(Topic ID: 321365)

Employment issues and work ethic 8-2022.

By gdonovan

1 year ago


Topic Heartbeat

Topic Stats

You

Topic Gallery

View topic image gallery

pasted_image (resized).png
csx_45 (resized).jpg
reliant_cecil_01 (resized).jpg
92A35543-CE72-4F6B-9093-14898D22C330 (resized).jpeg
house2 (resized).jpg
pasted_image (resized).png
ElasticScentedAgouti-size_restricted.gif
20220905_095248 (resized).jpg
20220905_094413 (resized).jpg
20220905_111154 (resized).jpg
20220905_074639 (resized).jpg
28FCF865-9C01-461C-BBA3-DD26B47B92D5.gif
Doggy MEME Theif.gif
Doggy MEME Theif.gif
B34ED7A8-3A80-4C9F-BCCF-54A8A6D42D9C (resized).jpeg
384743F5-135C-4008-B71A-26D857E1CDA4.gif

You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider flynnibus.
Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.

#224 1 year ago
Quoted from Deez:

The younger generation has realized that the concept of hard work equals success and security is a lie and are demanding better from employers. The issue isn't lazy workers as much as cheap employers.
Why show loyalty to a company that isn't loyal to you?
Quid pro quo baby.

The notion you can just show up when you please without consequence is not ‘demanding better ftom employers’ - its complete lack of respect for others and selfish.

It doesn’t matter what ghe lay or perks are… this behavior is prolific

#230 1 year ago
Quoted from NY2Colorado:

When you start spewing it, you’ve officially become your father.

It normally happens when you are the one who has to hire or cover for them.

Not a problem when you are the one milking it - your perspective changes as the burden of their choices switches to you.

Hiring people recently has been more miserable than ever. This started before the pandemic too. A larger and larger portion of young people are simply pathetic employees.

#235 1 year ago
Quoted from Deez:

Having an entitled attitude where you think employees will just bow to your terms is absurd and that was my point. It's a simple supply and demand issue with employers needing to meet the demands of potential employees to attract them

What do you think is an acceptable form of ‘meeting demands’ to reliably expect an employee to show up go a shift they previously agreed to?

#236 1 year ago
Quoted from snakesnsparklers:

This argument boils down to boomers saying "Nobody wants to work anymore!" and zoomers saying "I'm not going to work a shit-paying job that sucks and barely pays the bills!"

No it doesn’t - because this behavior is not bound to low paying jobs.

#240 1 year ago
Quoted from NEW-B:

But does that mean the company or boss can treat you like dirt? If you provide a good work environment, you'll get good employees. The key is making that known. If all the employees in that store up and quit, I'd say it has more to do with the environment and less about pay.

Old school thinking- that’s more what it used to be. Not a general explanation anymore.

People do not exercise even the most basic courtesies

#245 1 year ago

All the people that suggest it’s because of crap pay etc. most of the kids that get fired for ncns etc at my wife’s work don’t have another job lined up. People are not defecting to better jobs… thry just keep getting fired and expect thry can get another.

It’s not a plan for upward movement… it’s simple lackadaisical attitude towards responsibility.

#259 1 year ago
Quoted from Deez:

If I pay you to produce something and it's done by the deadline I don't care when you show up. The idea of someone having to be at a place specific hours is just poor leadership that doesn't know how to properly measure output and set expectations. The work should follow the person not vice versa.

Uhh… how do you except a cashier or a person running a class as a teacher to just do the eork whenever they please?

The job is to staff a position at a certain time and place.

Your retort blaming leadership is ignorant of the actual circumstances

#263 1 year ago
Quoted from Deez:

Depends on the work. I was viewing this in terms of professional employment vs hourly. So you are right in that regard.

Most work is not ‘just deliver a good’. Be it staffing a retail spot, be it providing services, be it answering a phone, or whatever.

Even professional jobs often have an expectation of availability. It hurts productivity when accessible goes down. It’s why developing products across the globe is thst much harder than single site or time zone.

But the general topic here is about lower level work becof the age group being discussed.

It’s easy to fire one for not producing- its far more frustrating to fire people over and over because they can’t even bother to show up long enough to finish their PAID training

#268 1 year ago
Quoted from porkcarrot:

Just because it pays well doesn’t mean the job isn’t shit.

So what’s the excuse when the job isn’t shit?

It’s not just bad employers struggling to get good help. Are you involved at all with trying to staff new hire positions?

#270 1 year ago
Quoted from porkcarrot:

Or they are realizing that in the current environment their labor is quite valuable and they can prioritize enjoying their life over settling for a job they don’t like. It won’t be like that forever, but right now it is and they are taking advantage of it. They are clearly making enough to be comfortable. Just because they aren’t doing what you did doesn’t mean it is wrong.

Taking advantage to do what?

This isn’t a slick move to maximize pleasure. They are trying to get a job again somewhere else right away.

They are kids living at home who are actively seeking work but can’t keep a steady job because they are shit employees. Then whine about the job that had the nerve to fire them for NCNS repeatedly

#330 1 year ago
Quoted from gdonovan:

My wife is dealing with this at her job; The number of crap employees is just clear off the scales. They lack even basic life skills like how to answer a phone, showing up to work on time, showing up to work not stoned or drunk or even just showing up to work.
We won't even get into making change or rotating stock.

Yup - and none of this has to do with what people get paid.. so when armchair qbs claim its all on bad employers… i wonder if they’ve actually had an experience with trying to keep part time workers in the last 5 yrs

#332 1 year ago
Quoted from porkcarrot:

The basic reality is the vast majority of jobs are shit when you get right down to it. And other than a small handful of people who make it a point of pride, most people have no interest in work being their purpose in life. The basic point of this thread is correct, people don’t want to work. We work because we have to, that’s the society we live in. But if we had a way to live comfortably without it, we wouldn’t go to work.
Companies are still in the mindset of thinking that offering the job is the gracious part and employees should be happy to be employed. That’s not the way the labor market is right now. Companies are offering people something they inherently do not want; the pay, benefits, hours, work environment, etc is what makes them take the job they don’t and stay there. If they aren’t taking it or staying, the company isn’t offering enough.

By your own logic … it doesn’t matter what you offer… they don’t want to work.

The real difference is they aren’t willing to do what it takes, they want it given to them. None of us WANT to work for other people inherently. We do it because we know its an means to an end. We know to get what we want, we may have to do some things, make some sacrifices, and be a good enough human to get the things we want.

The pay or benefits isn’t what motivates someone to have the responsibility to own the consequences of their actions or not.

#335 1 year ago
Quoted from porkcarrot:

And yes, I’m involved in interviewing and leading people at my job. It’s a very competitive industry where most people can have multiple job offers any time they want.

Well one has to admit that type of position isn’t the same as alot of the young entry level roles people/situations are highlighting here. I think its very different when talking about full time professional roles verse people hiring for part time roles

#349 1 year ago
Quoted from precisionk:

Hard to blame the youth on how they act, what do they have to look forward to?

And what do they expect to happen if they do nothing at all? They want a hug because adulting is hard?

Imagine if they had to figure out how to work or not have their instagram, or a place to sleep. Shouldn’t that take priority over worrying about their end game?

Most of those points outlined apply pretty much the same on the last generation as well. It hasn’t been since the baby boomers since people could legitimately work their own way through university level college without major debt.

I feel worse for the employees like teachers whose wage escalation has not kept up with where they live… all while being shat upon by parents these days. Doing everything right and still getting shat on by controlled wages and horrible ‘customers’ is the most demoralizing.

Kids who make 18/hr can take the terrible burden of having roommates… or not having an iphone 12… or giving up their latte habit before whining about what they are owed to do a simple task they can be trained on in under a week.

Maybe if these kids didn’t have such a safety blanket they’d learn that to get by you actually have to do some work… and what you get is what you earn, not what you feel you are entitled to

#351 1 year ago
Quoted from PanzerKraken:

Why go to school and rack up huge piles of debt after years of school to get offered a crappy entry level job that is barely over min wage at most offices? But others can go and get on the job training for a technical trade and start off making good money without building up any debt at all. But it's not a soft office job and you didn't spend years of going to school for it, so it's looked down upon still somehow by lot of society.

Trades don’t just start out making cushy money either. The new guy gets all the crappy support tasks and makes way less money.

It’s no lie the trades verse white collar aspirations got knocked out of wack… but this ‘why do i need to get an entry level job’ posture makes little sense to me. You get an entry level job because that’s the experience level you have. That’s the same for trades or office work.

Some industries were impaired by globalization more than others… but there are also entire industries/roles that didn’t exist before either. Opportunity is out there… you just shouldn’t expect it to always be the easy path or necessarily a guarantee.

Today people are too afraid to move where opportunity is and will stay in a market with depressed wages… because they don’t want to face uncertainty or the need to sacrifice to invest in their own future.

#370 1 year ago
Quoted from porkcarrot:

Yeah, they don’t want to work. There is a need to work, but that’ll only go so far with any particular job. That’s the reality of the work force. You can complain about it, but that doesn’t change it. So…if you don’t like that aspect of your job, maybe you should quit.

They dont even quit… they just ghost. They can’t even quit properly

#546 1 year ago
Quoted from LoranSlater:

For people who aren't as lucky as me and do have debt, the idea that they can possibly afford these things is laughable. You come from a time where these opportunities were meaningful and there was a way up the ladder. People instead chose to spend on things that make them happy now because there's nothing meaningful they CAN do for their future in the current American economy. Life is too short to make yourself miserable with the tiny chance that you might be able to afford something, and so people don't.

So your life advise is just YOLO?

#552 1 year ago
Quoted from Gornkleschnitzer:

Most of my argument was directed more at those who actually don't understand inflation (which many of the anti-increase-minimum-wage crowd seem to struggle with), but regardless, I'm glad you are indeed on the same page there.
I think what may have thrown off my initial impression of your post was "minimum wage jobs were not designed to be career jobs" from the first paragraph, which is something I usually see floated as an argument against raising minimum wage at all. In context, I can see the validity in your statements. And yes, bringing up non-entry-level pay at the same time as entry-level pay is something that should be done but is too often overlooked.

So would you support a non-living wage if a person isn’t full time?

#554 1 year ago
Quoted from Chisox:

The whole bitching about the younger generations is so tired

Maybe your perspective would change if you had the cross to bear?

This isn’t old man yells at cloud… it’s real world dynamics that actually makes many people’s lives miserable when people with ahitty ethics torpedo your hard work… over and over.

#555 1 year ago
Quoted from DiabloRush:

And trade jobs are far-harder to outsource. If you job involves processing information, creating "content", or providing knowledge, you're at risk of outsourcing. It's already happening. Far-better to get hands-on and fix something. Considerably harder to outsource that job to someone in SE Asia.

It can’t easily be outsourced because someone has to be there… but doesn’t stop someone from doing it way cheaper than you want to charge.

Instead of outsourcing the work is simply taken by immigrants who undercut the existing workforce. This is what happened in the EU as mobility opened up with eastern europe. Cheap tradesman from the east devalued so many jobs.

#593 1 year ago
Quoted from Gornkleschnitzer:

There are a couple of ways I can interpret this question, so I'll address it in a couple of ways too.
A part-time job probably (??) shouldn't need to pay as much in a week as a full-time job, since the person is spending less time working for the company. I suppose you could make the point that a part-time worker could be trying to balance school in their off hours or having health issues preventing them from being able to work full time, but I think that's an issue of unemployment coverage rather than an employer's responsibility.
That said, not working full time isn't an excuse for the employee to be paid less than (the idealized) minimum wage per hour that they do work. If the employee only works 20 hours a week, their paycheck ought to be roughly half that of another employee who does the same job 40 hours per week. Aside from situations like I mentioned above, if this person needs to support themselves independently, they could take up the other 20 hours per week on a second job, since they literally do have time.

The issue is people advocate that anyone should get a living wage… at all jobs. It sets this expectation that as long as you work… you should be ok.

But the problem is not all roles need someone that much…so not all jobs can sustain someone. If you are a gig sound guy when live music is only in demand 3 nights a week… you can’t demand they be given more hours for a role that isn’t needed.

so you get into your ‘equivalent hourly rate’ theory. Which means people still have to take multiple jobs to get to the ‘fully satisfied’ level.

But this doesn’t satisfy the crowd that want to dictate that all work should be able to sustain someone.

And when you take the pure emotion avenue that says people should be able to sustain as long as they work you have to face that everyone’s life expenses are not the same. Dependents vary. Housing situation varies. It’s impossible to truly keep all employees above a minimum quality with a same minimum pay. So do you expect people to get paid based on their life situation?

The guy who starts out as a retail clerk as a single guy living with roommates… but stays in the same job for 5yrs. During those 5yrs did his life situation change? What if he has a live in gf now and wants his own apartment. Is he underpaid because he can’t afford an apartment alone but yet is still doing the same work as before? What about the guy with no kids verse someone with 3? So we have to conclude one wage can not fit the minimum needs of all.

Unless we pay people based on their life situation we must accept there will be jobs that pay more than others… and why wouldn’t everyone just take those higher paying jobs? Those jobs will need to deliver more value to the business to offset or justify their costs. Those jobs will then have higher requirements and/or qualifications.

Thus we will always have some jobs that have lower pay and some with higher pay… and your life situation may exceed what the lower job with a “living wage” may support. So you will always have ‘wntry level’ jobs and those jobs can’t sustain all possible life situations.

And what does anyone expect housing costs to do if you say all workers should be able to afford housing within a radius? Everytime someone adds jobs you screw the housing market by pure rule. This last 24months is the first introduction for many to true inflation… aiming for sustainable living with only addressing wages will do far far more to inflation pressures.

The way we do this everywhere else is expect workers to seek employment that fits their life situation. When you need more, people seek more opportunity (more hours, better job, savings, etc). The ideal of ‘any work = sustainable life’ is not reality.

Add in our society’s selfishness and it the notion ‘well workers will do the right thing and take that extra job’ is fantasy. The vast majority will do the least possible they can get away with. They’ll still demand more. The best feedback loop is necessity. And that works both ways… in both attracting employees and employees pushing to advance.

So the ideal of a true living wage and having any job lead to a sustainable lifestyle is fantasy. Having better wages and policies to prevent worker exploitation? YES. Preaching anyone should be able to get by with a minimum lifestyle at everyjob? Emotional argument that isn’t practical

#595 1 year ago
Quoted from fisherdaman:

We ended up finding careers that afforded us the ability to only work one job, but even then buying a house was out of reach. So what did we do, we started a dog sitting business which allowed us extra income while not impacting our fulltime jobs. After 4 years of dog sitting we saved enough to buy a duplex.

Wait… you didn’t buy into the justification that there is nothing you can do so you should just give up and blow your money on excess today because there is no hope for your future????

Good on you. The ‘woe is me, the future sucks crowd so i should not work at it’ can stuff it

#622 1 year ago
Quoted from DaWezl:

Yes, it’s “attitudes” and not at all connected to massive workforce shrinkage (boomers finally retiring) being accelerated by an ongoing global pandemic. Face it, there are exponentially less people in the workplace, so good employees have many options.

Your postulate doesn’t cover the work ethics problems raised nor foes it speak to the issues staffing many non professional roles (like part time retail, service, etc).

And even in the band you highlighted, having a better opportunity is no justification for no courtesy or respect for your peers by having poor work ethics.

#629 1 year ago
Quoted from Ribs:

Ok a genie grants your wish and suddenly EVERYONE is as hard working as you. Now everyone is working hard but there aren't enough quality positions for everyone to ascend into fairly. What do you have to say to the people working hard and still going nowhere? How do you fix that number problem?

Be willing to do what is necessary to chase opportunity where it is.. instead of pouting opportunity isn't coming to you.

Save to have a piggy bank to make yourself agile.. instead of just running on empty because the future is doomed (as another poster advised). So when opportunity is revealed, you can adapt and pursue.

Be willing to learn and willing to sacrifice to make attempts.

In a situation where 'EVERYONE is hard working' there will be a lot more opportunity because you will have a lot more leadership starting new ideas and pushing for growth... instead of simply people trying to optimize to try to squeeze the last drop out of what they already have.

I've never been in a situation where anyone felt 'too many people were too good'... in fact it is the opposite, it makes you feel even more incredible when you are surrounded by people that all impress you. Because you all benefit when everyone is success focused and willing to make the job their own.. and not something you do for a few hours a day. The best years in my career were in a company like that.. and when hiring I would tell people 'if you are here after 6months, you will probably be here forever'. And it was true for about 90% of people.. until acquisition time and many moved on after new leadership changed the culture.

#631 1 year ago
Quoted from Ribs:

Millions and millions and millions of people work hard in this country and still get screwed though. Most are 1 accident away from bankruptcy. 1 corporate whim away from having their lives ruined. Most live paycheck to paycheck, have less than $500 in the bank.

There are always exceptions because reality is hard. Someone gets sick, someone has a family situation, someone gets in an accident, you have a string of events that wipe you out, etc... but as a whole for the population.. if you have less than $500 in the bank as the norm that is YOUR PROBLEM based on YOUR CHOICES. If you can't save even $20 a paycheck - you are living way beyond your means. Reassess your choices.

Instead we got people who insist they gotta have X, Y, and Z and complain they are broke. No, being broke is when you can't afford transportation to work or the store.. or can't afford basic food on a regular basis.. or put clothes on your kid's back. Don't send me memes your iphone 12 about being broke.

My favorite example is people in Orlando who all complain about there only being low paying service jobs in that town... and the climbing housing costs due to all the influx of people.. yet... they refuse to seek out other areas because they just can't see themselves anywhere else. Well sorry.. you refuse to do what it takes to remedy a bad situation, my empathy declines for you.

#636 1 year ago
Quoted from Ribs:

Most live paycheck to paycheck, have less than $500 in the bank

Wouldn't that be a good motivation to actually want to work a shift instead of blowing it off? Actually having more hours and more take-home pay?

If it's the employers keeping people down and circumstances... why don't people follow-through with communications? Are they so poor they are paying per text message?

What's the excuse for ghosting?

#639 1 year ago
Quoted from Ribs:

Why do you have no words for those who exploit hard work, and only words for those who have relatively nothing? Why is it not the system's fault, ever?

Because life is random. You can't justify or systemize the random entropy of life. But you can take ownership of what you do inside that randomness. Does everyone win? No. But you can't win if you don't play.

If all you do is focus on what someone else did to you... you're doomed to fail because the difference is not in what adversity you faced, but what you did in the face of adversity. Stop playing the victim and start focusing on how to adapt.

Quoted from Ribs:

The only people I hear talk like this have a belief system where corporations and those amassing wealth deserve more power and breaks. They want more of people's lives to hinge on corporate whims while only blaming the individual when it doesn't work out.

Again, what does corporate whims have to do with simple ethics like... GETTING THE FUCK UP EVERY MORNING? Or owning a decision?

Quoted from Ribs:

I beg some of y'all to do some reading on the history of labor in this country. The blood that had to be spilled for even the smallest of working improvements. I'm sure they were all just a bunch of undeserving lazies too.... You are spitting on their sacrifices by using the exact same words that their employers did. The same employers who would hire the police to shoot you dead if you refused to work.

Sorry, no... there is no comparing someone getting beat down by the Pinkertons for lobbying for better working conditions and the guy who can't be bothered to return a text message or even SHOW THE FUCK UP. The factory worker who risked his health and his very limbs because someone wouldn't be bothered to design a machine with resiliency in mind is on a different planet than the kid who is just being asked to answer questions and push a few touchscreen buttons.

#642 1 year ago
Quoted from Ribs:

It's hard to be reliable when your life is really fucking hard. It's expensive to be poor.

It costs them NOTHING to respond to a text message or make a phone call. That's a BS excuse. And when I'm talking about teenagers LIVING AT HOME it's not 'expensive to be poor' excuses. It's lack of responsibility which is really going to sink them when mommy and daddy aren't there to pay the bills.

Quoted from Ribs:

You can be juggling multiple jobs and still be going nowhere. You can't get sick or have an accident. Something as simple as a flat tire from a pot hole can cascade into some really hard choices.

Isn't that what I already said before? You know what though.. if you call and tell your boss you are stranded because your car is busted, I bet you get a lot better response than hiding from the truth and not showing up at all.. or waiting until your shift starts to tell them you won't be there. Again, no one is expecting people to never have anything bad happen or not face blocking issues... but it's how you act when faced with them that forge people's opinion of your character and ethics. It's how you act that is mentioned over and over in this thread... yet posters like yourself want to blame the employer for the employee's personal choices in how they behavior. no, doesn't work that way.

#644 1 year ago
Quoted from Oaken:

Lack of a ride or daycare come to mind.
Or previously scheduled commitments.
Or maybe working 3 straight shifts across 2 or 3 jobs isn’t physically sustainable.
Possibly other financial conflicts as well.

And which one of those prevents the employee from making a phone call or text message to communicate that lack of availability to the boss?

#647 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

Accountability doesn't just stop at with the poor, but many of the already affluent seem to think it does.

No, when someone preaches 'accountability' or 'self-responsibility' they are talking about taking ownership of the things WITHIN YOUR CONTROL. That applies to everyone.

You don't control everything, but you still should own what you do control... not deflect and say 'but what about...'.

#650 1 year ago
Quoted from Ribs:Deleted post

No, it's called common courtesy and conventions expected between employees and employers. If they can't meet those standards they are going to get called out on it.

It's not biases - it's actual retelling of true events.

A job has certain expectations -- expectations that aren't really that hard to comprehend and follow. The problem highlighted in this thread from begining was a lot of young people now can't reliably do even the most basic things expected of an employee. Something that I have lots of direct personal experience with. Something re-iterated virtually everywhere by employers of businesses big and small.

Yet.. somehow people like your self want to put head in sand and just call it 'bias' and deflect blame to others because someone can't even do the basic things to function in a work place.

Doesn't matter if you are picking up trash, or designing SpaceX rocket engines... there are some basic courtesies between a worker and their employer. Yet, you and others insist people are instead just victims.

Your bank account balance isn't an excuse for how interact with someone.

#652 1 year ago
Quoted from Oaken:

Easier to ask forgiveness than ask permission?

It's not about asking for permission - those people have already committed themselves to not showing up for work. It's the difference between 'no show' and 'no call, no show'.

If you at least let you boss know ahead of time, the damage can often be reduced because substitutes can be found. But when you NCNS, you make everything worse by exposing people at runtime with far more difficult solutions to resolve.

I mean.. this isn't hard to grasp why NCNS is far more damaging. Yet, kids hide from that reality and simply don't want to face the hard conversation.

Remember when it became a big deal that 'you got dumped via text instead of a call' ? It's that same thing just the continued evolution. These people do not want to have to face adversity and would rather hide from it as much as possible.

This is no a matter of rich, poor, circumstance, etc... It's attitude.

#655 1 year ago
Quoted from Oaken:

Or something like that. That is my answer as to why they don’t call.

which is why you see the OP's topic was 'ethics' and his complaints were about people's behaviors.. yet people want to keep deflecting blame to others or situations. When at the end of the day, the topics that were highlighted are personal attitude and choices. Just like NCNS and opt'ing to hide from conflict rather than adult and face the topic.

#658 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

I feel like you two have narrowed the conversation down to one specific minority issue. The overall issue is much more complex than if someone calls in/shows up. Yes that is an issue, but it isn't THE issue.

It's a simple example that illustrates the personal choices people make. Choices that are COMPLETELY IN THEIR CONTROL. Not boogeyman corporations, not systemic poverty, etc. I keep bringing it up because it's a simple way to debunk these counter points that try to deflect away from the criticism of people's individual choices... their ETHICS.

The complaints in this thread were about ETHICS - Things that people control themselves. Examples like blatant NCNS, ghosting, lack of focus or motivation while on the job, were all examples highlighted that people keep deflecting around to point the blame at bad employers.

Bad employers make employees made and incite bad behavior... but that doesn't mean the behavior isn't bad and that just because people do it means the employer is bad. These are ultimately the standards of behavior the employees are holding themselves to. And that is what is being criticized.

#660 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

The people complaining are the people trying to hire people. You are saying people should just do what you want them to. Good luck with that. Times have changed.

The key point is... the people trying to hire people are the ones with actual experience in what they are observing in the job market. It's not fluffy biases. It's people trying to get by month to month and noting why things have degraded.

As for saying 'people should just do what you want them to'... you act like I'm just making stuff up about courtesy and worker expectations that are somehow out of line?

Seriously... 'just show up' as Job #1 isn't a disconnect from reality. It's fundamental man.

#662 1 year ago
Quoted from Oaken:

Opting to hide from conflict is nothing new though.
I suppose the difference is that in the past you could just shit can them and move on much much easier.
My dad was constantly battling NCNS in the 80s, 90s, and 00s before he retired. Much of my youth towards the end of that timeframe was making in person “courtesy calls” to employees…most of which were classmates ha. (That or working their shift for them, yay family business)

No one claimed it was new... The problem is the pervasiveness of it now and the attitude towards it. Turnover is not a new concept, but it is a raging problem now, more so in the past. And not just because someone is leaving for something better... people just act like work is something they should do when they feel like it.

For NCNS in the past, people would make excuses when forced to face it... now kids are like 'whats the big deal?' or act like its perfectly ok behavior.. and as you can see from many of the responses here, people actually JUSTIFY it as if it were some retort to bad employers.

This is not the same as it was 25-35 years ago.

#663 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

If you only come from what the OP title says, of course all the blame goes to the employees. I don't see anyone making excuses for employees actions in a normal scenario

Dude, you don't even have to be following from the start to see recent responses like this one - https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/employment-issues-amp-work-ethic-8-2022-/page/13#post-7115431

Examples like where brought up in this chain of responses.. and what's Rib's counter? A postulate that deflects again and tries to paint the idea of everyone having ethics as a bad thing. You can go on and on in this thread about how many times examples of behavior were not the responsibility of the individual, but because someone else or something else. It's a deflect tactic intended to skip over the bad behavior and instead paint them a victim justified to act that way.

#670 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

I made a similar statement in relation to people saying low cost jobs were not meant to be career jobs, except that it's a known fact that people aren't retiring and positions are not opening up (in higher paying jobs)

Many people are working longer because of the lack of retirement options in our country vs prior work generations.. but we also have a huge amount of people that left the traditional workforce during the pandemic and have not returned, instead shifting to gig economies, etc. I don't buy into this 'musical chairs' argument as related to the problems of work ethics in the younger population. Plus, it's not an argument that speaks to the ethics examples being highlighted by the OP. Instead of facing that problem, people keep trying to deflect away to grander topics that aren't even a factor for the population in the examples.

Quoted from Zablon:

He was proposing a theory to show that, the whole mindset that anyone not moving up it was their own fault. There are indeed issues around this and goes back to what I said about, your actions only get you so far. Other peoples actions play a huge role in other peoples lives. You are only concentrating on the bad actors, there are plenty of people out there who work their ass off and the system screws them over left and right. Your comment is basically the opposite of what you posit. Everyone else is innocent, because someone else must be lazy. It's all a broad statement, because it isn't actually one or the other, it's a mix of many things as keeps getting said.

No - it's accountability for your actions. You don't get to control everything, and yes, you can still lose even when you do everything right. But none of that changes the basic expectation that you are defined by your actions.

If people want to believe you can only have good ethics when everyone has the same chance of success we're all fucked. Life isn't that fair and to justify bad behavior because of that reality... well then we're doomed to fall into our own prediction of failure.

Quoted from Zablon:

Want to talk accountability? I said it before, maybe the people hiring need to do a little accountability themselves and see why we are where we are. The 'lazy kids' stereotype was around when we were kids, and when the people before us were kids, etc.

It's not a stereotype when you are relaying actual experiences. I'm happy to cite the numbers behind my personal examples. But we know how that will go... people will deflect away to macro topics that aren't even a factor in the specific examples cited. So what's the point?

#674 1 year ago
Quoted from nwpinball:

My work employs 25-30 college kids at any given time, they are 18-22 years old. Honestly, they have better attendance and job performance now than the kids 10 or 20 years ago, for us the new generation are better employees. We also have a min wage of $17, so we expect a lot out of them and it's clearly communicated in their onboarding and training. We run a tight ship with clear expectations and constant mentoring and communication with our staff.

Isn't that only minimum wage in Seattle?

In VA the min wage is $11 and the jobs my wife hires for pay $15-17 an hour for the brand new part-timers. They can get full time roles at higher rates as well, including benefits, PTO, 401k, predictable schedules, etc. These are all customer facing jobs where they don't need prior experience, just be good with kids and the public.. the rest is covered in paid training. $500+ signing bonuses. No need to sweat in a kitchen, clean tables, mop floors, or do any heavy labor. It's teach kids in a small group a well established curriculum you are trained in. Easy part-time job for anyone from HS students, to college kids, to part-time moms.

You'd be amazed at how many times employees no show over excuses "oh my family went on vacation and I couldn't come in". We even have moms call in for their grown adult child telling the manager why their kid can't report for their shift because they had other plans. A freaking ADULT has their mom call in like he's getting an absence from gym class.

All have to work a Sunday or Saturday shift typically... and guess what shifts get the most NCNSs...

#676 1 year ago
Quoted from Ribs:

But it could be if certain people cared a little less about amassing capital using other people’s labor.

No, employers or the boogyman corporations do not control the randomness of the world. The fact your car breaks down, someone runs into you, your mom gets cancer, you get sick, Russia invades the Ukraine and your business gets impacted, the company HQ in your town moves and your feeder business gets impacted, Streaming companies get born and take out your Video business... all things that happen in life and not because of some greed or not. Stop trying to make it sound like LIFE is something that happens purely by the boogyman's strings. No, sometimes you just get dealt a hand worse than someone else. Maybe someone gets lucky and gets all aces all the time... but either way stop looking for nirvana where everything happens for good or bad intentions. That's just not reality.

Quoted from Ribs:

You echo the beliefs of people who ensure life isn’t that fair for everyone because that’s how they make their money and wealth.

Yes, your family's house was wiped out in a hurricane because someone was getting rich at your expense while the family across the street survived with minimal damage. Go find the boogyman to blame.

No, just sometimes LIFE ISN'T FAIR

-1
#679 1 year ago
Quoted from DaWezl:

You’ve made this same point a few times that there’s an “increase” in unethical behaviors of employees. The musical chairs postulate is not that there aren’t employees behaving unethically or lazily, but rather that because there are less workers in the workforce, certain jobs that are deemed less desirable for whatever reasons, will have a harder time finding any candidate, let alone quality candidates

Stop talking theory and start listening to the real world examples given. The kids flaking on us are not 'finding a better job and leaving us'. They literally just flake out and act confused why you don't tolerate their behavior. They EXPECT their behavior to be tolerated and normalized.

We often know where they end up next because of referral and background checks. They aren't moving up

Even if you want to argue 'well this is the bottom % of the labor pool'. Ok, then lets acknowledge 'the bottom % of today's labor pool is worse than it was 5-7 years ago'.

Quoted from DaWezl:

So yes, in certain roles there WILL be a lower quality standard of employees, but you can’t take that result and therefore say that overall all employees are lower quality.

This is a strawman. You're reframing this into a position of absolutes ('all employees are lower quality') to try to discredit the existence or pervasiveness of the behavior.

Quoted from DaWezl:

If you still disagree with that explanation, please share evidence beyond what you are experiencing in one company or industry to help explain how you’ve come to your interpretation of the situation.

Have you paid any attention to the feedback of other hiring managers? I'm not on an island here. Your argument here is that my cites are anecdotal without anything to counter the common experiences. It's just a 'it must be only you' with nothing to counter it point.

Meanwhile, turnover and labor shortages plague entire industries while the effectiness of hires is critiqued broadly.

A simple example... the company has to pay more employees on any given shift because they have to prepare for increased numbers of noshows. That increased duplication takes away from labor dollars that could be invested in better employees. Instead of having 8 workers on a shift, you commonly have to schedule 11 or 12. That increased cost to makeup for employees unreliability drives up costs and hinders wages. Literally workers are screwing each other over with their behavior.

#681 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

These things are not even remotely the same. A better reference would be the CEO laundered the money and got caught, went to jail and the business went away and everyone lost their jobs. And yes, that was because of someone else, and indeed does happen.
Does any of this excuse NCNS? I would say the hurricane does.

You could never experience a CEO laundering money in your lifetime - it still wouldn't make Life fair for everyone. Sometimes accidents happen, illness happens, or just bad luck.

Just because there are bad people in the world, that doesn't mean that is the only source of bad circumstances in the world. Far more people are impacted by cancer every year than employees who got screwed by a laundering CEO. Who do those families go to blame and ask for fairness?

#683 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

You can't equate natural disasters and medical sickness with employment. Just no. If you are going to do that, then why would anyone want to work for you? You clearly have zero empathy for anyone but yourself

You need to go back and read what was stated and responded to. I was not equating these things to employment. I stated

Quoted from flynnibus:

If people want to believe you can only have good ethics when everyone has the same chance of success we're all fucked. Life isn't that fair and to justify bad behavior because of that reality... well then we're doomed to fall into our own prediction of failure.

It's a simple statement that you can't expect everywhere to have the same circumstances. That's not reality. And if you expect only those with great circumstances to able to act reasonably to other humans then we're doomed.

Quoted from Zablon:

I get what you are stating is frustrations, and again, I agree that these examples of lazy employees exist, but again, they don't exist in a vacuum. Why do you think a minimum wage exists? Why do you think worker protections exist? It isn't because of lazy workers.

Again with the deflections - those factors are not driving the individuals in question. People need to acknowledge and own THEIR choices, not deflect and say 'yeah, but what about that guy!!'

#687 1 year ago
Quoted from NEW-B:

No. I worked a few of these minimum wage jobs in the 90s and it was the exact same shit, different decade. It motivated me to go back to school. It's not new.

Ok, conclusion reached.

Nothing is fucked here, people are just being undude like. Businesses reducing hours and cutting services for labor shortages is just what it's always been.

#691 1 year ago
Quoted from Jamesays:

off topic but whatever.I was at a gas station early one morning and a couple were in a car waiting as I filled up ,the female comes over and asks for gas money so her husband can make it to work.Thinking what a jerk to have his wife beg for him I tell her sure I will give him some gas money if He comes and asks for it Himself.He wouldnt do it.

Real common schtick at interstate gas stops. 'my family is traveling and we ran out of money...' 'we hit hard times and just need something...' etc. Just another panhandling form.

The ones that don't speak but come up to you the parking lots with the hand written notes are the wierdest to me.

#704 1 year ago
Quoted from RyanStl:

There has been a lot of talk about working from home or not and two camps on this. This is not a binary argument. For some people and jobs it works very well and others it doesn't. The pandemic helped sort that out because employers that never allowed work from home suddenly did. It takes someone with discpiline to sepate their home life from work life to be able to be productive from home. At my work, it was a general fail and productivity went down. However, that didn't mean it didn't work for some.
I hate driving to and from work, but I really like having my office to go to during the day. I have meaningful interactions with my coworkers and have very little distractions like family members and TVs.

Very true. Not all jobs nor all people are good for full time WFH. But at the other extreme there is a lot that as you say, never had the opportunity, but could. This will continue to settle out in the coming years. I still think the hardest part is for people to start new roles or new companies remotely…

I think the dynamics are going to be tough as people learn to figure out that this is not necessarily a black & white thing and can vary even person to person.

15
#719 1 year ago
Quoted from Jamesays:

Some but not all of my favorite Restaurants have posted in the front door area a sign that reads due to the increase in minimum wage we are adding a 3.5 % surcharge to your bill.

A lame way to try to paint a picture of blame by that employer. If you need to raise prices, raise prices. This surcharge angle is just posturing to try to pass blame to those pushing wages up.

#761 1 year ago
Quoted from Oaken:

I think this part of rules is where "tips are expected" culture comes from.

except states that do not have the exception for tipped staff in minimum wage (aka they are getting paid at least full min wage by the employer) there is still an expectation of the same tip. Servers do not expect to make min wage, they expect a higher avg earning based on expected tips. The old min wage exception really doesn't have much to do with it anymore.

Besides, employers would screw employees out of this 'owed min wage' anyway by evaluating this over a pay period, not over a smaller time period.

#777 1 year ago
Quoted from NEW-B:

Work smarter, not harder. The pissing contest some people get in about who did the hardest work in their lifetime, who worked the longest hours and the crappiest jobs is silly to me. "Look at this tree I cut down all day. I work hard."

Winning the most while doing the least is always the best.

But don't whine when you lost doing the least.

#779 1 year ago
Quoted from NEW-B:

Or when all that hard work just doesn't pay off.

Yup... sometimes you get dealt a bad hand. But the difference is people who do something about it vs expect someone to fix it for them.

#818 1 year ago
Quoted from Swainer80:

Why work for McDonald's for a minimum wage only to have the franchise and McDonald's get money off of your labor?

If you don't like the environment - don't work there. What justifies being a shitty person as a form of 'pay back'??

#825 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

Since you seem to be stuck on this one little aspect of the conversation, and I'm not saying I don't agree with you, but would you rather have a somewhat warm body or no body at all? If the option is bad, or none...which would you prefer, assuming you aren't willing to change anything?

None - because dead weight costs and complicates your ability to hire in.

I want nothing to do with an employee who projects the attitude I responded to. If you are out to spite me, you're only going to cause more grief, more cost, and more trouble.

I'm not saying all jobs are rainbows and sunshine... but if your attitude is "the system sucks, so that empowers me to be a shitty employee by right" -- GTFO. You'll never do anything but waste time and space.

#832 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

And I agree, but the issue here is that, if you are only getting bad employees, there is more wrong here than just lazy workers.

You can try to suggest that - but you're still trying to make emotional, rather than factual or substantiated arguments. A stretch that is easily debunked by the common experiences and earlier cites.

You really going to argue there is something wrong with the business when people can't return phone calls? Or have the decency to own up to their own decision to not show up? Or literally, accept a job and ghost before even showing up for the first day of work?

How do you blame a system or employer for all those kinds of behaviors?

#853 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

You are assuming I'm only referring to the business itself

It's really simple.. who do you blame for all those personal choices except for the person themselves? What excuses or justification are there for those choices?

Quoted from Zablon:

I won't be thankful I have a job. You should be thankful you have me. I realize that can problematic when they don't want to show up at all, but that might be what we are facing for awhile.

You summed up entitlement as a justification for being a shitty person in your role. Let that sink in.

Why are we defending poor behavior as a response to your voluntary work position? If you don't like the work or the boss.. leave. That distain does not justify being a crappy person to other people. Even in leaving someone should display common courtesies and expectations.

#855 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

I'm stating the mentality switch. I'm not saying that specific behavior was right. I said, things have changed and as such, you must adjust to compensate. Someone has to, and if those people don't care about your business, what makes you think they are going to change? You care way more than they do because you have a vested interest. You can stomp and complain about it, but that isn't going to make them change.

I will call it out for what it is instead of trying to normalize it or justifying it as many in this very thread have.

People can chose to suck - that doesn’t mean we should all just start to accept it.

Whatever happened to just trying to do the best at whatever you are doing? Following through on your commitments? Respecting others?

Nothing about other people having bad bosses or bad pay justifies you as an individual giving up these simple principles.

#862 1 year ago
Quoted from Zablon:

Yes, I get it. You've repeated the same thing repeatedly. The other things people are bringing up are parts of a bigger picture that is contributing to the shortage of workers and the general lack of enthusiasm.

Yet, 'you should look at yourself' is the most repeated retort to those highlighting the real world struggles. You may not be saying it, but that is the repeated attack here in the thread. The retort to challenging real world examples has been to speak in ideal generalizations instead of facing the specifics.

You at least acknowledge things are different... most do not, simply arguing 'people no longer accept less' -- ignoring the standards of behavior are declining. Here you are saying 'adapt'.

I don't want to adapt my standards because customers don't want to adapt what they are willing to tolerate either. Should I change my opening hours day to day simply based on 'adapting' when employees decide when they want to show up? You can't just bend to whatever the most non-committed person is willing to do. You have a product you are putting to the consumer - there are expectations from both you and the consumer on what that interaction will be.

Just like I chastized employers putting 'surcharges' on bills as an excuse to point the finger at labor costs, I would not support someone simply blaming poor work ethic to a customer as justification for why they should accept poor service.

Quoted from Zablon:

The nuance I'm trying to get you to understand is you can lament the state of things, or you can look at how to change it in a way that works for you. You aren't going to change those that don't want to work. The question is how do you make it work for you (or anyone else having trouble hiring decent employees right now). As has been pointed out, many of the good employees have been otherwise employed elsewhere. So the question then becomes, how do you get those employees to want to work for you rather than you trying to get the bad employees to be good employees.

You can't get stuck trying to chase 'the only good employees available'. 1) When hiring into part time roles you must accept people will not stay forever, and the new hire pool is always being refreshed. Simply put.. life ages most of the eligible worker pool out of your job. The market does not support me being able to pay for teacher trying to put 3 kids through college... nor will the customers feel empathy and start accepting some teachers charge 2-3x others do simply because of what happens at home for that employee. There is a price tolerance in the market for the product and labor costs need to stay within targets to make that product viable. By those forces of nature, this business will always be hiring new employees, and only so many will stay long term as they move up the management ladder.

So yes, we are tied to hiring from the 'new worker' pool more than not... so the topic of what workers are doing in general as the norm is very much top of mind.

And if you challenge the part-time role.. know we try to hire full time too, but most do not want a full time role (even with benefits) unless the pay is substantial. People prefer working shifts with less hours per week than actually having stability, PTO, benefits, etc. I think that has most to do with the age demographic you are targeting... which is a necessity in part when your labor budget has market constraints as well.

To answer your 'how do you adapt' challenge.. most people are simply reducing hours and retreating in their offers to be able to operate within the coverage they have. And unfortunately many workers are getting burned out having to do more with less... because they aren't getting the mutual benefit of having the other staff around.

You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider flynnibus.
Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.

Reply

Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.

Hey there! Welcome to Pinside!

Donate to Pinside

Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!


This page was printed from https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/employment-issues-amp-work-ethic-8-2022-?tu=flynnibus and we tried optimising it for printing. Some page elements may have been deliberately hidden.

Scan the QR code on the left to jump to the URL this document was printed from.