4 ms·
That sounds like they abused your monkey-brain's inability to measure the value of your time and that canoe trip. In short, that would almost make me more pisse
by benmathes 16y ago
That sounds like they abused your monkey-brain's inability to measure the value of your time and that canoe trip. In short, that would almost make me more pissed off than no reward. No reward at all is cheap, a relative-pittance of an award is cheap and duplicitous.
The next time they ask you to work an extra 50% for a few months, don't. Instead work your normal hours and give them a banana; that would only be fair.
- varjag 16y agoI think you read too much into it. It is obvious both parties realize canoe trip is not a compensation for work, but a mere token of recognition. I.e. "although we can't afford/not willing to compensate it we are aware of the extra work you put in". Did execs got extra for themselves out of it? Maybe, maybe not. Without knowing the specifics and the situation of the company it is meaningless to speculate. Is it "fair"? Probably not. But then, in the military there were thousands of people who had to risk their lives and got just a shitty medal out of it - not even a canoe trip. Life isn't about fairness, but I think even a token recognition is better than the other most likely outcome - no recognition of your effort.
- aaronbrethorst 16y agoAt least in the military you're serving a higher purpose than 'maximizing shareholder value.' Assuming, of course, that you're not employed by Xe.