March 7, 2009 at 8:42 am
And productivity is NOT contingent on how many hours I put in (as a matter of fact - after a certain point, the more hours you put in the worse it becomes). So - having fewer days off does NOT indicate that we will be more productive than those who have more.
Nor does having more days off indicate you will be more productive. The average work week in the US is 46 hours and we get, as has already been pointed out, only two weeks of vacation a year plus another two weeks of intermittent holidays. The US has one of the highest productivity rates in the world, so I would guess we have hit upon just the right mix of work and leisure.
Actually, the US has one of the lowest productivity rates per hour worked in the developed world. The French (yep, the French!) are more productive per hour than you guys, but they work far fewer hours (=more leisure time), so their overall GNP-per-capita is lower than yours.
March 7, 2009 at 8:55 am
Tomm Carr (3/6/2009)
Matt Miller (3/6/2009)
With all due respect - what we choose to value above everything else is a cultural thing. Irish does have a point that in our American culture, our JOB seems to have a disproportionate share on the scale used to establish our standing in society.Oh, really? Which society exists where this is not the case? Take me into the deepest parts of the Amazonian jungle and show me the tribe where standing is independent of JOB. (England is not allowed. Brits are just too weird to be used as an example of anything.)
You're taking my statement to the opposite (equally ridiculous) extreme. Here in the US, we seem to value JOB over everything else, and in many cases the "everything else" doesn't even seem to play into the mix.
If you want to see what I mean - take ANY of the European societies. You end up with a much healthier mix of "Work to Live, not live to work". The arts, culture, knowing what someone else's mind is made of rather than what their house is worth, etc... all are important in figuring out where you stand.
All I'm trying to say is that it doesn't have to always be so one-dimensional. Enjoying your work and working hard at should not have to negate having other passions and the time and opportunity to do them.
You're correct about raw output - we are towards the top (the French and Japanese are higher in efficiency than we are). The difference is that we tend to do it at great cost to our own selves, which among other things is why we tend to have much shorter lifespans than some of our counterparts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
March 7, 2009 at 9:24 am
First, NO TO UNIONS!
As far as the "wish list" goes... have you tried just asking for those items? I'm a developer at heart and was forced into management. I don't have the budget to pay top $alarie$ so I have to demonstrate commitment to my staff in other ways. For example, I bought laptops, routers and phones and dropped them into their homes so they can easily telecommute. The incremental cost to the company was roughly $1200 per employee but it eliminated 90% the "out-because-____-is-sick". Everybody wins.
I've got two short people on staff so, I made arrangements to lower their desks, added foot rests and am willing to do whatever else is needed to solve a problem. {Problem = them not being comfortable != their height ;)} This demonstrates to everybody that if they need something to help their productivity that they can come to me and I'll try my best to resolve the issue.
Every year I budget for training. I worked a deal with a local tech training company to permit "unlimited" training for a flat fee. My challenge is to find the time for my staff (and me) to go.
My boss has been happy with what I've done (which works out good for me) since we're able to do more with less.
IMHO: management has the responsibility/challenge to put "golden handcuffs" on employees. Make work life so good where they are so they don't want to go someplace else. Many items are available for the asking. There's no need for a union thug to get into the "protection racket" and require me to pay part of my hard earned money to a group that heads off to a 5-star hotel to discuss how they're going to rip off me and my company (see AFL-CIO this week in Florida).
--Paul Hunter
March 7, 2009 at 10:37 am
Paul,
I think you're in a good situation, and I've had a few of those, but there are many in upper management that don't see things the same. If you'd like to write up something about how you talk to your boss, how you get benefits or how you argued for telecommuting, I think it would make a great article and plenty of people would be interested. Especially in sending it to their bosses!
March 7, 2009 at 11:22 am
The problem with the situation tha tPaul described is there is no protection from "change without notice".
I worked in a similar situation once where stuff like telecommuting was commonplace. Whenever we were feeling under the weather a little, we would work from home. It saved us from having to choose between using our sick leave or coming in to work.
Then we got a new CEO who decided that telecommuting should not be allowed because there is no way to monitor how hard the employees were working. We were no longer allowed to work from home even when we were sick. If we were sick, we had to come in to the office anyway or use sick leave.
The next December, I got really sick and missed almost two full weeks of work. Since I was the only DBA at the company, there came a point where the CEO actually called me at home and asked if I was well enough to work from home because they needed me to do some data mining reports for a meeting with the executive board. I refused.
Shortly thereafter, the staff started quitting one at a time. The CEO was eventually fired, but not until after he had ruined morale and a majority of the staff had gone packing.
March 8, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Firstly a quick reality check for those single blokes out there. People with a family certainly wouldn't be happy with 4x10 hour days let alone 2x20. Being a single mum, I am very happy with my 8 hour days! 😀
What I would really like is some form of paid maternity leave. Australia and the US are the worst in the developed world for this! I have 20 days leave and 5 days sick leave (standard is 10 days sick leave in Australia) plus public holidays and I am NOT giving them up!
I would also like some training. I haven't had any for the last 7 years. I bought my own chair for work and claimed it on tax, I am able to work from home whenever I need to and I prefer to sort out my own health insurance. Yep, paid maternity leave and training would be my focus!
Nicole Bowman
Nothing is forever.
March 8, 2009 at 9:24 pm
I don't agree with paid maternity. A benefit should be equally available to everyone, not just a few. Why should the "single blokes" and those who choose not to have children do more of the work and receive less of the benefits?
March 8, 2009 at 9:40 pm
Robert Davis (3/8/2009)
I don't agree with paid maternity. A benefit should be equally available to everyone, not just a few. Why should the "single blokes" and those who choose not to have children do more of the work and receive less of the benefits?
Don't get me started! You don't "do more of the work" and men tend to receive more pay than women for doing the same job. Women who take maternity leave are behind in their careers and pay levels sometimes permanently and are always behind in retirement benefits. Besides in Australia men are equally able to take parental leave so it isn't just for women. I am sorry but I believe this is a socially ignorant view point.
Nicole Bowman
Nothing is forever.
March 8, 2009 at 9:59 pm
I don't think it's neccessary to start insulting people. I'm speaking of both men and women who take time off of work for the birth of a baby. If one person works 11 months out of the year (discounting 1 month for vacation, holidays, and sick leave) and another works 10 months out of the year and yet the both get paid for the same number of months, then one has done more work and received less benefits than the other.
You bring up a good point. In many places, paid maternity leave is offered only to mothers and not to fathers. Is it a fair practice to only give a benefit to one gender and not another?
This is a barbaric practice, in my opinion. If you don't want your career to be hurt by taking extra time off, then don't have children.
March 9, 2009 at 6:25 am
Nicole Bowman (3/8/2009)
People with a family certainly wouldn't be happy with 4x10 hour days let alone 2x20.What I would really like is some form of paid maternity leave.
Well, I have a 20 month old daughter. I would prefer 4x10 days. Instead of my 5 x 9.5. Although I cant complain about flex when I need it. I'm finishing up my last college course, and I leave early twice a week to get to school for 3:15 (early, eh that's it... Since I start at 6).
Maternity leave? I have a friend of mine. Works for one of those big companies with initials... She got 6 months, paid.
Um baby!
Honor Super Omnia-
Jason Miller
March 9, 2009 at 7:44 am
I had a friend and a co-worker at a former employer (that was unionized) that took 4 months off paid when she had her baby. She did it the hard way by saving up her vacation leave to cover her time off plus we had a program where you could donate your accrued vacation time to someone else that needed to be off for an extensive leave. you had to have at least 120 hours of vacation time accrued to be able to donate, but there were several of us that donated our own vacation time so that she could be off longer.
I think that is a much better plan than just giving away paid maternity leave. This plan helps anyone who needs it, not just the select few that have babies. Most of the people I knew of that got assistance through this program were new mothers, but I knew of at least two people who got assistance due to extended illness. One was being treated for cancer and I don't remember what the other illness was. Our union there wasn't good for much, but one thing they were good for was getting word out if someone was in need of shared leave and trying to drum up support for them.
March 9, 2009 at 8:23 am
Robert Davis (3/9/2009)
I think that is a much better plan than just giving away paid maternity leave. This plan helps anyone who needs it, not just the select few that have babies.
Speaking strictly US here, but PAID maternity/paternity leave is a bonus anywhere. UNPAID maternity/paternity or otherwise leave is a right, per the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA). And any employer who thinks that time off for family emergencies or other medical issues is beyond the pale needs to consider what kind of work/life balance they are promoting, and what their culture of work is doing to their employees.
---------------------------------------------------------
How best to post your question[/url]
How to post performance problems[/url]
Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]
"stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."
March 9, 2009 at 9:45 am
jcrawf02 (3/9/2009)
Speaking strictly US here, but PAID maternity/paternity leave is a bonus anywhere. UNPAID maternity/paternity or otherwise leave is a right, per the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA). And any employer who thinks that time off for family emergencies or other medical issues is beyond the pale needs to consider what kind of work/life balance they are promoting, and what their culture of work is doing to their employees.
I agree completely. However, child birth is not an emergent issue. Even if the pregnancy is unplanned, the child birth isn't. I definitely think people should be allowed to use the paid leave for something like this. I just don't think that the employer should be giving extra paid leave to a subset of employees and not to others. Or even more extreme, I don't think an employer should be forced to give extra paid leave to a subset of employees that is not also given to others.
I would not complain if a company had a benefit program like what my current employer has (I'm a contractor there, so I don't actually get these benefits). My current employer gives paid maternity/paternity leave to mothers and fathers. Additionally, they give paid parental leave to anyone that adopts a child as well. I definitely see this is being fair. If someone isn't able to have children of their own, they can still take advantage of the additional paid leave by adopting.
March 9, 2009 at 10:01 am
Robert Davis (3/9/2009)
jcrawf02 (3/9/2009)
Speaking strictly US here, but PAID maternity/paternity leave is a bonus anywhere. UNPAID maternity/paternity or otherwise leave is a right, per the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA). And any employer who thinks that time off for family emergencies or other medical issues is beyond the pale needs to consider what kind of work/life balance they are promoting, and what their culture of work is doing to their employees.I agree completely. However, child birth is not an emergent issue. Even if the pregnancy is unplanned, the child birth isn't. I definitely think people should be allowed to use the paid leave for something like this. I just don't think that the employer should be giving extra paid leave to a subset of employees and not to others. Or even more extreme, I don't think an employer should be forced to give extra paid leave to a subset of employees that is not also given to others.
As a current employee of a Managed Care plan (HMO) - gotta tell you, child birth is definitely still an emergent issue at times, although it's more planned than getting hit by a bus, for sure.
As for the forcing of extra leave to a subset of employees, I think it comes down to lobbying for your rights, somebody lobbied successfully for these rights, if we want to expand it to all employees, then we need to lobby for that. Current system may not be fair, so let's work the system to make it so. (Idealist, I know)
And then that takes us back to Steve's original idea, what's the wishlist, ignoring the practicality of how we get there. 😉
---------------------------------------------------------
How best to post your question[/url]
How to post performance problems[/url]
Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]
"stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."
March 9, 2009 at 10:31 am
Union or none, the ultimate goal would be to manage one's finances in a manner that allows one the freedom to make the choices they desire, rather than being forced into bad situations.
I personally only recently realized how possible this truly is on any income, and how extremely important it is also. I now look at personal finances far different than I ever did before. This reality allays most of the concerns I have seen expressed on this topic, at least for me.
Viewing 15 posts - 91 through 105 (of 157 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply