Dude, the whole thread is you denigrating and arguing. The basic premise is “here’s how I do things, which is smart and awesome; it’s inconcievable to me that anyone would do anything else”.
Your reply to me just confirmed it (again).
Of course. If they’re not actually being used for anything then why put them on in the first place? I’d also not bother with cover sheets if I discovered that the people doing TPS reports didn’t actually care about having them even if other people put them there, at least until someone commented. What you’re describing is clearly a useless ‘requirement’ that might have served a purpose in the past but now is just a requirement out of inertia. I don’t see why you’d take pride in wasting paper and spending time on useless busywork that clearly doesn’t serve an actual purpose, at least the ‘slackers’ are better for the environment than you are.
Also, most companies with written company policies have some catch 22s thrown in, like places that both require manager pre-approval for overtime but also don’t allow you to leave at the end of a shift if you’re engaged with a customer. So trying to religiously follow ‘requirements’ is a fools game anyway.
Is it? Can you quote a post of mine that denigrated someone? I bet you can’t.
But they are being used for something. There is just no punishment for not doing it. But you know it’s a requirement, just your coworkers stop doing it because they know there is no punishment for not doing it. Do you stop doing it too?
There are many work policies that I don’t follow because I find them to be a pain in the ass. For instance, we are supposed to restart our computers at the end of the day, but I usually just walk away from my desk and let my computer fall asleep on its own. That way, I can jump right back into whatever I was working on when I come back the next day. If I restart, I’ve got to try to remember what the hell I was doing the day before in addition to waiting for my computer to get its shit together. And I’m usually not in the mood for either of these things early in the morning.
I don’t break this rule because everyone else does. I break it because it gets in the way of my productivity and general well-being. I also break it because it isn’t enforced. I wouldn’t do it if I believed there would be negative ramifications waiting for me.
There are only two employees in my particular department. We are cube neighbors. Every day I come in 15-20 minutes before my coworker does and I always leave an hour after he does. We are supposed to work the same number of hours. It is a mystery to me how he gets away with it. I feel some resentment that he flaunts this rule so flagrantly without any penalty.
His behavior hasn’t affected my work ethic. However, it has affected my attitude towards following rules in general. I’m not rebellious enough to steal hours each week from my employer, but do I limit my breaks to fifteen minutes every day like we’re supposed to? No. Do I limit my internet surfing to 30 minutes? No. Do I let my boss know a day in advance every time I need to take personal leave? No. As long as no one gives my coworker a hard time for his time transgressions, I see no point in stressing out over mine.
Most people are getting paid to do a job. They’re not getting paid to do the best possible job they are capable of.
That’s the way most job relationships work; the employer will pay the least amount that will keep the employee from quitting and the employee will perform the least amount of work that will keep the employer from firing him. Both sides are acting in their own self-interest.
If you’ve been convinced that it’s okay for your boss to act in his self-interest but it’s wrong for you to act in your self-interest, then yes, you’re kind of a sucker.
Like I said, if it’s a ‘requirement’ but no one actually cares about it or actually uses it for anything, then of course I’m not going to waste time and paper doing it. If it’s actually used, then someone will complain that people aren’t doing it, and there will be ‘punishment’ (usually in the form of a manager saying ‘hey, we need you to do this thing,’ escalating to ‘hey, we’re going to have to put this on your review’ or something like that if it continues). If there’s no actual complaint from not doing it, then it’s not a real requirement. Like I said before, I’ve never worked a job where all of the BS procedures that were listed off somewhere were actually followed in practice.
You can’t answer any of these questions without context.
Say Dilbert is doing 3 times what Wally is doing, and making tons of money for the company, at the expense of his private life. At review time the PHB tells them that because of financial constraints (the CEO needs a new yacht) neither of them are getting a raise. Is Dilbert’s pride in his work worth it? As someone said upthread, I don’t have a lot of pride in getting played for a sucker.
I’ve done tons of performance reviews from the management side, and all we care about is what you produce, not whether you have pride in it or how long you work. One of my best people took naps every afternoon. Fine with me.
Lots of places in Silicon Valley at least do a distorted Deming review, in which you have some superstars, some losers, and everyone else is the same. If you are not in the superstar range, putting in extra work is not going to help at all. My last company didn’t give raises at all in that range for a couple of years, fine for the recession not so fine for the recovery. People left, but HR sent an outraged memo about how they looked at the parking lot and noticed people were coming in later and leaving earlier. No shit. If you aren’t going to be rewarded for spending time away from your family, why do it?
What’s your experience, btw? Mine is 36 years of working and managing.
Yup. My motto was “anything not worth doing is not worth doing well.” I never had to do cover sheets, but I have been on clearly dead projects. Ain’t no reason to put in extra work on them. There is nothing wrong with slacking off on a death march.
Requirements such as TPS reports, must have some sort of consequence if not completed. Otherwise they’re not a requirement. People aren’t stupid and they’re not robots. If my co-worker gets a promotion and doesn’t do the TPS reports, what’s the point? Unless as an employee you prefer to be bitter, or as a manager, ur just ignorant.
I guess I must be super old-school. I believe you should work your ass off even if they’re not paying you what you are worth, but only for a limited period of time. If you continue to bust ass and they don’t notice and/or offer you a raise THEN it’s unfair and you should walk. But to deliberately shirk and do a worse job just because YOU think the boss could pay you more than he is? That’s lame with a capital L-A-M-E.
Prove your value and appropriate compensation should come your way (May the Invisible Hand bless you). If it doesn’t? Move on. But for Og’s sake don’t be a sulky, petty, four year-old.
Sure. But in that scenario you can’t say “Nobody else cares so why should I?” because clearly someone cares - the TPS person. If it turns out they actually *don’t *care - then yeah, neither do I
Not working your ass off is not equivalent to shirking.
I agree that you should give the company the benefit of the doubt. But after your hard work doesn’t get rewarded, then you can cut back. And not everyone can leave very easily. Sometimes cutting back and having a life is a good compromise.
This was the attitude of whole school systems some years ago. I read a news interview of a principal of a school that had abolished the honor roll. The honor roll was disheartening to less gifted students, he said.
The reporter asked, shouldn’t bright students be recognized for their efforts and hard work some way?
The principal replied that they should be helping their fellow students improve their skills.
Yeah, I was livid. Some of those slackers were my worst enemies. I would be hesitant to warn those guys about a school shooter, if we had school shooters back then. No fucking way I was helping them with homework for nothing.
Maybe team sports should’ve been abolished too. I’m sure those kids who didn’t make the team felt disheartened by it.
In similar situations throughout my career, my strategy is to ask “why?” A lot of the time, the knee-jerk response is “it’s procedure.” Then you drill down and discover the procedure is hugely outdated (“We need it for the keypunch machine” or “Back when we used DOS…”), which is why no one complains when it’s not done. I’ve worked places where people generate dozens of reports no one looks at because “it’s procedure.” Worse, they were empty reports, like account statements for accounts they no longer existed.
If the requirement’s legitimate, sure, I comply even if everyone else slacks off. If it’s just pointless bureaucracy, I stop but unlike all the other people I know why it’s okay to stop doing it.
Alternatively, you can continue to stay at your current place of employment and keep doing the bare minimum as pleasantly as possible. As long as you’re getting paid, why not? Your employer should let you know if the bare minimum isn’t good enough for their purposes. So until that happens, don’t worry.
Of course I do. In the jobs I’ve held, being in the top quarter among my co-workers has never involved putting forth my best effort.
Where did you get this idea of self-worth? Where did you get your attitude and work ethic? I’m going to guess they are based on other people’s attitudes and work ethics: specifically, your parents and extended family, your religious community, and/or military training. Why would you permit that?
I’d be interested to know if you were explicitly indoctrinated in the protestant work ethic. Calvinism? Presbyterianism?
Specifically regarding this “reality” tv situation that troubled you, you seem to not understand how a person can get demoralized by frustration. You have no experience with morale affecting the performance of a team? Emotional contagion?
Based on the question you asked in the OP, what you’re talking about is morale.
Yes, people should be internally motivated to keep working even when the place you’re working at is falling apart around you. But reality is that a dysfunctional place leads to the attitude you’re asking about.
When management doesn’t hold people accountable, slashes wages, removes resources, makes the job untenable, people begin to check out. When that happens often the even the best workers lose morale and checkout too. Sometimes you just can’t care more than the business owners/management do.
What you’re describing I’ve seen and lived and it’s usually the endpoint of a bad managerial situation that has sapped the enjoyment out of work. Sometimes self care becomes more important than pride of work.
I’ve never actually worked at a restaurant or warehouse, but is that really the way the jobs used as examples in the OP are typically run? This seems utterly at odds with how the real world works, especially if you look at corporate jobs where raises tend to be only at 6 month or one year time frame and limited to a certain percentage.
Also, since the vast majority of places don’t hand out huge raises on a short schedule, if at all, what do you do if your ‘show up and burn yourself out’ strategy doesn’t work at any of your local jobs? Do you pack up and move to another area and hope it works there while ditching your old circle of friends, family, and personal interests?