperative to make sure that the business’s needs are always met, but a well-managed business will ensure that personal sacrifices are not demanded arbitrarily, but only when truly necessary. I’m not sure if I’m saying what I’m trying to get across very well. It’s a complicated topic, because besides what I said above there then comes into play an employee’s work ethic, which should be consistent no matter how well, or how badly, they are treated. I am retired now, but I always tried to approach work with gratitude toward my employer and dedication to ensure that their needs were met. But I can understand why many employees become rigid in their attitudes when met with an autocratic employer who doesn’t seem to care about the unavoidable conflicts that sometimes occur between work life and “personal” life (I really hate the dismissive “personal life” term, as if nothing outside the workplace matters).
That said, the employer is purchasing a product (your labor) and has every right to expect that it will meet their expectations, and if it doesn’t he has the right to terminate the arrangement. It’s just that wise employers will think a little more deeply than that. And wise employees are smart enough to realize this basic reality and respect the reason that their employer hired them in the first place.
I’m retired now, but I’ve worked for total autocrats, “touchy-feely” employee-first types, and those in between who balanced both approaches. In my experience, the autocrats and the squishy types both achieved some measure of success, one by instilling fear and the other by turning the workplace into a playground, but both generally produced inferior results compared to managers possessing the awareness and finesse to balance both needs without significantly compromising either. The autocrat’s downfall usually comes from the resentment and “us versus them” attitude that they instill in their employees, plus the fact that their tendency to “shoot the messenger” when receiving bad news eventually causes underlings to just stop informing them of anything at all. As for the squishy types, it’s obvious why they fail: While a few self-motivated employees will thrive in a hands-off playground atmosphere, and can even carry the business on their shoulders for a while, most will by nature see how far they can push things and productivity will inevitably suffer as a result.
So there’s my “on the one hand, but on the other hand” diplomatic response. Take it for what it’s worth.
Yes. FIRED.
“We childless did double duty about 25% of the time to pick up the slack for those others. Our pay didn’t increase; their pay didn’t decrease.”
Very few single parents ever pulled their weight in my experience, too.
*
Found one where they were also "family friendly" but those who took up the slack got rewarded with bonuses, promotions, floating holidays and so forth.
I did not mind the extra work if there was compensation involved.
I attempt (imperfectly) to enforce correct grammar and diction upon myself. Because
It is a primary reason there are so many misunderstandings.
I worked for an idiot who was all in for the same thing (he wasn't going to rotate, just the peons). I wasted my breath arguing with him and was told that's what it is.
Well he ran into the rest of each crew who, to the last person, told him they would all give notice. That type of idiocy belongs in the schedule for badminton in the insane asylum, not in the real world. Needless to say it wasn't implemented at all.
The meeting wasn't during work hours. It was during the employee's time off.
What is this person doing scheduling “Workout sessions” at 8am for in the first place.
The workday starts at 8am. That is why it is normally called an “8 to 5 job”.
Unless I’m missing something?
In all my personnel training, conducted by labor attorneys employed by our insurance carrier, that we were informed that all new job descriptions had to cleary state the hours of work. Apparently Gen Z “workers” assume they can make their own hours.
As they beat into our heads in the military; if you can't get the job done in the time allotted, you're doing something wrong.
The advice I'd give the Gen-Zer is to tell the boss it's a health-related reason they can't attend that early, not a workout. Fitness is an admirable goal to some but a source of petty envy to others. Fatty gonna hate, especially if fatty is from an older generation that still believes one's value as a human being is their willingness to die for the money holders in the korporation.
A salaried person — who “they” was — should expect deviations from normal schedule on occasion.
Nobody dictates terms to me. If I have an agreement with an employee that lays out specific hours on the job, then that agreement stands unless we both agree to deviate from it.
It has nothing to do with being the boss or being the employee.
And, yes -- in my work, I AM the boss.
My other daughter got hired for a full-time job, and turns out it was only PT. After two weeks of 15-hour weeks she found another PT job, mainly to make scheduling hard for the full-time job she wanted. “I’m sorry - but I really need more hours and you said it would be full time so I had to take another job.” I think she did that for 3 weeks and they realized that she wasn’t just at their beck and call so they put her on full-time.
There definitely needs to be some level of respect between both parties. All of my kids are willing to go above and beyond what is expected, but they also have learned not to get pushed around either.
Click Biat. Click bait everywhere. Be sure to like and subscribe and “buy me a coffee”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.