Why do people think if we are unemployed we are LAZY??? (free market, 50k)
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.
Wrong, andywire, when they hire the industry trained at 60k, they proved it IS not about $. That guy trained is worth , in their mind, the 90-100k he'll cost them. What they are saying is if you need 9 months more to be equal to him, for that period, you are not worth the 90-100k annual cost. So I suggested just as you did, a training wage for 9 months, to bridge your costs during said period to your value added.
And here we will agree to disagree
The owners up here are not not worried about labor costs... Those businesses died off a decade ago, or moved to Tennessee . The business owners here are worried about finding the high quality worker capable of keeping their business on the competitive side of the sword. I'll admit, we work on different sides of the coin... But we all go to work for the same reason. The strategies that we must employ are different in many ways, yet we seek the same outcome. To make someone else rich.
Someday, I hope to hire others to actually make ME rich. With the crumbling state of our K-12 system, it looks like I'll be running solo
. The strategies that we must employ are different in many ways, yet we seek the same outcome. To make someone else rich.
Not totally true for those of us on the other side of thecoin, incentivized for making them rich. Yes, bonuses andywire, are most often, tied to HOW profitable one is, not just meeting a target.
Not totally true for those of us on the other side of thecoin, incentivized for making them rich. Yes, bonuses andywire, are most often, tied to HOW profitable one is, not just meeting a target.
Yes, but if those $700 parts I ran this morning for my boss are accepted by the customer, the drinks go down much easier next Saturday, especially when the boss is buying There is more to life than bonuses, though I do just fine on the paycheck as well. God bless capitalism, in it's purest form I prefer.
There is more to life than bonuses, though I do just fine on the paycheck as well.
No doubt; quite frankly, I want higher operating profits EVERY year due to a sheer competitive nature. If our ownership group did not care, I'd still be disappointed any year we did not beat ALL prior years.
I've had my mom tell me this a million times. She was born in the '50s and said there was a recession in the late 70s early 80s. I barely work part-time myself, and times are different than they were 30 - 40 years ago.
No doubt; quite frankly, I want higher operating profits EVERY year due to a sheer competitive nature. If our ownership group did not care, I'd still be disappointed any year we did not beat ALL prior years.
Absolutely it's competitive out there. The only saving grace I have is I do a lot of niche work that most have no exposure to, and I know how to efficiently give the customer what they want, and when it's ok/profitable to cut some corners.
What I think is lost in the fry... Somewhere along the line, a lot of companies have gotten too caught up in the numbers game. Certainly, if you've financed your operation on a 8% bank loan, you've gotta beat that every year after all your expenses are covered. At the same time, you also have to take a simpler approach from time to time. It's like I always say... If your bucket is fuller at the end of the day, you're doing fine. During recessions, breaking even might be the best possible outcome. It doesn't mean you have to shove a 30% paycut down your workers throats. I do know smart businessman with money who will eat the cost, pay their workers what they think they are worth, and wait for the storm to pass. Even such a brute as Andrew Carnegie admitted he would have been nothing without his workers. They were after all, the source of his livelihood and his income.
Operating such a business is an investment. If you skimp on your labor because times are tough, the quality of your product WILL suffer, and customers may very well decide to take their money elsewhere, even after the storm has passed. Getting back a PO customer is next to impossible at that point. The numbers game does nothing to address the human element of business.
I've had my mom tell me this a million times. She was born in the '50s and said there was a recession in the late 70s early 80s. I barely work part-time myself, and times are different than they were 30 - 40 years ago.
80's were great, I made tons of money, the whole downfall started in the early 90's and then it peaked again with the dotcom boom and then it never recovered again and here we are today.
Off beat idea, but I do not think I have ever seen it. Have you or anyone unemployed ever offered to work for an employer for a much lower training wage for 6-12 months or whatever is needed to be fully functional in a new industry, in return for an agreed upon salary in writing after said period and after management has agreed reviewing your work you would now be considered as functional as anyone who had worked in the industry for a reasonable amount of time?
This is a very GOOD idea, but unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to get this concept across these days. On the rare chances I'm able to speak to a human being in the employment process, I make this clear - I always ask for less than my former wage if any sort of training or "coming up to speed" in a new industry is required, or if it is a smaller company that probably can't pay as much. Same idea if the job simply pays less - I'll happily accept the new, lower wage since it is far better than unemployment or nothing.
One roadblock to this concept - which applies to everyone, not just me - is that automated resume processes don't really handle this concept. Now and then, you can enter your "desired salary," which I always underbid to increase the odds of getting the job. More often, you have to enter your most recent salary, which can unfortunately lead to assumptions about how much you "demand" to be paid. I don't make "demands" about my pay... I mean, yeah, okay, if somebody wanted to pay me minimum wage for engineering work, that would be dumb, but you know what I mean.
I like your idea - maybe they should add a question to the system that asks something like, "Would you be willing to be paid X percent less for just the first year if you need training in this area or are coming from a different industry?" That would help sort out the folks who *could* do the job if trained from those who can't, and would help find the ones who are willing to make a long-term commitment to the place. I can't speak for everyone, but I prefer careers vs. jobs, if you know what I mean.
That being said, I'll propose this idea when I get to talk to people about jobs - it can't hurt to ask. The worst they can do is say "no" or ignore me, and I'm used to that!
This is a very GOOD idea, but unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to get this concept across these days. On the rare chances I'm able to speak to a human being in the employment process, I make this clear - I always ask for less than my former wage if any sort of training or "coming up to speed" in a new industry is required, or if it is a smaller company that probably can't pay as much. Same idea if the job simply pays less - I'll happily accept the new, lower wage since it is far better than unemployment or nothing.
One roadblock to this concept - which applies to everyone, not just me - is that automated resume processes don't really handle this concept. Now and then, you can enter your "desired salary," which I always underbid to increase the odds of getting the job. More often, you have to enter your most recent salary, which can unfortunately lead to assumptions about how much you "demand" to be paid. I don't make "demands" about my pay... I mean, yeah, okay, if somebody wanted to pay me minimum wage for engineering work, that would be dumb, but you know what I mean.
I like your idea - maybe they should add a question to the system that asks something like, "Would you be willing to be paid X percent less for just the first year if you need training in this area or are coming from a different industry?" That would help sort out the folks who *could* do the job if trained from those who can't, and would help find the ones who are willing to make a long-term commitment to the place. I can't speak for everyone, but I prefer careers vs. jobs, if you know what I mean.
That being said, I'll propose this idea when I get to talk to people about jobs - it can't hurt to ask. The worst they can do is say "no" or ignore me, and I'm used to that!
Absolutely does not hurt to mention it anytime one suspects the alternatives are folks within the specific industry looking. Best part is you do not need all of them to listen, just one may do the trick.
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.
. The business owners here are worried about finding the high quality worker capable of keeping their business on the competitive side of the sword. I'll admit, we work on different sides of the coin... But we all go to work for the same reason. The strategies that we must employ are different in many ways, yet we seek the same outcome. To make someone else rich. 
