6 ms·

I completely agree , also , Us as employees we need to learn when to say stop , i know we all work hard and we want to be the an important asset. But remember

I completely agree , also , Us as employees we need to learn when to say stop , i know we all work hard and we want to be the an important asset. But remember going the extra mile and getting recognition for it will only last until the next downtime/problem which could be tomorrow.

pjc50 11y ago
Us as employees we need to learn when to say stop There's a word for this, beginning with "U", that a lot of people don't like.
- bechampion 11y ago
  i know , i hate Unicorns too!
- barking 11y ago
  And (in the UK at least) the demise of unions has seen the earnings ratio of company bosses to employees rise to levels not seen since the 19th or early 20th century
  - mattmanser 11y ago
    That's happening across the world at the moment isn't it? Doesn't seem to be linked to the demise of unions. Admittedly, there needs to be a new version of unions, the next evolution. We need the next Marx to bring the pendulum back.
    - pjc50 11y ago
      demise of unions The demise of unions is also a general phenomenon across the western world. It's not helped by the migration of lots of factory industries to parts of the world without strong unions and with plenty of hungry workers. Ultimately unions have only one effective negotiating tool: the strike. And if it's easy to replace striking workers, it's not an effective tool. It's also very disruptive (in the bad sense) when it is effective. UK public opinion turned against unions when they rationed electricity to 3 days a week. We need a better check on unlimited greed than the blunt threat of going up against the wall in a Communist revolution. A lot of people have cited Piketty as the next Marx, but there don't seem to be Piketty-ist factions.
      - barking 11y ago
        As I'm sure you know, it wasn't just globalisation, Margaret Thatcher's intention was to spancel the unions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_labour_law_in_the_United_Kingdom#Conservative_government https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_labour_law_in_the_U...
        bechampion 11y ago
        Unions are noisy lately here in London , i'll have 2 hours commute next week thanks to them.
        barking 11y ago
        The public sector is the only sector that is still strongly unionised while also being the sector with least necessity for it
        pjc50 11y ago
        Yes - although she wasn't the first or only person to propose that. That Wikipedia page leaves out both "In Place Of Strife" (1969 Labour government), and the three day week itself. The disruption caused by high levels of industrial action greatly reduced the support of the public for it.
      - toyg 11y ago
        > plenty of hungry workers. aka a reserve army of labour, just on a global scale. It's the XI century but Engels still makes quite a bit of sense when you think about it. However you look at it, the game is still fundamentally the same; it's just that one side can play it so much better than the other. It's like that period in the '90s when football clubs using the offside trap and applying pressure up the pitch dominated the European scene. > Ultimately unions have only one effective negotiating tool: the strike. That's not correct. Striking is the only legal negotiating tool; but it's not always been legal, nor the only tool. Striking is a type of industrial sabotage; being the most innocuous one, it's the only one that was made legal (and even there, its legal deployment has been progressively restricted in most countries since the '80s). If shit really hits the fan, a compact unionized workforce can do much more damage than "down tools". We've forgotten a lot about industrial relations, sooner or later we'll have to relearn old lessons. > UK public opinion turned against unions when they rationed electricity to 3 days a week. That's a problem for public services only (most recently, with the London tube). Unions in public sector and public services refuse to understand that their exposure damages the whole movement. It's a historical issue in most countries, a huge strategic problem for any progressive movement. Most private companies likely wouldn't get public support in a fight with unions, but because public-service ones can (and will) abuse their role, the whole movement gets a bad rep. > A lot of people have cited Piketty as the next Marx Unfortunately, with all due respect, Piketty's contribution is nowhere as significant as Marx. Piketty tried to prove what a lot of people suspected, but I don't think he managed to reveal so many new elements about the structure of the game in the same way as Marx did, nor did he articulate solutions as powerfully as Marx did. Besides, there is little point in waiting for a messiah; what is required is a combination of analysis and prognosis that can resonate with an atomized and oevereducated white-collar workforce.
    - wowoc 11y ago
      Speaking of which: http://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Piketty/dp/067443000X/ http://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Pi...
- andrewmu 11y ago
  Unemployment?
- dimman 11y ago
  Yep, it's as simple as that; almost. There's good ways to do it and there's bad ways to do it. 1) Figure out what's wrong at an early stage, why it's wrong and come up with a proposal of how it could be improved. Find solutions. 2) Always fix things despite the unreasonable amount of work or pressure. You wait until you'r almost broken and then say you can't take this anymore, it's too much. Problem needs to be fixed right away or you'll lose it. We very much create our own situations too unfortunately.
- serge2k 11y ago
  I really think a union at Amazon would probably fix a lot of issues, but would cost most of the things about the culture that are actually good. I do think the FC workers should be in a union. Absolutely.
  - boxy310 11y ago
    I really think that if Amazon is only surviving with a razor-thin profit margin and they only do that because they treat their employees like beat-up warehouse equipment, then maybe it shouldn't exist as a company. My opinion of them has really downgraded from a "Sears" of the internet (back when Sears actually had a good reputation) towards more of a "Walmart" of the internet.
    - toothbrush 11y ago
      ...and that's not to mention their systematic tax evasion. I agree that the human cost is the bigger problem at the moment, but i really get worked up about the multinationals earning massive profit and paying single-digit percent taxes. That's another rant, though.
  - rrss1122 11y ago
    I think it would be good if the FC workers unionize. It would greatly increase the speed of development for automation solutions and benefit robotics as a whole.
- serge2k 11y ago
  I really think a union at Amazon would probably fix a lot of issues, but would cost most of the things about the culture that are actually good. I do think the FC workers should be in a union. Absolutely.
- TheCondor 11y ago
  It seems to me, as an outsider that has rebuffed them several times, that they've found this subculture of abuse takers that will just sort of deal with it. I know their pay isn't stratospheric, certainly not a shattering lifestyle change to leave. Many seem drawn to the allure of the name, it's a well known tech company.. Are these types capable of forming a union? by the time they are willing to stick their neck out to do something like form a union, it's just so easy to turn the page and leave. I worked for a satellite TV provider years and years back, it was similar, very abusive, very demanding. I did my project and left, it just wasn't a good fit. In retrospect, the people that stayed all seem to be somehow damaged. It was just unhealthy, emotionally, I don't remember anyone that was actually happy in life being there. Also very similar to Amazon, they sell to the lowest common denominator, Amazon is effectively going toe to toe with Walmart, more so than google or apple.
- deskamess 11y ago
  For me its past 'like'... I think we need them. Abuses will continue without some sort of oversight (legal or behavioral); corporations are beholden to their share holders and not their employees. Medical/construction workers have established safety and paid overtime policies going for them and we need to emulate something like that. In addition, we (IT workers) should look at other avenues. Like the AMA (medical) and ALA (legal) professions we need an organization (or PAC/lobby) with political clout that influences law makers and fights for IT employee/labor rights. I would love for a David Boies or someone with that type of clout/knowledge to grow such an organization.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
sshagent 11y ago
this is pretty much what i took from this story. its not pleasant granted, but really you need to push back occasionally. Constant call outs is really an issue the management need to resolve so its not such a burden.
72deluxe 11y ago
Without sounding too cynical, loyalty to a company (working out of hours) is not always returned as loyalty from the company. They wouldn't be pleased you turning up a few hours late every day to compensate for your extra time outside work. Of course, time off in lieu may be arranged.
- eitally 11y ago
  To be fair, it depends on the company and often the individual manager. I gave people comp time almost all the time they were forced into some extraordinary work.
- omouse 11y ago
  Yep I got dinged for coming into work at 11am when I had stayed till 11pm the night before and had done weekend work. Fuck exploitation.
  - a_e_k 11y ago
    Yikes! First company I ever worked for wasn't particularly flashy, but I did like that they had a "12-hour rule" to guard against that. The policy was that you wouldn't be expected back at work in fewer than 12 hours after you'd left the day before.
    - pm24601 11y ago
      Nice simple rule!

pjc50 11y ago

Us as employees we need to learn when to say stop There's a word for this, beginning with "U", that a lot of people don't like.

bechampion 11y ago
i know , i hate Unicorns too!
barking 11y ago
And (in the UK at least) the demise of unions has seen the earnings ratio of company bosses to employees rise to levels not seen since the 19th or early 20th century
- mattmanser 11y ago
  That's happening across the world at the moment isn't it? Doesn't seem to be linked to the demise of unions. Admittedly, there needs to be a new version of unions, the next evolution. We need the next Marx to bring the pendulum back.
  - pjc50 11y ago
    demise of unions The demise of unions is also a general phenomenon across the western world. It's not helped by the migration of lots of factory industries to parts of the world without strong unions and with plenty of hungry workers. Ultimately unions have only one effective negotiating tool: the strike. And if it's easy to replace striking workers, it's not an effective tool. It's also very disruptive (in the bad sense) when it is effective. UK public opinion turned against unions when they rationed electricity to 3 days a week. We need a better check on unlimited greed than the blunt threat of going up against the wall in a Communist revolution. A lot of people have cited Piketty as the next Marx, but there don't seem to be Piketty-ist factions.
    - barking 11y ago
      As I'm sure you know, it wasn't just globalisation, Margaret Thatcher's intention was to spancel the unions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_labour_law_in_the_United_Kingdom#Conservative_government https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_labour_law_in_the_U...
      - bechampion 11y ago
        Unions are noisy lately here in London , i'll have 2 hours commute next week thanks to them.
        barking 11y ago
        The public sector is the only sector that is still strongly unionised while also being the sector with least necessity for it
      - pjc50 11y ago
        Yes - although she wasn't the first or only person to propose that. That Wikipedia page leaves out both "In Place Of Strife" (1969 Labour government), and the three day week itself. The disruption caused by high levels of industrial action greatly reduced the support of the public for it.
    - toyg 11y ago
      > plenty of hungry workers. aka a reserve army of labour, just on a global scale. It's the XI century but Engels still makes quite a bit of sense when you think about it. However you look at it, the game is still fundamentally the same; it's just that one side can play it so much better than the other. It's like that period in the '90s when football clubs using the offside trap and applying pressure up the pitch dominated the European scene. > Ultimately unions have only one effective negotiating tool: the strike. That's not correct. Striking is the only legal negotiating tool; but it's not always been legal, nor the only tool. Striking is a type of industrial sabotage; being the most innocuous one, it's the only one that was made legal (and even there, its legal deployment has been progressively restricted in most countries since the '80s). If shit really hits the fan, a compact unionized workforce can do much more damage than "down tools". We've forgotten a lot about industrial relations, sooner or later we'll have to relearn old lessons. > UK public opinion turned against unions when they rationed electricity to 3 days a week. That's a problem for public services only (most recently, with the London tube). Unions in public sector and public services refuse to understand that their exposure damages the whole movement. It's a historical issue in most countries, a huge strategic problem for any progressive movement. Most private companies likely wouldn't get public support in a fight with unions, but because public-service ones can (and will) abuse their role, the whole movement gets a bad rep. > A lot of people have cited Piketty as the next Marx Unfortunately, with all due respect, Piketty's contribution is nowhere as significant as Marx. Piketty tried to prove what a lot of people suspected, but I don't think he managed to reveal so many new elements about the structure of the game in the same way as Marx did, nor did he articulate solutions as powerfully as Marx did. Besides, there is little point in waiting for a messiah; what is required is a combination of analysis and prognosis that can resonate with an atomized and oevereducated white-collar workforce.
  - wowoc 11y ago
    Speaking of which: http://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Piketty/dp/067443000X/ http://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Pi...
andrewmu 11y ago
Unemployment?
dimman 11y ago
Yep, it's as simple as that; almost. There's good ways to do it and there's bad ways to do it. 1) Figure out what's wrong at an early stage, why it's wrong and come up with a proposal of how it could be improved. Find solutions. 2) Always fix things despite the unreasonable amount of work or pressure. You wait until you'r almost broken and then say you can't take this anymore, it's too much. Problem needs to be fixed right away or you'll lose it. We very much create our own situations too unfortunately.
serge2k 11y ago
I really think a union at Amazon would probably fix a lot of issues, but would cost most of the things about the culture that are actually good. I do think the FC workers should be in a union. Absolutely.
- boxy310 11y ago
  I really think that if Amazon is only surviving with a razor-thin profit margin and they only do that because they treat their employees like beat-up warehouse equipment, then maybe it shouldn't exist as a company. My opinion of them has really downgraded from a "Sears" of the internet (back when Sears actually had a good reputation) towards more of a "Walmart" of the internet.
  - toothbrush 11y ago
    ...and that's not to mention their systematic tax evasion. I agree that the human cost is the bigger problem at the moment, but i really get worked up about the multinationals earning massive profit and paying single-digit percent taxes. That's another rant, though.
- rrss1122 11y ago
  I think it would be good if the FC workers unionize. It would greatly increase the speed of development for automation solutions and benefit robotics as a whole.
serge2k 11y ago
I really think a union at Amazon would probably fix a lot of issues, but would cost most of the things about the culture that are actually good. I do think the FC workers should be in a union. Absolutely.
TheCondor 11y ago
It seems to me, as an outsider that has rebuffed them several times, that they've found this subculture of abuse takers that will just sort of deal with it. I know their pay isn't stratospheric, certainly not a shattering lifestyle change to leave. Many seem drawn to the allure of the name, it's a well known tech company.. Are these types capable of forming a union? by the time they are willing to stick their neck out to do something like form a union, it's just so easy to turn the page and leave. I worked for a satellite TV provider years and years back, it was similar, very abusive, very demanding. I did my project and left, it just wasn't a good fit. In retrospect, the people that stayed all seem to be somehow damaged. It was just unhealthy, emotionally, I don't remember anyone that was actually happy in life being there. Also very similar to Amazon, they sell to the lowest common denominator, Amazon is effectively going toe to toe with Walmart, more so than google or apple.
deskamess 11y ago
For me its past 'like'... I think we need them. Abuses will continue without some sort of oversight (legal or behavioral); corporations are beholden to their share holders and not their employees. Medical/construction workers have established safety and paid overtime policies going for them and we need to emulate something like that. In addition, we (IT workers) should look at other avenues. Like the AMA (medical) and ALA (legal) professions we need an organization (or PAC/lobby) with political clout that influences law makers and fights for IT employee/labor rights. I would love for a David Boies or someone with that type of clout/knowledge to grow such an organization.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

sshagent 11y ago

this is pretty much what i took from this story. its not pleasant granted, but really you need to push back occasionally. Constant call outs is really an issue the management need to resolve so its not such a burden.

72deluxe 11y ago

Without sounding too cynical, loyalty to a company (working out of hours) is not always returned as loyalty from the company. They wouldn't be pleased you turning up a few hours late every day to compensate for your extra time outside work. Of course, time off in lieu may be arranged.

eitally 11y ago
To be fair, it depends on the company and often the individual manager. I gave people comp time almost all the time they were forced into some extraordinary work.
omouse 11y ago
Yep I got dinged for coming into work at 11am when I had stayed till 11pm the night before and had done weekend work. Fuck exploitation.
- a_e_k 11y ago
  Yikes! First company I ever worked for wasn't particularly flashy, but I did like that they had a "12-hour rule" to guard against that. The policy was that you wouldn't be expected back at work in fewer than 12 hours after you'd left the day before.
  - pm24601 11y ago
    Nice simple rule!