Should an employee work to the best of his ability, or only to the level of his pay? (wages, salaries)

[Kenneth-Kaunda]

does an employee have an obligation to work to the best of his ability, or should he just work to what he feels his paycheck merits?

If he is on a low wage, does he have a right to do the bare minimum that he can get away with - in other words, what is the incentive for the floor sweeper on min wage at MacD's?

if he gets fired, then so what.

but if we look at this the other way around, those on much higher salaries and profit earnings, say they must get these wages otherwise they would not work so hard and create jobs.

Anyone see the glaring double standard here

so what is it to be?

[old_cold]

Regardless of the job or the pay , an employee should do whatever is needed to accomplish the job he agreed to do when he took the job.
An employee that is looking to be advanced/promoted or get good references for another better job will do better than the entitled ones that would rather do the least they can get away with and complain about how they deserve so much more.

[russiaonline]

Something (preferably not the state) that will force the employee to work to the best of his ability, and receive an adequate pay for this?

but if we look at this the other way around, those on much higher salaries and profit earnings say they must get these wages otherwise they would not work so hard and create jobs.

Purging them is always an option. A scary proposition, but it may very well happen again somewhere, even in America.

[russiaonline]

Originally Posted by old_cold

get good references

That's really flawed recently, with employers often unwilling to provide bad references.

[Kenneth-Kaunda]

It's also flawed because the references that one could get as a floor-sweeper would only lead to another floor-sweeping position.

[Kenneth-Kaunda]

Originally Posted by old_cold

Regardless of the job or the pay , an employee should do whatever is needed to accomplish the job he agreed to do when he took the job.
An employee that is looking to be advanced/promoted or get good references for another better job will do better than the entitled ones that would rather do the least they can get away with and complain about how they deserve so much more.

but, as with my last post, if you are the guy cleaning the toilets then how high can you possibly expect to raise anyway?

it's easy to throw out slogans such as 'those who work hardest will get the cream' , but in the real world that isn't really the case.

certainly not these days anyway.

[old_cold]

Originally Posted by Kenneth-Kaunda

but, as with my last post, if you are the guy cleaning the toilets then how high can you possibly expect to raise anyway?

it's easy to throw out slogans such as 'those who work hardest will get the cream' , but in the real world that isn't really the case.

certainly not these days anyway.

Guess work ethic is an unknown phrase to you?
How well one does his job, how reliable they are, how well they get along with other workers, how well they can work and make decisions independantly, just for examples....these things apply to any job.

Quite often, those very highly paid executives you mention, have never been associated with the products/requirements of a company they were asked to go to work for.

[freightshaker]

Do whatever you wish, but keep in mind that the employer is under no obligation to keep you employed and regardless if you are a dishwasher or a toilet scrubber, you can be replaced by someone who is willing to do a better job.

[le roi]

Originally Posted by Kenneth-Kaunda

but if we look at this the other way around, those on much higher salaries and profit earnings, say they must get these wages otherwise they would not work so hard and create jobs.

this doesn't ring a bell, do you have an example ?

[Baldrick]

Best of their ability else they may as well be replaced with someone that may well do better/try harder.