81–90 of 209 posts
On a serious note, there are obvious restrictions on who can work from home with intellectual jobs preferred over physical labor. And wasn't it always this divide? Even in communist countries it was sought after to get a college degree and perform intellectual work because it's better paid and has advantages.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I totally understand the reaction. Then again, people with kids have it hard enough, let alone those that with low paying jobs. When that happens to me, I get annoyed, but then, I remind myself that I get to exit the call while the other person has to stay in that environment, trying to hustle for money, and I try to show them as much kindness and grace as is possible for me in that moment.
When this lady applied for the technical phone support job, did she mention that her toddler would be on the calls? If her manager were to “secret shopper” call in, how much kindness and grace would they show for being forced to sit though a children’s cartoon while quoting 5-figure invoice numbers back and forth?
The same inequality between c level and frontline workers exists on so many levels with other perks is it possible that the c level just don’t want to lose its privileges? In Europe as a manager you get subsidized cars where the company pays for gas, private corner offices, equity or special bonus programs not always are benefits packages available for frontline workers… and now they talk about inequality if more sta…
I think that this is partly because in Europe taxation is progressive and it quickly becomes quite high. (In the UK £100k-£120k is effectively taxed at 60%+ more if you have young kids) So there is a point where giving someone 10k take home pay rise costs the business much more than giving a frontline worker a 10k take home pay rise. But an EV car in the UK is taxed 98% less than the same amount in cash. Rest zones,…
(Numbers approximate)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That comment may apply to the general topic often, but this article clearly mentions "just pay them more" as a solution. It's really quite a balanced read.
Sure, but I'm positing that pay here is the entire issue (hence forest for the trees) comment. People tend to associate WFH with a cushy job. You can find a hundred side effects of that - people who want to work in their underpants, not get ready for work, not shower, have a flexible schedule, etc., as individual 'inequalities.' If fixing the pay makes other complaints disappear, were they ever a primary factor? FWIW…
i don't think this is the right question.
of course, if i get paid more, i am willing to put up with worse work conditions. (to a degree). so the mere fact that pay makes the problem go away is not an indicator that this was not a real problem.
more pay lets me compensate the problem otherwise. for example it may mean that me or my partner can reduce work hours instead of working from home.
I will agree to abolish the inequality caused by WfH when CEOs agree to abolish the inequality caused by salary discrepancies (i.e. never). We leave in an inequal society, and for good reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wouldn't it be more relevant to determine if their potential hire has had an undiscovered affair in the past, or is currently cheating? Why aren't they doing this now if it was really about the potential for blackmail?
I don't know how the federal government works but I am positive that in the private sector evidence of extramarital affairs can cause your clearance application to be rejected.
I was a carefree recent college grad and sheepishly admitted to smoking weed a couple of times, having been assured by older friends that admitting to some past experimentation was a lot better than hiding it. “Is there anyone you don’t want to find out about this?” was the agent’s response.
“Nah, my parents know…”
Later, a friend who had assiduously avoided even being around weed took ages to get his clearance. We theorized that the holdup was DIA being suspicious that he didn’t admit to such minor drug use, and wondered what else he might be hiding.
Habitual gambling still gets the side-eye for the same reason general financial problems do: higher susceptibility to the temptation of a few thousand dollars to let something slip or to look the other way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is some implicit assumption that drug testing is a safety measure. I am quite convinced it is a productivity measure.
it is neither. Otherwise, you'd see productivity being better in places that allow drug testing of normal employees and worse off in places that do not. But that's not the case: Retail employees in Norway aren't really less productive than those in the US. Plus, if it really were a productivity measure, why would you not drug test more professionals and salaried employees? Does their productivity not matter? Wouldn't…
Depending on the drug, and the circumstances.
I'm sorry to say.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When this lady applied for the technical phone support job, did she mention that her toddler would be on the calls? If her manager were to “secret shopper” call in, how much kindness and grace would they show for being forced to sit though a children’s cartoon while quoting 5-figure invoice numbers back and forth?
To emphasise she probably didn’t realise their was background noise. I don’t phone call centra much but the background noise in some is very frustrating.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I totally understand the reaction. Then again, people with kids have it hard enough, let alone those that with low paying jobs. When that happens to me, I get annoyed, but then, I remind myself that I get to exit the call while the other person has to stay in that environment, trying to hustle for money, and I try to show them as much kindness and grace as is possible for me in that moment.
When this lady applied for the technical phone support job, did she mention that her toddler would be on the calls? If her manager were to “secret shopper” call in, how much kindness and grace would they show for being forced to sit though a children’s cartoon while quoting 5-figure invoice numbers back and forth?
Unsurprisingly, workers whose skills are in high demand and short supply (eg highly educated, highly experienced people) can demand better work conditions such as pay and commute flexibility.
Honestly a lot of the “low skill jobs” actually have a high skill threshold but we just arbitrarily decide to suppress them. Take somewhere like Starbucks. They pay them minimum wage, churn em constantly so they’re never trained and make them work arbitrary shifts like 4 hour -> 2 hour unpaid break -> additional 4 hours. Those staff end up “low skilled” but in reality someone who was treated fairly and respected woul…
Problem is VCs don’t fund coffee shops, otherwise Starbucks would be “disrupted” overnight.