Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Salaried or hourly jobs are a both scams. It is ridiculous that a person is paid an hourly wage regardless of if they are actually working during that time. The only pay structure that isn't a scam is commission. You should be paid for the value you produce, not for the time you spend hanging around the company.
Maybe as a compromise, some combination of salary, hourly, and commission could work.
So if you've demonstrated an excellent work ethic at your desk job and your employer wants to fire the janitor and have you clean toilets in addition to your normal responsibilities, would you do it? Probably not, I bet.
I will comment on that below.
Quote:
It's important to set boundaries.. when you're already exceeding the minimum work you're being paid to do, it's easier to set limits.
I absolutely agree. In fact, setting boundaries is a topic that I often post about on this forum, but most here seem to not agree with me. When setting boundaries, you sometimes may need to make other sacrifices to allow that boundary to be met.
For example, in June 2012, a new deadline was dumped on my company by our biggest client, just days before I had a non-refundable vacation, which was approved many months earlier. Although it was clear my employer wanted me to cancel that vacation (but they never explicitly asked me to), that was a boundary that I was not willing to cross. I did make it clear that I was willing to work as much overtime as needed before and after the vacation, and that I was willing to cancel one vacation day in between the actual vacation and 4th of July, as long as my vacation would be respected. I was even willing to work on 4th of July if it meant not cancelling the vacation, but I did not mention that (I was going to save that card for later).
More generally, I do whatever it takes to avoid working on weekends, but am willing to work as late as needed during the week. Even more so, I do whatever it takes to avoid working on holiday weekends, even if it means working on a regular weekend. Others are the opposite of me: they want to leave the office at 5:00 sharp every day, but are willing to work every weekend and holiday of the year if they have to.
Going back to your example about the possibility of my employer firing the janitor and asking me to clean the bathroom in addition to my regular duties: while it may be tempting to say no, it's not always that simple. Is this a one-time deal when the janitor is in the hospital for surgery? Then I might need to step up to the plate and show I am a team player. Is it simply a way to take advantage? Then I might have to be more resistant. However, the other thing to keep in mind is that you can lose your job if you refuse to do a task. In my case, I want to keep this job at all costs. It is basically the only job in my field left near where I live. Since I value time with family, including extended family, I would not want to relocate, nor would I want a long commute to a job in the city. So, if doing janitorial work is the only way to have time spend with family, then it is something I might have to do.
If I was going to resist doing janitorial work, I would never use the "it's not my job" line. Instead, I would try to focus on how I would be willing to do those tasks, but that I feel that my engineering work, which is what I was really hired for, would suffer if I had to spend much of my time on janitorial work. That would then make it look like I was looking out for the company's best interests, rather than mine.
Quote:
If you're the one carrying the weight of the group, it's time to ask for a raise.
But you do need to be careful, since the bigger raise you get, the more likely you are to get laid off. Companies want to lay off the employees that they perceive as being overpriced, and want to keep the underpriced ones. By getting a bigger raise, you are putting yourself closer to the perceived overpriced category, and more likely to be laid off.
But you do need to be careful, since the bigger raise you get, the more likely you are to get laid off. Companies want to lay off the employees that they perceive as being overpriced, and want to keep the underpriced ones. By getting a bigger raise, you are putting yourself closer to the perceived overpriced category, and more likely to be laid off.
True, but it's still advantageous if you don't increase your spending when you get a raise. 2 effects:
1) If you do get laid off, you can more easily adjust to being unemployed.
2) You'll probably already have a BIGGER safety net saved up.
Hate to say it, but leaving early takes balls. But it's your time.. most people only got about 70 - 90 years of it in their lives and that's it. You can always earn more money if you lose it or lose your income but you cannot make back time.
So if you're doing more work than the rest of the team in 40 hours than they do in 60, and they still choose to pile more on you? You refuse! (Or just cherrypick the most interesting or more productive of the tasks.) Because I know for a fact I'll be more productive in absolute terms working 40 hours a week and having plenty of time to recharge rather than working 60 hours and rushing to take care of other things life throws at me.
Again, this takes balls but it's worth the risk if you can stomach it financially.. (ignore the above if you have no emergency fund.)
True, but it's still advantageous if you don't increase your spending when you get a raise. 2 effects:
1) If you do get laid off, you can more easily adjust to being unemployed.
2) You'll probably already have a BIGGER safety net saved up.
Hate to say it, but leaving early takes balls. But it's your time.. most people only got about 70 - 90 years of it in their lives and that's it. You can always earn more money if you lose it or lose your income but you cannot make back time.
So if you're doing more work than the rest of the team in 40 hours than they do in 60, and they still choose to pile more on you? You refuse! (Or just cherrypick the most interesting or more productive of the tasks.) Because I know for a fact I'll be more productive in absolute terms working 40 hours a week and having plenty of time to recharge rather than working 60 hours and rushing to take care of other things life throws at me.
Again, this takes balls but it's worth the risk if you can stomach it financially.. (ignore the above if you have no emergency fund.)
But there are other factors as well. Since I do not want to relocate, and I do not want to commute to the city, it is to my advantage to do whatever it takes to keep my job at all costs, regardless of how much of a safety net I have saved up.
a work life balance is possible working on a crab boat where you work 19 hours a day for weeks, its just a matter if that work/life balance is what your looking for lol. some people dont midn putting in 60 hours a week, ohters are ready to pull their hair out at 40. its all about what you consider to be work life balance.
Maybe as a compromise, some combination of salary, hourly, and commission could work.
True, however, salary is more like a retainer fee than anything else. It helps the employer maintain a stable workforce. If you're making only commissions, and nothing else, what's stopping you from up and leaving at any given moment for another opportunity without any notice? A salary states to the employee that we want you to stay and work for us, this is our commitment to you.
But there are other factors as well. Since I do not want to relocate, and I do not want to commute to the city, it is to my advantage to do whatever it takes to keep my job at all costs, regardless of how much of a safety net I have saved up.
Your situation isn't typical.. most people have (a few more but not that many) other options if they're willing to work a little harder to find them and/or make small compromises.
Maybe as a compromise, some combination of salary, hourly, and commission could work.
I agree that is the most realistic method that could actually happen. It just confuses me when people say salary is a scam without acknowledging that hourly is just as much of one.
I agree that is the most realistic method that could actually happen. It just confuses me when people say salary is a scam without acknowledging that hourly is just as much of one.
Just because someone says salary is a scam doesn't mean that they are necessarily saying that hourly is perfect either. In reality, there is no perfect method of compensation, and any method will lead to unintended effects and abuses.
Like a few other posters, we also "outsource" a few personal chores like a housekeeping service in order to ensure that time away from work is truly "free" time. When we bought our house a few years back, we were also both traveling 50%-75% so we purposely bought a townhome in a neighborhood where the HOA takes care of any yard maintenance so that we did not have to worry about taking time to mow a lawn or trim bushes, etc.
...
Very interesting, but if you were going to pay an HOA a fee as part of yard maintenance anyway, why not just buy a single-family home and then just pay for someone to maintain the lawnmowing, leaf-raking, etc. services on an outsourced basis?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
