4 ms·

Does that make them bad employers? I would expect it to be quite logical that employers want to hire the best workers, where the 'best' is those who can process

by roel_v 6y ago

Does that make them bad employers? I would expect it to be quite logical that employers want to hire the best workers, where the 'best' is those who can process the most items. I used to work in a brush factory when I was a teenager (during school holidays). It was basically 8 hours of grabbing a metal clip and s row of brush hairs, slide the latter into the former, put the assembly under a press, put the result in a box. I made the day interesting by getting my movements down exactly so I would get into a flow and even almost dissociate (it was better than it sounds, I was not a sweatshop child laborer). The regular workers would regularly remind me not to 'overwork' myself, and after a few weeks, those 'reminders' turned into near bullying (probably because I was upping the level for what was 'normal' output levels). Was I a bad employee or bad colleague in that case? I don't think so, but ostensibly some others thought differently.

C1sc0cat 6y ago
You just have to remember to slow down when the time and motion person is monitoring your work - its I known way of gaming the system. There's a lot of unwritten rules in factories - I recall being told about how when a big heavy engineering turbine or what have you was close to being delivered ,work slowed right down until the magic brown envelopes arrived. And my source commented even the tea boy got £750 - this was the 70's so a lot of £
- Aeolun 6y ago
  Why would people get envelopes with money if a turbine was delivered?
  - C1sc0cat 6y ago
    They went on a go slow - company paid under the table to hit a delivery date.
    - Aeolun 6y ago
      Ah! Thanks. I missed that implication :)
webmaven 6y ago
> Does that make them bad employers? I would expect it to be quite logical that employers want to hire the best workers, where the 'best' is those who can process the most items. Sure, if by "most items" you really meant "most items at a sustainable rate that won't cause long-term injury, for enough hours to qualify for benefits such as health insurance at a pay-scale sufficient to live on, on a schedule that allows taking care of non-work obligations, etc. " Instead, businesses are optimized to hire those who can do the most for the least pay, are desperate enough to not complain about the working conditions, and burn them out without much concern over any externalities. Particularly galling to me are the "35 hours a week is a part-time job that doesn't qualify for health benefits" (which makes it very difficult to get and keep a second job), and the "we pay in 15m increments rounded down just to make sure you aren't a full time employee" dodges.

by roel_v 6y ago

C1sc0cat 6y ago

You just have to remember to slow down when the time and motion person is monitoring your work - its I known way of gaming the system. There's a lot of unwritten rules in factories - I recall being told about how when a big heavy engineering turbine or what have you was close to being delivered ,work slowed right down until the magic brown envelopes arrived. And my source commented even the tea boy got £750 - this was the 70's so a lot of £

Aeolun 6y ago
Why would people get envelopes with money if a turbine was delivered?
- C1sc0cat 6y ago
  They went on a go slow - company paid under the table to hit a delivery date.
  - Aeolun 6y ago
    Ah! Thanks. I missed that implication :)

webmaven 6y ago

> Does that make them bad employers? I would expect it to be quite logical that employers want to hire the best workers, where the 'best' is those who can process the most items. Sure, if by "most items" you really meant "most items at a sustainable rate that won't cause long-term injury, for enough hours to qualify for benefits such as health insurance at a pay-scale sufficient to live on, on a schedule that allows taking care of non-work obligations, etc. " Instead, businesses are optimized to hire those who can do the most for the least pay, are desperate enough to not complain about the working conditions, and burn them out without much concern over any externalities. Particularly galling to me are the "35 hours a week is a part-time job that doesn't qualify for health benefits" (which makes it very difficult to get and keep a second job), and the "we pay in 15m increments rounded down just to make sure you aren't a full time employee" dodges.