Unpaid teens bag groceries for Wal-Mart

[rgraham666]

Snerk. Hilarious.

When I could work, I did the long and hard thing as well. Nobody gave a shit.

They only noticed that I didn't quite fit in. They noticed that although I was within the dress code I was never comfortable within it. They noticed I wasn't properly respectful of the chain of command. They noticed I wasn't popular with my peers. They noticed my paper work wasn't perfectly done.

Business could care fucking less how hard or how well you work. The work is always going to get done somehow someway. More important is whether you are proper.

I don't call upper management courtiers and consultants sophists because it sounds cool.

 

[S-Des]

Snerk. Hilarious.

When I could work, I did the long and hard thing as well. Nobody gave a shit.

They only noticed that I didn't quite fit in. They noticed that although I was within the dress code I was never comfortable within it. They noticed I wasn't properly respectful of the chain of command. They noticed I wasn't popular with my peers. They noticed my paper work wasn't perfectly done.

Business could care fucking less how hard or how well you work. The work is always going to get done somehow someway. More important is whether you are proper.

I don't call upper management courtiers and consultants sophists because it sounds cool.

But don't you see the problem there, Rob? You have a bad personal experience, and decide to judge everyone by it. If I had a bad experience with a Canadian , wouldn't it be silly to assume all Canadians were the same? My dad owned a small business, and I've worked for a dozen different companies. They all had varying degrees of ethical practices, usually relating to the middle manager. If you had a good manager, the employees were treated well and the company usually did well. If you had a moron who thought being a jerk to everyone and doing things as cheaply as possible was the way to go, the workers suffered (and usually the business did, as well). I've seen the same company, with the same board of directors treat their employees totally differently. When you're at the top, you delegate authority. When you do it to a bad person, then the workers suffer. The expression, "Shit rolls downhill . . . " is very true.

I have never had a problem getting the job I wanted. I put myself through tech school in my late 20s and was able to obtain a different level of employment. While I'd love to make even more, I'm really happy where I am right now. There are still things I'd love to change, but my company treats me well and I have no fear of losing my job to someone who'll do it for half my salary. People do get treated badly, but I believe it happens far more often because of bad management then because of "evil" business practices from the top.

 

[rgraham666]

I quite agree.

But, in my experience, bad management is a fact of life. In fact, in my opinion, bad management is the religion. People are now 'human resources', dug out of the ground, shaped into useful tools, worked until they fail and then discarded.

It's logical, efficient and profitable.

Yes, companies that do that tend to fail. But modern economic philosophy does not link bad management with failure. It will be taxes are too high, the regulatory regime was too tight or something other than bad management.

We're not allowed to be wrong in our society. So management can never be wrong.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

I quite agree.

But, in my experience, bad management is a fact of life. In fact, in my opinion, bad management is the religion. People are now 'human resources', dug out of the ground, shaped into useful tools, worked until they fail and then discarded.

People were always human resources--establishing a term for it in modern business didn't change that a bit (except protect people a shade /more/). Truly, the Transcontinental Railroad contractors understood "human resources". And, honestly, I don't want my employer considering me in any way but calculable ones--I don't want them choosing what to do or not do with me based on "like" and "warmth" and "niceness" and "morality" and "religion" and "politics" and subjective things... that opens up the door for judgement and action based on "dislike" and "cruelty" and "malice" and "immorality" and "bigotry" and all sorts of other subjective things. My employers and I always have the same conversation no matter the job.

I ask what the metrics for my position are--the goals and expected performance and results in a quantifiable and thus improveable and manipulable way. How many sandwiches/cars/ads/packages/etc. ought I sell? What kind of customer relations index score is the goal? Hours of operation. Salary. Bonuses. Etc., etc., etc.

That's just business. Everything else is personal.

It's logical, efficient and profitable.

I won't try and dodge that one. I like that kind of system /because/ I like logical and profitable things. I work best without gray areas in my job and I'm there to make me profit. I think, at the end of the day, most people are that way--from janitors to programmers to CEOs.

Yes, companies that do that tend to fail.

/Muchly/ disagree there.

But modern economic philosophy does not link bad management with failure. It will be taxes are too high, the regulatory regime was too tight or something other than bad management.

Of course it does. There's no end to the number of business model analyses that cover just that--that management systems and structure and "best practices" (God, anyone here whose ever done management... how often have you heard "best practices"? Fuckloads). I've been management--in a couple industries--and shit DEFINITELY hits management. Upper and lower. The turnover rate for CEOs is pretty insane.

We're not allowed to be wrong in our society. So management can never be wrong.

In my experience, its the employees who claim an immunity from "mea culpa" more often.