3 ms·
And yet they still won't care, because most people have zero interest in their job. For those that do? They're lucky, work is fun, and they often love doing t
by b112 2y ago
And yet they still won't care, because most people have zero interest in their job. For those that do? They're lucky, work is fun, and they often love doing the best they can at their job.
So sadly for many only the threat of dismissal forces those unhappy ranks to do their job. Others have a strong work/duty ethic, and will do their best. One thing that can help overall is an entire corporate culture, where everyone is lambasted for such failures.
"You saw that <security guard> wasn't doing his job, and you didn't tell anyone? You're in trouble too!", and so on.
- mschuster91 2y ago> One thing that can help overall is an entire corporate culture, where everyone is lambasted for such failures. That is precisely what you not want to do, all that breeds is a culture of hyper-paranoid ass-covering and blame deflection.
- eddyg 2y ago> because most people have zero interest in their job So. Much. This. The number of people who do “just enough” to not get fired is staggering. There is no “work ethic”. At least in the military when somebody fucks up during training the entire $GROUP gets punished. It doesn’t take long before people start taking “rules” seriously. There needs to more consequences and accountability.
- ok_dad 2y agoThe military isn’t some place you send miscreants who always misbehave, most of us wanted to do our best and your description of it is petty insulting and inaccurate. We worked together to attain a goal and fight alongside each other, not because we were beaten trained dogs.
- Aeolun 2y agoI think the implication was more that there was a lot of social pressure in the military that is absent in megacorp X
- bravetraveler 2y agoFor the better, I don't live with my coworkers and I don't want to
- none4methx 2y agoBut those engagements would go so much differently and churn would be so much higher if the threat of prison didn’t disallow going AWOL. It’s a threat of violent coercion, even though daddy never personally hit you or anyone you served with. It’s how all abusive relationships work, they just operationalized and scaled it to an unprecedented degree. And then you come out of that abusive relationship with a quick reintegration course and track your duty, but no honor, back to the private sector. If vets weren’t a protected category, they’d be subject to more discrimination due to the warped psyche basic training is designed to produce.
- eddyg 2y agoAbsolutely no disrespect intended at all. Thank you for your service. Perhaps I should have said “basic training” instead of “the military” because that’s the context I was thinking of.
- m1n7 2y agoonly the threat of dismissal forces those unhappy ranks to do their job or, you know, just pay them properly
- b112 2y agoPay has nothing to do with it. Nothing. Here's an example. Your salary is $1M per year, or $10k. In both cases, you hate work, hate your job, don't want to do it, and... can never be fired. How does better pay help? Better pay may help, but only conjoined with the threat of it being taken away if you don't do your job. And amusingly, you throw out the "better pay" line without even knowing the salary.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- BizarroLand 2y agoI get what you're saying but it is a known fact that most corporate security personnel make not a lot of money. I work in a nice high rise and our front desk security people make $23-$25/hr. That's probably higher than average.