As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Ever met the Employee who does the Bare Minimum at work?

GreninjaGreninja Registered User regular
edited October 2015 in Help / Advice Forum
If so what happens to these employees?

Do they get fired/laid off?

Do they get promoted?

Do they get raises?

How do you handle employee who do the bare minimum?

Greninja on
«13

Posts

  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    It all depends.

    Minimum wage means minimum effort.

    It's really hit or miss depending on the job or person what happens.

    not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
    QuidNobodyEncZilla360zepherinJuliusKlein
  • Grunt's GhostsGrunt's Ghosts Registered User regular
    You try to get them to do more and if they don't, let someone higher up know. It's not fair to everyone else if they have to carry more work while the person slacks off.

    Sometimes the system finally does it, as bare minimum becomes less than to not showing up to work. But if they stay, someone will notice and they get fired. Or if you work at McDonald's, they become managers.

  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    in a depressing number of workplaces you'll get accused of 'doing the bare minimum' if you

    -show up on time

    -complete assigned tasks / fulfill job description

    -leave on time

    It is much more productive to address whatever acute problem you have than to stress over how hard everybody is working

    NREqxl5.jpg
    hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
    that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
    FeralAlbino BunnyGizzyPanda4YoubowenadmanbThe EnderEncSoggybiscuitAldoCasually HardcoreShadowfireQuidZilla360PsykomazepherinminirhyderkimeNightDragonThroTofystedethAngelHedgiecabsyDerrickShadowhopeAl_watMr KhanLovelyDjiemskyknytLeztaeddizhereGonmunKirindalspool32JuliusBobbleElement BrianV1mAgahnimDhalphirjoshofalltradesMagellKreutzDidgeridooKalnaurKamarCptKemzikOatsEl MuchoRhan9
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    edited October 2015
    Depends on what passes for the bare minimum. If the bare minimum means things get done and are done on time (see above post), then said employee will generally coast by forever, not getting raises and being ignored for promotion opportunities - if those are a regular thing they'll eventually quit when they realize they're now working for people they helped train. Now and then they might get reprimanded for not getting shit done, but they'll generally fly straight long enough that they never accumulate a disciplinary record.

    If the bare minimum means shit's only getting done so long as people are picking up their slack, then eventually things will come to a head when either A. people stop picking up their slack because seriously fuck that guy or B. things get hectic enough that nobody is getting shit done and they are visibly falling behind the clusterfuck or C. the person picking up the slack leaves or gets a promotion and is no longer picking up slack. In this case, they'll start slowly accumulating disciplinary actions, usually cleaning up their act for a week or two after each write up as managers are paying extra close attention, and eventually they'll get fired for repeat write ups and even the managers won't really be able to pin it on any given reason.

    Hevach on
  • SkeithSkeith Registered User regular
    Promotions and raises don't generally happen to people doing the bare minimum, and they tend to be the first on the block if layouts become necessary. Most organizations should have some kind of flow to what happens; a series of warnings and termination is what I've seen before.

    mts wrote: »
    heres how i see it being a total win situation for you
    1. stay with your wife while she dog sits. this wins husband points since she knows its out of your comfort zone
    2. have sex all over her friends house so that the next time you see her friend look at you condescendingly, you can wink back knowing you did the freaky deaky where she eats her cheerios.
  • Inquisitor77Inquisitor77 2 x Penny Arcade Fight Club Champion A fixed point in space and timeRegistered User regular
    Is this just a general question or are you dealing with this as a manager? It'd help to know more about the situation if you want advice.

    Otherwise, "bare minimum" is a self-defining term that means little as an abstract concept. Whatever will let someone continue to be employed without getting fired is "the bare minimum". If someone gets fired, then clearly they didn't do the bare minimum.

    FeralbowendavidsdurionsSkeithThroAl_watCptKemzik
  • Bliss 101Bliss 101 Registered User regular
    Yeah it depends a lot on what kind of work we're talking about. In a minimum wage job, the bare minimum is all you can expect. In more skill-intensive jobs, you can pretty much ignore arbitrary measures of effort and just look at what the employees are accomplishing.

    MSL59.jpg
    bowen
  • EclecticGrooveEclecticGroove Registered User regular
    Skeith wrote: »
    Promotions and raises don't generally happen to people doing the bare minimum, and they tend to be the first on the block if layouts become necessary. Most organizations should have some kind of flow to what happens; a series of warnings and termination is what I've seen before.

    In many places they also don't happen to people who put in much more effort.

    In general the OP's question is far too vague to get a real answer.

    Over the years I have seen people who put in the bare minimum and coast by years.

    I've seen some that put in the bare minimum, or less, but schmooze the bosses like champs and get promoted and put in charge of people.

    I've seen people bust their butts and get denied raises or even outright fired.

    The one thing that I have, however, seen universally.
    If you don't provide an environment where people think that putting in the extra effort will pay off, they will usually dial back that effort pretty quickly.

    Remember Office Space, when Peter talks about just doing enough to not get hassled. That isn't just a silly line, it's absolutely the truth when people have absolutely no faith in their job ever going anywhere.

    And there are some who get a job, are comfortable, and don't WANT to go anywhere. Maybe they have hit the apex of their career goals. If they are content, and they get the job done, there may be little or nothing you can do to get them to do more.

    bowenSoggybiscuitCauldLostNinjaZilla360SkeithminirhyderThroAngelHedgiecabsyLovelyDjiem38thDoeMaguanoAgahnimKamar
  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    Yeah, in most places if you work above and beyond at your compensation level you are actually less likely to be promoted because you are too useful where you are now, whereas those that are more social and better liked due to after hours drinking/brown-nosing/etc tend to get advanced regardless of workforce capabilities.

    If the OP is the hiring manager or supervisor, a better question here would be "why are you not compensating success and initiative," because that is how you get enthusiastic and better workers.

    PhasenDerrick
  • EclecticGrooveEclecticGroove Registered User regular
    Enc wrote: »
    Yeah, in most places if you work above and beyond at your compensation level you are actually less likely to be promoted because you are too useful where you are now, whereas those that are more social and better liked due to after hours drinking/brown-nosing/etc tend to get advanced regardless of workforce capabilities.

    If the OP is the hiring manager or supervisor, a better question here would be "why are you not compensating success and initiative," because that is how you get enthusiastic and better workers.

    I would not say it is a given that it's not happening.

    But if he wants to do himself, the workers, and everyone involved a favor (assuming that all falls under his general job bucket), then he should look at everything.

    Is this one employee just unmotivated despite having every opportunity to show his/her worth?
    Or is this a symptom of a larger issue going on?

    My last job, as an example.
    I had little desire to go beyond where I was along the "easy" paths. I didn't want to be a project manager. I hate being a PM. Despite it being a very clear path for advancement for me.

    The other options were all me doing more work for the same pay and being on call for more items while still being effectively 24/7 365 on call for my previous responsibilities.
    I not only had no motivation to really engage in that, I had negative motivation for it.

    The paths I did want to advance in I talked about at every single review meeting I had. And it always went nowhere. They cut out most training, and the only training they would ever find was the "I took 20 seconds on our internal site, here is a link" training for being a PM that I'd found myself.

    Not to say I could not have been more motivated. I could have sucked it up and jumped at the PM opportunities. But it just wasn't anywhere near where I wanted to go with my career.

    So look at this person objectively, and you may see they are in a similar boat. Either with no options to strive for, or none they care to pursue.

    Or maybe they just have no desire to rise beyond where they are.

  • italianranmaitalianranma Registered User regular
    I don't usually come here to dispense advice, so lucky that this topic popped up on the main forum page. The military has done a tremendous amount of research into how to motivate and lead people, and having been in a leadership/managerial position for almost 10 years I can share a few tips with you. The paradigm I was taught is called Situational Leadership, and you can find some of the basics online if you're interested. Generally the theory goes that as a person progresses in their job, their motivation lags as their expertise rises, until they "buy-in" to the goals of the organization and become self-motivated. Until that happens, you need to be directive with tasks, easing off of how directive you are as they become more proficient. There's been some follow-on research to this that shows that not all employees ever reach that ultimate "buy-in" state, and how more directive leaders generally produce more efficient results, regardless of the skill level of their subordinates, but that's for another forum. Coupling this theory with my own experiences, here's my advice for dealing with employees in general:

    1) Clearly establish your expectations for each employee, and do so in writing while sitting down and explaining it to them in a formal setting. With new, and sometimes with troubled employees, I go through the basics: arrive to work on-time and ready to work, be clean and presentable in appearance, be courteous to fellow employees and customers, etc. Expectations can be different for each individual, and you can increase these expectations as they continue to work for you.

    2) Accomplish feedback with them regularly. Even if you're working closely with that individual and you get plenty of 'face time' with them, I'd still make it a point to sit down in a formal setting every other week or so and give them feedback on their performance, regardless of whether they're doing well or poorly. If they are doing poorly, I'd make a habit of writing down specific events and keeping a log of whenever they fail to meet your expectations. Then at the feedback you can point to all the specific examples and say what exactly they failed to do in your eyes. Give them a chance to vent their frustrations and excuses, but at the end of the day point back to the written expectations that you agreed upon initially. Explain to them that you're offering advice on how they can better meet these expectations, but ultimately it's up to the individual to meet them, and there can be some negative consequences for their actions, ultimately leading to termination.

    3) Allow employees to bring problems to you: you don't need to deal with the problems yourself, but you can get some good insight this way, and sometimes just being a sounding board for their problems (and offering a little advice if applicable) can go a long way to building good relationships.

    4) Lastly realize that not everyone is a shiny penny. Some people just come to work to do the bare minimum and go home to enjoy life. You don't need to deal with them any differently though: clearly communicate your expectations and let them know when they're not meeting them. If your expectation for this person is "do the tasks I assign to you without my direct involvement" and they won't do it, i.e. they're taking up too much of your time, then fire them and get someone new in.

    The last bit of advice I'll give to you is that you need to manage your expectations carefully. This is something that comes with experience, and you're going to make some mistakes along the way. "The bare minimum" usually seems very clear to the person saying it and unclear to the person who's doing it. Consider this scene from Office Space:



    It's funny, but it illustrates two things. First, the manager isn't happy with Joanna's performance, but he's not doing a good job of communicating it. Instead of talking about a technique or action "you're not wearing enough flair," he should be talking about what expectation she's failing to meet like "You're not providing a fun and friendly atmosphere our customers expect." Then he can go into some techniques like "Try wearing more flair, people identify with these wacky pieces of shit" or "Look at how energetically Brian greets his customers, try smiling more and showing off a happy persona." The second thing that it illustrates is what is a reasonable expectation; it's probably not reasonable to expect all of your employees to be at the same level as your star performer. You can try to improve their output, but at the end of the day you're always going to have those that go above and beyond and those that just coast on by. Reward and hold on to the former, and with the latter, so long as they're meeting your expectations, you don't owe them anything greater than "the bare minimum" yourself.

    飛べねぇ豚はただの豚だ。
    CaedwyrOnTheLastCastleZilla360QuidEncFeralCambiataElvenshae38thDoespool32NarbusNecoV1mKamar
  • MysstMysst King Monkey of Hedonism IslandRegistered User regular
    Greninja wrote: »
    If so what happens to these employees?

    Do they get fired/laid off?

    Do they get promoted?

    Do they get raises?

    How do you handle employee who do the bare minimum?

    you give them their paycheck

    ikbUJdU.jpg
    Twitter Steam Playstation- Mechaphiliac
    Casually HardcoreLostNinjaUsagiSkeithEncFeralNijacabsyXaquinAl_watBurnageCommander ZoomDjiemMan in the MistsBobblejoshofalltradeslessthanpiDidgeridooKalnaurKamarCptKemzikHappylilElf
  • OnTheLastCastleOnTheLastCastle let's keep it haimish for the peripatetic Registered User regular
    Is "bare minimum" their job description? Because that is actually their job... if it is doing less than that description, then it's not the bare minimum, is it?

    Italianranma's answer is excellent so that x2.

    FeralEcho
  • RichardTauberRichardTauber Kvlt Registered User regular
    Bare minimum is the principle by which we all should live. Occams razor and all

    Julius
  • ThroThro [email protected] Registered User regular
    Mysst wrote: »
    Greninja wrote: »
    If so what happens to these employees?

    Do they get fired/laid off?

    Do they get promoted?

    Do they get raises?

    How do you handle employee who do the bare minimum?

    you give them their paycheck

    Hello yes hi I am the lazy government employee and contractor you have heard of from sitcoms and poorly told office jokes. I do the minimum to not get fired. I never seek out extra tasks, unless they are very interesting, easier, or more fun than what I'm currently doing AND I can do them instead of work I like less.

    I spend the majority of my time applying to better jobs. I spend the next largest chunk of my time lurking the PA forums. If I get really bored, I learn more about the field and other stuff that interests me online.

    I tuck my shirt in, show up on time, and get paid, raises, and promoted.

    FeralFANTOMASShadowhopeLovelyZilla360AngelinaHappylilElf
  • darkmayodarkmayo Registered User regular
    I've been in my field for 17 years, and at my current site for just over 2 years. I would certainly say I am doing the bare minimum now, we complete our tasks, come to work on time leave when we are supposed to etc. . I jump on the emergencies and prioritize the issues that require immediate work, but I am not going to volunteer myself for stuff that is outside of my scope or outside of my hours. I have more important things in my life than staying late and coming in early. I do what I do to make people not bother me, that is my job. If I move to a new site, I certainly work harder off the bat ,but half of that is learning the environment and is all work that happens so I can get to the place where I am now.. coasting and being comfortable.

    I like a challenge here and there but I like my job being pretty routine, the rest of my life is the excitement. Work just pays the bills.

    Switch SW-6182-1526-0041
    FeralKyouguMego Thorxraydog
  • Jam WarriorJam Warrior Registered User regular
    edited November 2015
    You punish work below the minimum.

    You reward work above the minimum.

    Doing the minimum itself should get you no hassle either way. That's what the word minimum means.

    It's not hard.

    (Okay so maybe punish is the wrong word, but you take action to help the employee understand what is expected of them, and if there's no improvement you move to making sure there are consequences)

    Jam Warrior on
    MhCw7nZ.gif
    ShadowhopeschussNobodyDjiemEcholessthanpiKamar
  • DjeetDjeet Registered User regular
    edited November 2015
    Another question that is well answered with experience.

    Get a job. Find out why the expression "doing the bare minimum" means almost nothing without such context.

    Djeet on
  • MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    I have no reason to go above and beyond the scope of my duties in my job. My pay increases are automatic, my promotions are based on taking civil service exams and doing interviews, and my job duties are explicitly listed in the duty statement for my position. Sure, I'll frequently do a bit extra as a favor for someone, or if I'm bored, but that's my perogative and is not to be expected or demanded.

    Djiem
  • schussschuss Registered User regular
    Yeah, it all depends on the reference point and expectations for the job (note that comments below pertain to non-management):
    Entry Level - bare minimum is meant to be low for a reason - they want you to go above and beyond quickly in one of the areas you touch so you can grow into other jobs in the organization
    Few years of experience - bare minimum is a reasonably high expectation, still room for self-development, advancement and the expectation of such
    Senior level - bare minimum is a pretty high bar in terms of scope, quality and timeliness. Additional goals are driven by the employee and sold to management appropriately as good uses of their time. Not engaging at this level is a good way to get saddled with projects no one else wants.

    As you move up in an organization, competition increases as the number of positions available for advancement narrows. You also have WAY more control over your future as a high performer than as a clock puncher, as you can more easily move to projects or items that interest you.
    Many make the mistake that specific knowledge = high performance, but the opposite is true, as you should always be setting it up so that you can easily transition to something else more interesting to you so when that random manager says "oh hey I need you" you can answer "nope, documented here, can pass to anyone".

    As far as "what happens" to bare minimum employees? In a nutshell, they'll be shuffled around and promoted less often than those who put more effort in and ultimately be first on the block for reorgs and layoffs. My question would be: if you're spending 8 hours of your day and roughly half your waking hours somewhere, why would you tune out and miss half your life?

    minirhyder
  • ThroThro [email protected] Registered User regular
    schuss wrote: »
    . My question would be: if you're spending 8 hours of your day and roughly half your waking hours somewhere, why would you tune out and miss half your life?

    I don't; they gave me mostly unrestricted internet here where I can learn new things I am interested in, and talk to you fun people! I'd prefer to do this at home with no pants on, but doing it at work while wearing pants allows me to afford said home, and even more fun things.

    Ideally you would not want to be in my situation, I get that. A job you're interested in, or that at least engages you and rewards extra effort is better (at least it is for me). But for people not in a situation where putting forth more than the minimum effort benefits them in any way, why put forth that effort?

  • schussschuss Registered User regular
    Thro wrote: »
    schuss wrote: »
    . My question would be: if you're spending 8 hours of your day and roughly half your waking hours somewhere, why would you tune out and miss half your life?

    I don't; they gave me mostly unrestricted internet here where I can learn new things I am interested in, and talk to you fun people! I'd prefer to do this at home with no pants on, but doing it at work while wearing pants allows me to afford said home, and even more fun things.

    Ideally you would not want to be in my situation, I get that. A job you're interested in, or that at least engages you and rewards extra effort is better (at least it is for me). But for people not in a situation where putting forth more than the minimum effort benefits them in any way, why put forth that effort?

    Your point on learning is a good one - ideally you learn what you need to get out and do something more fulfilling. I know when I was entry level and bored I took something like 50-100 classes off the training site licenses we had. It was a huge factor in selling myself to get promoted.

  • Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    It is this rather toxic environment where "exceeds expectations" is the new "minimum" while "minimum" can mean "let's look for an excuse to get rid of this guy." I recall the Dean of my school saying "employers don't want people who just come in and do the 40 hours a week," and my thought is "man, unless i'm having the time of my life on the job, you can bet my ass is out the door at 5:00:00 unless my coworker's having a heart attack or my shift replacement didn't show up" (the latter was depressingly often at the last gas station i worked at, though usually that was 5-10 extra minutes, max, which i got paid for.

    There's this inherent belief that the FLSA Exempt employees are there to take time abuse, and i'll definitely look for the door in a place where they expect too much of a time commitment, unless the work itself is a joy.

  • Casually HardcoreCasually Hardcore Once an Asshole. Trying to be better. Registered User regular
    Nothing grinded my gears more, when I was working salary, when it was heavily implied that I was 'slacking' when I only logged in 40 hours a week and was heavily encouraged to log in 50 hours and work my way up to 60 hours.

    Psykoma
  • schussschuss Registered User regular
    Eh, exceeding expectations should have nothing to do with time requirements. If you focus on work most of an 8 hour day and have relatively efficient work practices, you should have no issues. I spent some of my career working extra hours, but most I've spent working pretty normal hours (between 40 and 45) and I'm in a decent spot. Most people just waste a lot of time at work or don't take the time to plan and work effectively or really try to improve their knowledge and ability.

  • STATE OF THE ART ROBOTSTATE OF THE ART ROBOT Registered User regular
    edited November 2015
    edit: wrong forum

    STATE OF THE ART ROBOT on
  • DaimarDaimar A Million Feet Tall of Awesome Registered User regular
    schuss wrote: »
    Eh, exceeding expectations should have nothing to do with time requirements. If you focus on work most of an 8 hour day and have relatively efficient work practices, you should have no issues. I spent some of my career working extra hours, but most I've spent working pretty normal hours (between 40 and 45) and I'm in a decent spot. Most people just waste a lot of time at work or don't take the time to plan and work effectively or really try to improve their knowledge and ability.

    A former boss of mine would only judge people on how many hours your ass was in the chair, they had no other idea on how to tell how much or how little someone was doing. Anyone that worked 40 hours a week was a slacker in their eyes.

    steam_sig.png
    twitch.tv/kragaar
  • MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    When I worked retail I was heavily pressured to work off the clock if things weren't done. And by things I mean carts in the corral while customers were still taking them in a 24 hour Walmart.

    This whole concept of "going above and beyond" to be seen as a good employee can bite my ass. It's predatory and every time I see it happen I want to bring the full extent of the law down on whoever's doing it.

    LovelymanwiththemachinegunDjiemMan in the MistsThirithQuidEncNobodyWordLustDisruptedCapitalistxraydogMysstNarbusGoldenSeducerDerrickjoshofalltradesMagelllessthanpiPsykomaCaptain MarcusKalnaurPreciousBodilyFluidsCptKemzikOatsHappylilElf
  • ThirithThirith Registered User regular
    In my last job I worked with people for whom their job was a mission in life rather than, well, a job. That can be okay - I don't have any issues with people who define themselves largely by their work - but it can also become unhealthy and toxic so quickly. It also quickly becomes inefficient: if one colleague in particular was in charge of a project, she'd put more and more time into it for rapidly diminishing returns. She'd work the entire weekend thinking that the event she was organising would end up so much better, when it fact it might have been a tiny bit better at best, and all that time could've been used so much more productively. It would even have been more productive for her not to work over the weekend, get some actual rest, and then not be tired and anxious all the time, which didn't exactly result in her using her regular working hours most effectively. She did end up getting a nice raise, but she regularly worked 50-60 hours a week for that raise. Personally I think I got the better deal.

    As an employee I'm absolutely willing to put in more hours and do more work if there are relatively well defined crunch times, but only if this means you're able to compensate for that extra time. Any employer who thinks they own me and my spare time and act accordingly, well, they can go and find themselves someone else for my position. I've been lucky so far in that all my employers respected that stance.

    webp-net-resizeimage.jpg
    "Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
    DaimarTicaldfjam
  • schussschuss Registered User regular
    Daimar wrote: »
    schuss wrote: »
    Eh, exceeding expectations should have nothing to do with time requirements. If you focus on work most of an 8 hour day and have relatively efficient work practices, you should have no issues. I spent some of my career working extra hours, but most I've spent working pretty normal hours (between 40 and 45) and I'm in a decent spot. Most people just waste a lot of time at work or don't take the time to plan and work effectively or really try to improve their knowledge and ability.

    A former boss of mine would only judge people on how many hours your ass was in the chair, they had no other idea on how to tell how much or how little someone was doing. Anyone that worked 40 hours a week was a slacker in their eyes.

    That's a crappy boss. If you're in a thought work position, 60 hours is generally LESS productive than 40 due to exhaustion. In addition, you should be judging people based on the work they produce, not the hours in the chair, as anyone can screw off and post to forums 5 out of 10 hours at work and be less productive than a 7.5 hour focused worker.
    Efficiency is to be rewarded, not punished. (/soapbox)

    EncNightDragonJuliusOats
  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    My office (also public sector) has folks like myself, who arrive here an hour early, leave a half hour late, work through lunches and answer emails and do work at home because we strongly beleieve in the purpose of our office. And folks that show up an hour or more late and leave early each day, do barely any work while here, and generally blow through leave time as fast as they get it.

    Neither impacts promotion or salary. I don't get paid in anything but client gratitude for doing my job slavishly well. The coworkers that do barely anything don't get compensated less. In fact, state mandate is that no one can be fired, demoted, promoted, or compensated differently for the same job classification. We actually have no promotional capability in house unless we flip to another entire field or office as a counter-offer.

    I don't do the bare minimum because what we do is important and in many cases peoples future and finances are at stake, so I take it very seriously and keep everything going at some personal expense of time and effort. I am disgusted at those who don't do the same given how poor performance can negatively impact people's lives in a very real way.

    But I also don't blame them for it. There is literally no reason above idealism and a sense of duty to work hard in this job.

    schussQuid
  • PhasenPhasen Hell WorldRegistered User regular
    edited November 2015
    Enc wrote: »
    My office (also public sector) has folks like myself, who arrive here an hour early, leave a half hour late, work through lunches and answer emails and do work at home because we strongly beleieve in the purpose of our office. And folks that show up an hour or more late and leave early each day, do barely any work while here, and generally blow through leave time as fast as they get it.

    Neither impacts promotion or salary. I don't get paid in anything but client gratitude for doing my job slavishly well. The coworkers that do barely anything don't get compensated less. In fact, state mandate is that no one can be fired, demoted, promoted, or compensated differently for the same job classification. We actually have no promotional capability in house unless we flip to another entire field or office as a counter-offer.

    I don't do the bare minimum because what we do is important and in many cases peoples future and finances are at stake, so I take it very seriously and keep everything going at some personal expense of time and effort. I am disgusted at those who don't do the same given how poor performance can negatively impact people's lives in a very real way.

    But I also don't blame them for it. There is literally no reason above idealism and a sense of duty to work hard in this job.

    I think the fact that you are working 10+ hour days is a huge problem and is probably linked to some coworkers not being into their job. It seems to do the job adequately you have to work more time than you are paid to get the job done.

    That is poor management and I sympathize with some of your coworkers that hate their job and do just enough to not get canned. Obviously I do not know these people but generally I think people like to do a good job.

    But I guess you already said that so blerg. I hate poor management.

    Phasen on
    psn: PhasenWeeple
    Lovely
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    edited November 2015
    Madican wrote: »
    When I worked retail I was heavily pressured to work off the clock if things weren't done. And by things I mean carts in the corral while customers were still taking them in a 24 hour Walmart.

    This whole concept of "going above and beyond" to be seen as a good employee can bite my ass. It's predatory and every time I see it happen I want to bring the full extent of the law down on whoever's doing it.

    When I was in retail, I never saw anything like this. When I made supervisor one of the first times I got to yell at somebody was for working off-the-clock - written rule was they were fired, but typical practice in stores was they got yelled at and sent home with no written disciplinary action, because there is so much illegal about having people work off the clock that leaving a paper trail just made everybody involved uneasy and the company had a well known incident where off-the-clock work resulted in an employee, his supervisor, and and the supervisor's direct report manager all getting canned. There was almost certainly more going on there, but that's just the kind of culture corporate pencil pushers create.

    This all goes to what I said in another recent retail work thread - not all retail is created equal. I know for a damn fact that not only to several major retail employers pressure for off-the-clock work, but Target has been known to fire people for NOT doing so... and if anyone tries to blow the whistle or raise a fuss, then they get fired FOR doing so.

    Hevach on
    GethTicaldfjam
  • WordLustWordLust Registered User regular
    edited November 2015
    Back when I was in college I worked retail very briefly, for Kroger, which I would describe as hell. Nobody should have to work a job that shitty.

    Then I went and worked for Half-Price Books for almost two years, and it was like night and day. It was retail, but:
    • You get an entire hour for lunch. Paid. (Kroger: 20 minutes, unpaid.)
    • You get profit sharing (doubles or triples your paycheck 2 or 3 times a year).
    • You get a 50% employee discount. (Compare to Kroger's shitty 10% employee discount.)
    • Everyone is trained on everything in the store, and you swap roles every hour. (Results in a significantly less tedious workday and makes the day go FAST.)
    • You get one free 3-day weekend every month, just because.
    • Every month you also accumulate 1 sick day and 1 vacation day. Vacation is obviously vacation, but sick days can be used as either sick days or personal emergency days (whereas other companies would consider that a dishonest use of sick days if they found out---even though they are not allowed to ask).
    • Sick/vacation time rolls over / stacks almost indefinitely. When I was working there, there was a guy who had been working there for like ten years and had never taken a vacation. So he was like, "You know what? I'm going on vacation for THREE MONTHS," and the company was like, "Sure, okay."
    • They ONLY hire you full-time w/ benefits. None of this "we're going to work you one hour less than the point at which we'd have to start giving you benefits" bullshit that Kroger, Wal-Mart, etc are always fucking doing.
    • When I left the company, they wrote me a check equal to all of the paid vacation time I had not used.

    Also, the benefits were AMAZEBALLS. Frankly, I am currently working a salaried desk job, and sure, the paycheck is great, but the Half-Price Books health/dental benefits were better than my current ones. And actually, the vacation/sick time was probably more generous as well, in the long term.

    Depends on where you work!

    WordLust on
    NaphtaliFryNightDragonWiseManTobesQuidPolaritieDisruptedCapitalistShadowhopeSkeithElvenshaeMan in the MistsSmrtnik
  • Casually HardcoreCasually Hardcore Once an Asshole. Trying to be better. Registered User regular
    edited November 2015
    That's my biggest rub about being a salaried employee. Sure my paychecks are bigger, but the amount of over time I was working meant that I could work the same amount of hours at a lower $/hr rate and make the same amount.

    Casually Hardcore on
  • WordLustWordLust Registered User regular
    edited November 2015
    That's my biggest rub about being a salaried employee. Sure my paychecks are bigger, but the account of over time I was working meant that I could work the same amount of hours at a lower $/hr rate and make the same amount.

    Yeah, salary is both good and bad. It's nice knowing your income is not (technically) tied to hours worked, so budgeting is simpler. On the other hand, there is no overtime and some employers will pay you salary with the expectation that sometimes you'll need to stay after work and put in a few more hours, which is not compensated at all, because salary. (Or from their perspective, it IS compensated, because salary.)

    Then again, on the plus side, an employer paying you salary will respect you more as a human being, even if marginally so. My experience with factories and retail was dehumanizing.

    WordLust on
  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    edited November 2015
    Unless you are both "Manager status" and make over 55k a year you cannot be salaried in the US without overtime compensation.*

    *In moooost cases.

    Enc on
    schuss
  • Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    Enc wrote: »
    Unless you are both "Manager status" and make over 55k a year you cannot be salaried in the US without overtime compensation.*

    *In moooost cases.

    The first point is still a bit of a weasel term.

    NarbusNobodyDelmainShadowhopeSkeithMan in the Mists
  • WordLustWordLust Registered User regular
    Enc wrote: »
    Unless you are both "Manager status" and make over 55k a year you cannot be salaried in the US without overtime compensation.*

    *In moooost cases.

    I am one of those exempt cases, unfortunately.

  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    edited November 2015
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    Enc wrote: »
    Unless you are both "Manager status" and make over 55k a year you cannot be salaried in the US without overtime compensation.*

    *In moooost cases.

    The first point is still a bit of a weasel term.

    Which is why you have to be ~both~ manager and 55k a year. The Mcdonalds 24k a year "managers" led to the legistlation change.

    Enc on
This discussion has been closed.