3 ms·
Don't even need higher pay. Just don't be an asshole boss when folk need to be sick. Else, the burden is transferred to the clients! Would all be easier with b
by djbusby 3y ago
Don't even need higher pay. Just don't be an asshole boss when folk need to be sick. Else, the burden is transferred to the clients!
Would all be easier with better health-care options and assurances of an improved social-saftey-net.
- cj 3y agoI’m not convinced social safety nets would fix worker reliability (people skipping work when they’re not sick) Work ethic, reliability, trustworthiness, etc are character traits that aren’t easily changed by a better HR policy or safety nets. Unreliable workers will still be unreliable regardless of how much they’re paid.
- throw_m239339 3y ago> Work ethic, reliability, trustworthiness, Aren't character traits that are encouraged by slave wages either. You care about these values? Employees care about money, "values" don't fill stomachs or pay the rent. this is about getting paid. If I need money I'll show up to work even if I'm sick otherwise I don't get any money, I don't care about the rest, just like the employer doesn't care about me when I'm sick. You really think that these food processing companies/restaurants pay employees enough to get some some of allegiance from them or something? that's absurd.
- fnordpiglet 3y agoI thought the issue being discussed overall was presenteeism in food industry jobs causing customers to get sick. Work ethic isn’t created by not allowing humans to isolate when they’re ill either. It’s a public health issue. Will people take off sick when they’re not? Of course. I don’t think that has a social stratum. I take off when I’m not sick using my sick leave as a “mental health day,” and I’m in the upper end of the upper end of the labor force.
- hgsgm 3y agoNon-monopoly businesses can't survive the free market by being nicer than legally required, unless customers are willing to pay for it and able to detect it.