Rock, paper, scissors.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
"We're a family here." - Corporations to their employees
- Thread starter an anarchist
- Start date
Agree 100%. Unless you work for a small business run by enlightened management, who probably wouldn't use that expression, you're capital.
And when they start using the phrase "team player," run. That's code for you but not they need to make uncompensated sacrifices.
Capital?
No. That is something owned.
Employees are an expense, which is
in a completely different group in
the chart of accounts.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
The working world isn't for me, having a job isn't ideal for me. Why deal with it and put up with it if I don't have to?
If you think working for a boss is onerous,
just wait till you run a business dealing
with the public.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I do run a business.
You've only just started.
After dealing with thousands of customers,
the real gems are memorable. The ones
who commit battery, commit assault, steal,
roil with racist rants, etc, etc.
Though it can be fun to trespass a lawyer
who gets too big for his britches. Or inform
another nasty lawyer that I an revoke his
license to park his cars.
Tomef
Well-Known Member
Sure, I just can’t see that working authentically in a large corporation. It would seem like another attempt to get people to buy in to a way of thinking about work that could be manipulated. Generally speaking, I think a professional commitment and a personal commitment are just inherently different, although I can see where there might be some crossover, that might not always be a good thing.
Every employment situation is different.
One finds friends & family when it happens.
Alas, it doesn't always happen.
The workplaces that are like family - as in, you all mutually support each other on the job (and sometimes outside of it) - don't tend to be the ones shouting it in your faces. The place I work is basically like this. When stuff happens, someone has your back to pick up the slack and keep things running. There's no backstabbing nonsense drama.
Pawpatrol
Active Member
I'm curious, how many percentage do you suppose are male at your workplace?
Kind of a weird question but we're half and half right now in our team.
To add, I have absolutely no clue about the University as a whole. It's like 2000+ employees. I was speaking of the teams I directly work in anyway, I have no idea about other units at the University. In general, public service type jobs tend to attract nice folks. Ones with empathy, who care, and are wanting to lend a hand. It's a work culture thing. I saw the same thing in the non-profit sector when I worked there. And I didn't see it in the corporate sector, which is part of why I GTFO'd from that.
Pawpatrol
Active Member
Isn't it your job to do what your manager tells you to do? Unless they hired you to be a co-manager you don't usually have a say, and if you have your say anyway it can be considered unprofessional behavior, to say the least.
That's unfortunate. There is no general rule that a manager has to talk with employees.
The gist was made plain with a question : 'what do you think?' I answered accordingly.
Yes, you are correct about how employees are categorized in business models. I'm speaking more cynically and metaphorically. In the worst working environments like Wal-Mart, employees are viewed the same as say business machines, farm animals, and slaves, all of which cost money to acquire, shelter, and maintain. Like these three, the well-being of such wage slaves is irrelevant to the company, and as little is spent on them as is necessary to get them back to work tomorrow just as is the case with any of the rest of the categories I mentioned.
Think of migrant farm workers, where the amount they are paid is just enough to get them to get them back again tomorrow and may be less of an expense that a slave, who has to be purchased, housed, fed, and clothed, and given just enough medical attention to protect the investment. I'm calling the machines, animals, and slaves capital ("wealth in the form of money or other assets owned by a person or organization") because they are owned, and as I said, we can include wage slaves in that category even though they are not technically owned because they are viewed the same way as the property - give them just enough to keep them working without any consideration of them as deserving more than a slave or farm animal.
Something happens when the ones making the decision and paying the bills are removed from the workers. Let me give you three models.
My medical office was a small business staffed by three other people, one my wife, one a young woman with whom we are still Facebook friends fifteen years after closing the office, and a third that was treated just as well, but didn't get as close to. They were paid above the prevailing wage for their jobs, were frequently treated to lunches, and were taken along with their significant others on a cruise one year. They were treated with respect, never challenged on sick leave, sent home early with pay on stormy days when snow might make travel difficult, and allowed the time they needed to tend to their children. Other offices were similarly run.
Then, there was the hospital, called Doctors Regional Medical Center, owned and operated by local doctors well-known to the community, who also owned and operated the large clinic that I worked in my first year in that town. I knew these people, and the principals were selfish and willing to exploit other physicians and patients, but they also had to look all of these people in the eye, which forced them to maintain a facade of decency. Care was always as good as the practitioners could deliver.
Then, the hospital and it's only competitor, Lucy Lee Hospital, was sold to a large national chain of hospitals, and everything changed. Staff was cut, cheaper substitutes were employed in the hospitals, and quality plummeted in the name of profits. One of my patients was damaged by these changes. She lost a leg and all of the physicians involved and the hospital were sued including me due to an unauthorized IV antibiotic substitution used in the treatment of a significant foot abscess to something cheaper and less effective, and due to errors in the delivery of IV fluids due to ICU nurses being spread too thinly. The villains were hundreds of miles away, and none of us knew them nor they us. In their place was their local guy, Mr. X, the hospital administrator, in the editorial below.
I went to war with this corporation in the local newspaper. I'll include the letter in this spoiler:
To the Editor
Much thanks is due Dr. ****** for organizing the expose of **** Corporation and its selfish, unethical treatment of our ICU nurses. It should be expected that **** will exercise damage control measures now, and try to put all of the blame for this mess on Mr. X as if he were acting alone or against corporate policy. Expect to see him fired and his chain of command to start pleading ignorance.
But do not be fooled by such tactics. **** has a long history of behaving in just this manner, and I can assure you that Mr. X was acting just as his superiors expected him to behave. I am very familiar with ****’s attitude on this issue. You should know, for example, that after several e-mailed communications to Mr. X which were received but disregarded, I personally communicated my discontent with Mr. X’s wanton disrespect of physicians as well as his disregard for issues of importance directly to his supervisor, Mr. Y. Mr. Y heads the ****’s regional division called the ‘Central States and Massachusetts’ division of the Central and Northeast region, the one that contains Missouri. When Mr. Y’s office disregarded my communication, I tried in vain to reach his superior, a Mr. W in Dallas, the executive vice president in charge of Mr. Y’s division. The disrespect for our community and its problems under Mr. X’s reign were of no interest to his chain of command. For completeness sake, Mr. V, answers to ****’s Chief Operations Officer, Mr. Y whose titles also include co-President and Vice Chairman of ****. And Mr. Y in turn answers only to the Chairman of the entire **** conglomerate, Mr. Z, both situated in Santa Barbara, California.
None of these people has ever shown the slightest interest in our local problems. Other local physicians with whom I have spoken have also tried to deal with one or more of these corporate ‘suits’, and they have expressed the same frustration with this corporation and its business ethics. I read in the DAR that the ‘president’ of ****, probably Mr. Z, visited Lucy Lee last week. As you know, his visit was not announced and as far as I know, he spoke with no member of the local medical community. This was, no doubt, strictly a damage control mission designed to help **** save its reputation locally and had nothing to do with helping our nurses, our hospitals or our community. So I can assure you, you can expect a large rasher of public relations garbage to follow which will almost certainly attempt to isolate Mr. X as a maverick who did not reflect corporate policy and did not have corporate approval. To ‘prove’ this, they will fire him and ask all of us to give them another chance to be good neighbors. All I ask of you, the good citizens of our community, is to not allow yourselves to be fooled or lied to but such transparent insincerity. Mr. X will be replaced not for abusing our nurses or violating corporate policy, but for losing control of the situation.
Be assured also that **** will offer as evidence of their good intentions the improvements made thus far at Lucy Lee: the new women’s center [i.e., OB unit] and the new 12 bed ICU which replaced the smaller nine bed ICU which was formerly adjacent to the ER. Make no mistake: this all part of a downsizing effort that will culminate in the closure of DRMC which includes its now defunct OB unit, its eight or nine bed ICU and its ER. When the process is complete, the community will have fewer, not more, of all of these services. For example, the new 12 bed ICU at Lucy Lee will replace both the old Lucy Lee and DRMC ICU’s. The net effect will be to collapse our community’s twenty or so ICU beds down to the dozen about which they now brag. Because ICU care is expensive to the corporation, they have decided that you will have less of it, and with inexperienced or temporary nurses working therein. The same thinking will lead to shrinkage of many key existing services. And don’t expect to see any of the benefits that **** has promised. These are well-documented liars who have and will continue to say whatever is expedient to help them suck dollars out of southeast Missouri at your expense for the benefit of themselves and their shareholders. Watch for them to dismantle our ambulance service next, as well as our hospice. Neither of these is as profitable as they need to be to be of any interest to ****. The fact that these services were here before they arrived and were deemed essential then is of no concern to these carpetbaggers.
[snip]
Sincerely,
******, M.D.
Much thanks is due Dr. ****** for organizing the expose of **** Corporation and its selfish, unethical treatment of our ICU nurses. It should be expected that **** will exercise damage control measures now, and try to put all of the blame for this mess on Mr. X as if he were acting alone or against corporate policy. Expect to see him fired and his chain of command to start pleading ignorance.
But do not be fooled by such tactics. **** has a long history of behaving in just this manner, and I can assure you that Mr. X was acting just as his superiors expected him to behave. I am very familiar with ****’s attitude on this issue. You should know, for example, that after several e-mailed communications to Mr. X which were received but disregarded, I personally communicated my discontent with Mr. X’s wanton disrespect of physicians as well as his disregard for issues of importance directly to his supervisor, Mr. Y. Mr. Y heads the ****’s regional division called the ‘Central States and Massachusetts’ division of the Central and Northeast region, the one that contains Missouri. When Mr. Y’s office disregarded my communication, I tried in vain to reach his superior, a Mr. W in Dallas, the executive vice president in charge of Mr. Y’s division. The disrespect for our community and its problems under Mr. X’s reign were of no interest to his chain of command. For completeness sake, Mr. V, answers to ****’s Chief Operations Officer, Mr. Y whose titles also include co-President and Vice Chairman of ****. And Mr. Y in turn answers only to the Chairman of the entire **** conglomerate, Mr. Z, both situated in Santa Barbara, California.
None of these people has ever shown the slightest interest in our local problems. Other local physicians with whom I have spoken have also tried to deal with one or more of these corporate ‘suits’, and they have expressed the same frustration with this corporation and its business ethics. I read in the DAR that the ‘president’ of ****, probably Mr. Z, visited Lucy Lee last week. As you know, his visit was not announced and as far as I know, he spoke with no member of the local medical community. This was, no doubt, strictly a damage control mission designed to help **** save its reputation locally and had nothing to do with helping our nurses, our hospitals or our community. So I can assure you, you can expect a large rasher of public relations garbage to follow which will almost certainly attempt to isolate Mr. X as a maverick who did not reflect corporate policy and did not have corporate approval. To ‘prove’ this, they will fire him and ask all of us to give them another chance to be good neighbors. All I ask of you, the good citizens of our community, is to not allow yourselves to be fooled or lied to but such transparent insincerity. Mr. X will be replaced not for abusing our nurses or violating corporate policy, but for losing control of the situation.
Be assured also that **** will offer as evidence of their good intentions the improvements made thus far at Lucy Lee: the new women’s center [i.e., OB unit] and the new 12 bed ICU which replaced the smaller nine bed ICU which was formerly adjacent to the ER. Make no mistake: this all part of a downsizing effort that will culminate in the closure of DRMC which includes its now defunct OB unit, its eight or nine bed ICU and its ER. When the process is complete, the community will have fewer, not more, of all of these services. For example, the new 12 bed ICU at Lucy Lee will replace both the old Lucy Lee and DRMC ICU’s. The net effect will be to collapse our community’s twenty or so ICU beds down to the dozen about which they now brag. Because ICU care is expensive to the corporation, they have decided that you will have less of it, and with inexperienced or temporary nurses working therein. The same thinking will lead to shrinkage of many key existing services. And don’t expect to see any of the benefits that **** has promised. These are well-documented liars who have and will continue to say whatever is expedient to help them suck dollars out of southeast Missouri at your expense for the benefit of themselves and their shareholders. Watch for them to dismantle our ambulance service next, as well as our hospice. Neither of these is as profitable as they need to be to be of any interest to ****. The fact that these services were here before they arrived and were deemed essential then is of no concern to these carpetbaggers.
[snip]
Sincerely,
******, M.D.
"Wage slaves" again. Geeze....workers sure do like to feel
like their just helpless victims...owned by the company.
They can quit when they want. They can take other jobs.
They shouldn't expect to be provided for without having
to earn money to buy what they need. That's not slavery.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
When they tell me to lean rather than squat (bad form that increases chances of getting hurt), tell me to cut corner and not follow policy and laws, my job is definitely not to do what they say. When it's demeaning stuff that isn't even a part of the job, when it's not even a rule but an ego trip, it is not my job to go along with it. It may even fall into the realm of there being a duty to stand up against a bully.
And from me there is no respecting a manager who can't talk things out with employees. And as these wankers can't talk things out with employees they don't deserve to be managing them.
You said he's not getting along with others even though the OP mentioned an entirely different problem.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
No business is as tough on its members than a purely family one.
Corporation's are looking for that sort of devotion but offer nothing back.
Often expecting it's workers to exist of tips while offering nothing not even security.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
Is that in contrast with "net" affairs? Maybe gross affairs include those where your initial advances are rejected? Or where you have had 144 affairs?
Just kidding. I still can't get used to Americans using "gross" to mean disgusting.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
In England married guys would attend evening get-togethers just not stay so late. True about the pub culture, or lack thereof.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
Something I noticed (when I worked) is that unhappy employees will be less productive, but often it's not directly apparent to the bosses. It's 15 minutes to quitting time and you have something to do that will take 30 minutes. Do you stay 15 minutes extra to get it done or leave it for tomorrow? Is that guy with his head down over the desk working or snoozing (I've seen this)? Does the employee arrive a few minutes early to get ready to start work on time, or arrive on time and fiddle around doing nothing useful for a while? This is where the bosses notice a reduction in productivity but can't quite see why.
The most productive places I have worked in had bosses that respected the staff and treated them well. Most people want to work for their pay but are easily put off when they don't feel appreciated.