2 ms·
I would imagine you don't raise expectations with the inten to fire, you raise them because you hadn't set them appropriately before. If there was some assumpt
by djohnston 4y ago
I would imagine you don't raise expectations with the inten to fire, you raise them because you hadn't set them appropriately before.
If there was some assumption that workers would give 110% for whatever, but now you know they'll give 100%, you're certainly free to raise the expectations next performance cycle.
Are you saying that's a violation of workers rights?
- As_You_Wish 4y agoIt is a violation of workers rights, and personally, I'm going to expect my salary to go from $100,000 per year to $110,000 per year. Give me the solution you seek to solve, we agree on a price, I do the solution, I get paid what we agreed. But, I'm not going to start cleaning the toilets every night because the manager wants me to "give 110%." I mean, if for some reason the manager or owner asked me to fix the toilets because they are backing up, and I have the expertise, and there's a big client coming in tomorrow that will quadruple revenue, yeah, I'd do it. But that is not putting in 110%. That's just...common sense? But if they wanted me to do it every week, for 110%, no. Not hired to do that. I'm not working 110% for anyone. Unless we renegotiate my contract and I get paid more.
- RalfWausE 4y agoIf you pay for 100% and expect 110%... now... i wouldnt say this violates workers rights but common sense