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.
Exactly. That is what I have told people--I know what I'm doing, I don't need to appease stupid people. I don't mind a quick simple explanation periodically, but beyond that yes think what you want I know the truth and if I know the truth that's good enough. Having to do something in an inferior way because people are too stupid to understand it is something I have close to zero patience for.
BUT... people will still think the worst. In fact my property manager and I joke about it all the time. I play games on my phone to relax at home, and I'll tell him I hit level 430 while vacuuming. I also think it's worse for those of us who do manual labor. Somehow we are seen as the most undeserving entitled slackers. I have one guy who I found out he tells people he never sees me working. So every time I see him I make sure to look like I'm loafing.
Great, you own the company, you make the rules. And I truly do understand that a smartphone can be a tool. However, my company, my rules. There is no, absolutely no, reason why any of my employees need to access a smartphone in fulfilling their duties. Therefore, no phones allowed at work, period. No exceptions. We have a receptionist who knows how to contact our employees if an emergency should arise.
No one is arguing that it's your company. You've made it very clear that it's your company and to heck with what an employee thinks. You think you're God, we get it. The point isn't that, the point is how much sense it makes to do such a thing and what constitutes being a reasonable person to work for.
A boss with any sense of being reasonable about things without an ego roughly the size of the former Soviet Union would provide a little bit of flexibility and not be so extreme in that way. If someone can show how a smartphone helps them do their job or how they're able to do their job without it causing undue interference with their job duties, a quality boss will take that into consideration and provide some flexibility with reasonable guidelines and yet in doing so will STILL not be tolerating true loafing on the job.
They will value their employee's views on such things. They won't rant ad nausea about how "it's my company my rules" even though they are the boss, they understand that no employee likes to be treated like a North Korean citizen or a Christian in the days of the Roman Empire. They will realize that if a given tool helps their employee do their job better or enjoy their job better while still being productive, they'll be man enough and smart enough and reasonable enough to provide a little latitude for them to do what they have to do to perform well at their job, as opposed to ranting over and over with the whole "I king, you peasant" Schick. They'll also realize that someone slacking off at the water cooler is exactly the same thing as goofing off on a phone, and to let the former go while chastising the latter is inconsistent and to be perfectly blunt it's flat-out stupid.
It reminds me of that show "The Jeffersons" where a lady was being interviewed by George Jefferson for a job but he was not being reasonable with her and she finally told him off during the interview by saying "I only work for people, not turkeys." Exactly.
No one is arguing that it's your company. You've made it very clear that it's your company and to heck with what an employee thinks. You think you're God, we get it. The point isn't that, the point is how much sense it makes to do such a thing and what constitutes being a reasonable person to work for.
A boss with any sense of being reasonable about things without an ego roughly the size of the former Soviet Union would provide a little bit of flexibility and not be so extreme in that way. If someone can show how a smartphone helps them do their job or how they're able to do their job without it causing undue interference with their job duties, a quality boss will take that into consideration and provide some flexibility with reasonable guidelines and yet in doing so will STILL not be tolerating true loafing on the job.
They will value their employee's views on such things. They won't rant ad nausea about how "it's my company my rules" even though they are the boss, they understand that no employee likes to be treated like a North Korean citizen or a Christian in the days of the Roman Empire. They will realize that if a given tool helps their employee do their job better or enjoy their job better while still being productive, they'll be man enough and smart enough and reasonable enough to provide a little latitude for them to do what they have to do to perform well at their job, as opposed to ranting over and over with the whole "I king, you peasant" Schick. They'll also realize that someone slacking off at the water cooler is exactly the same thing as goofing off on a phone, and to let the former go while chastising the latter is inconsistent and to be perfectly blunt it's flat-out stupid.
It reminds me of that show "The Jeffersons" where a lady was being interviewed by George Jefferson for a job but he was not being reasonable with her and she finally told him off during the interview by saying "I only work for people, not turkeys." Exactly.
You seem to have forgot the more important part, and are fixated just on cell phone use.
I have virtually NO employee turn over. Why? Because they know they are treated fairly, they have input to how to do their jobs (one suggestion from a laborer on the loading dock saved thousands), they get recognized for their achievements, they know the metrics that the company needs to hit to stay viable and those are shared monthly, and they feel they are part of the team, because they are. I've had them come to me voluntarily suggesting a Saturday shift to meet a deadline of an important project. Guess who my best salespeople are?
But cell phones will not be allowed. Period. You'd love to work here, but if you have a cell phone fixation, you won't last. You are not a special snowflake that the team would accept.
You seem to have forgot the more important part, and are fixated just on cell phone use.
I have virtually NO employee turn over. Why? Because they know they are treated fairly, they have input to how to do their jobs (one suggestion from a laborer on the loading dock saved thousands), they get recognized for their achievements, they know the metrics that the company needs to hit to stay viable and those are shared monthly, and they feel they are part of the team, because they are. I've had them come to me voluntarily suggesting a Saturday shift to meet a deadline of an important project. Guess who my best salespeople are?
But cell phones will not be allowed. Period. You'd love to work here, but if you have a cell phone fixation, you won't last. You are not a special snowflake that the team would accept.
The only "fixation" I see is with bosses who ban them for no good reason other than their own preference and opinion that a phone isn't necessary or because it's the "thing" nowadays, and then they do nothing about people loitering around the water cooler all the time and such. I worked for such a company that was like that, they went BALLISTIC when someone simply very quickly (not in any sort of "drawn out" manner) showed someone a picture on their phone. Meanwhile I was showing physical photos to people and they saw it, I even had displays on my desk with people stopping by talking about my photos and how pretty they were, something which is clearly not work, yet not a word was said. Yet someone quickly flashes a photo to someone on their phone and all of a sudden it's like they yelled bomb on a plane.
I don't care what anybody says, that's STUPID. The two different actions are fundamentally the exact same thing, yet they get treated totally differently. That's simply illogical, and I am one who tends to think that when something is illogical along those lines then to heck with their stupid rule. Why should I have to submit to inferior intelligence over my superior intelligence in terms of that understanding? "Because I'm the boss," that's not good enough.
THAT is why those rules get broken, it's because of that sort of thing. I don't blame those people who break the rules, the onus isn't on them to obey them, the onus is on the boss to not be so ridiculous.
Now, if your employees truly don't mind how things are going and all is well, then great. I have met a few people who truly don't mind leaving their phones in the lockers or such, and that's fine, but they're not better workers on that basis alone if they're even better workers at all. It just means they "fit" your company better in terms of what you want. If that's working out OK in your little world, then fine, but there's a whole big world out there full of people who would NOT be okay with that, and good for them, and good for the bosses who are reasonable about such things. If your setup is working for you and your crew, fine, that doesn't mean other people are supposed to be the same way.
Me personally, I admire and respect bosses who are willing to work with people and accept their quirks and such rather than only accepting those who fit their very narrow definition in terms of what they like. Good bosses and good leaders in almost any endeavor are the ones who can take a whole different set of personalities and work with them rather than trying to change them and still get the most out of them. In basketball coaching, I think of guys like Phil Jackson, someone who could take Dennis Rodman and make him a good player. He didn't ask Dennis Rodman to be just like everybody else, he allowed him to be who he was, and arguably Dennis's best years were under Phil Jackson. As I understand it he even allowed him an exception to the rule of bench players not being allowed to wait in the locker before their turn was up that they were to remain on the bench, Dennis wanted to warm up on the exercise bike while waiting his turn, and Phil Jackson allowed him alone that exception to the rule yet in doing so he did not cause the other players to become upset, he was able to convince them that Dennis DESERVED that accommodation and they all accepted him that way.
THAT is the kind of boss I like and respect. That takes real talent. Any nobody can take a bunch of cookie cutter types and make a place work, it takes somebody with special skills and with a tolerance for diversity and varying personalities to take a wide assortment of personalities and be willing to WORK WITH THEM and get the most out of them and keep all the feelings etc in check.
I don't care what anybody says, that's STUPID. The two different actions are fundamentally the exact same thing, yet they get treated totally differently.
Are you really comparing two employees socializing/bonding with one another (you know, face to face communication) to someone in their cube scrolling through their Facebook/Twitter feeds for 4 hours out of the day with their head down?
I think you're forgetting OP claims to be a caregiver. That's being attentive to a particular person who cannot fully care for themselves. Again, would you want your caregiver to be on their phone or would you prefer the kept their phone in their car and had their full attention on you?
I find it interesting that you could only make a comment about one part of my post, which for your convience, I posted completely above.
What part did you not understand that about the fact that I had virtually NO employee turnover? Why? Because their jobs were meaningful, they knew their input would be considered, and changes could occur quickly if they made sense.
I have no idea what makes you think I did not value diversity in gender or race. I don't give a flying fig about either, as long as you can pull your weight.
Your prejudging and assumptions is telling. And no, you would not be allowed to have your phone at my place of work... keep it at home or in your car. Period.
I notice you're using the past tense in many of your statements. It makes me wonder if your position on this issue would have evolved over time along with our culture if you were still running your company today. Especially if someone were able to point out a way that their cell phone was helping with productivity instead of hurting it. I use my phone to take photos and videos on the job that make my job a lot easier when I am back at my desk, for example. It helps to put sketches in context and in some cases eliminates the need for a sketch entirely. Although we've never had a strict cell phone policy, even just a few years ago we were expected to use the department camera in such circumstances which got to be a pain in the butt when there were scheduling conflicts. Now the cameras on our phones are of better quality than the department phone and instead of buying a new one we just changed the way we do things in that regard.
Well that's how it was at your job, it's not how it is at many jobs. At many jobs, they would become irritated at having to field calls to dozens of other people and wouldn't appreciate the company phone being tied up with personal affairs. At the same time, someone trying to call with someone really important can in such places frequently encounter busy signals.
Please find me a real life example of where this isn't happening. Dozens of calls a day aren't likely to happen. If they do, then something else is going on with the employee. Oh by the way.... companies have multiple lines to make sure that people don't get a busy signal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh
At the same time, why should a caller have to memorize 3-5 different phone numbers when they can memorize one? That's too much work. One person, one number--much much easier, and to me easiness is hugely important. I've got better things to do with my mental energy than having to spend it on keeping up with 5 different numbers for one person, if I'm going to spend that kind of mental energy on anything it should be for something like figuring out for the first time in human history that E=mc2, not something as remedial as that.
Ever heard of saving the number in a cell phone? If it's too much work to memorize one extra phone number then you're lazy plain and simple. I know both my office numbers, both of my wife's office numbers, both of her cell numbers, my son's cell number, my home phone, my mother in laws, my father in laws, my father's, and all of my friends numbers by heart. If I forget them, I simply pick my phone up and click their name and it calls them for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh
All of these responses "if you need to be reached there's always a landline." Why does that make any difference? To someone with a brain and any logic at all, it shouldn't matter if an employee is being reached with a landline, a cellular, or a megaphone. Heck, if anything, you'd think the company would appreciate company lines not being tied up and someone being willing to use their OWN resources for such things. If a person is loafing on the phone, they're loafing on the phone. For that matter, it shouldn't matter if they're loafing on the phone, loafing at the water cooler, or loafing around with co-workers wherever.
You seem to miss the point here..... if the company has a policy that prohibits cell usage, then that is the policy you signed up for when you were hired. If you were willing to sign on that dotted line to get the job then you agreed to abide by the policies the company sets. The likelihood of needing to call someone about something unrelated to work every single day is slim. If you do, then you have personal issues that need to be resolved that don't spill over into your place of employment. Most matters can wait until a break or after work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh
For that matter, just as not all employee chit-chatter is necessarily loafing and merits such scrutiny (maybe they were talking about something work-related and did just a minute of chit-chatter real quick before going back to work, do you really want to be THAT heavy-handed about such a thing?), not all cell phone interaction is in the realm of social media or gaming or endless yacking about silly stuff and again are we really going to be that anal and ridiculous?
Yes, they can be that strict over cell phone usage if it is company policy. Period. Don't like it? Then change jobs. Talking to a co-worker for a second isn't the same as being on a phone. You are available for someone to walk up and get information from you without having to wait while you end a call. But.... if someone is spending too much time at the watercooler or standing around chatting then yes they need to be reprimanded as well if it becomes excessive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh
The point of such rules is to curb nonproductivity due to loafing around and not working, not to brandish a bull-whip and treat your employees like children who don't deserve even the slightest benefit of the doubt. If someone is a productive worker and they're observed on their phone every now and then, BIG FREAKING DEAL. Stop being such a jackass. People don't have a bad work ethic or a bad entitlement mentality so much, they just don't have any patience for people living in the Laura Ingalls Wilder era and thinking that employees are supposed to be willing to kowtow to a bunch of Attila the Huns.
None of what you said here makes any sense whatsoever. You seem to want to be able to set your own rules and think that most of the working class feel the way you do. I'm sorry but many of us do not. I understand that when I get to my desk I am dedicated to my job. My personal life gets put on hold until I have provided the services for the period of time I am being paid for. Once I leave I do not owe the company any more of my time. It is this type of attitude that CAUSES these policies to be put into place.
Are you really comparing two employees socializing/bonding with one another (you know, face to face communication) to someone in their cube scrolling through their Facebook/Twitter feeds for 4 hours out of the day with their head down?
I think you're forgetting OP claims to be a caregiver. That's being attentive to a particular person who cannot fully care for themselves. Again, would you want your caregiver to be on their phone or would you prefer the kept their phone in their car and had their full attention on you?
For one, I'm not assuming the scenario of someone being distracted by their phone for 4 hours. I think we'd all agree that's way out of line, but then so would be 4 hours at the water cooler too. I'm saying just as a few minutes of water cooler talk is fine with most bosses, so should it be if someone goofs around on their phone for a few minutes a day. If people can take smoke breaks, other people can take phone breaks. They should be treated the same.
As for caregivers, well I wouldn't expect the caregiver to be watching whomever every single second the entire time. There are times they'll be napping or such and as long as the caregiver is on site and nearby and not totally zoned out, I'm sure it would be fine. There may be SOME cases where it would require the caregiver to watch the person like a hawk the entire time, but I think those are special cases. I'd trust that the person knew how to do what needs to be done and allow them some reasonable accommodations for their personal needs, and I'd want a boss who would do the same for me.
I'm sure there are some jobs that require "eagle eye" level of watching, prison-security guards come to mind, but even for those (except in prison places due to real concern over contraband) I'd still let them have their phone on them, just on silent (not vibrate) and only use it on breaks or when someone is covering for you. Employees deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt until their behavior gets out of line then that particular employee and ONLY that particular employee deserves to lose the privilege or their job, vs making everybody on site pay for it.
The OP is a caregiver, but it's not the caregiving job that is giving him/her a hard time about the cellphone. It's the retail job. The reason they want the cellphone in the first place is so the elderly/sick person can contact them in case of emergency.
Watching all of this quibbling about something so dumb just makes me thankful I don't have to deal with it. I won't be micromanaged, and nor do I feel the need to micromanage others. I'll get my work done, and if I hire you, you get your work done. End of story.
I notice you're using the past tense in many of your statements. It makes me wonder if your position on this issue would have evolved over time along with our culture if you were still running your company today. Especially if someone were able to point out a way that their cell phone was helping with productivity instead of hurting it. I use my phone to take photos and videos on the job that make my job a lot easier when I am back at my desk, for example. It helps to put sketches in context and in some cases eliminates the need for a sketch entirely. Although we've never had a strict cell phone policy, even just a few years ago we were expected to use the department camera in such circumstances which got to be a pain in the butt when there were scheduling conflicts. Now the cameras on our phones are of better quality than the department phone and instead of buying a new one we just changed the way we do things in that regard.
I too use the past tense because I am not currently in a management role. Yet my view has not changed one iota. In my current company if you are caught taking pictures with a cell phone the phone is confiscated and analyzed to see if you sent those photos to anyone else. If not the phone is wiped and you are terminated on the spot. If you did send it to someone else, not only are you terminated but you can be sent to jail and if severe enough the Government can send you to trial. If you took pictures of the inside of our company, our company will slap you with a lawsuit on top of termination. We have people who are approved to take pictures using company provided cameras.
In my previous job where I was the manager, there was no way that taking pictures would boost productivity. You couldn't take photos of drawings because they were proprietary, and taking a picture of a machine running didn't boost productivity. If you wanted to take a photo of a part being built for Engineering purposes, you were assigned a company owned camera to use.
In my job as an insurance follow-up agent for a medical billing company cell phones were prohibited in the building. There were no instances where taking a picture of a patient's medical information would boost productivity. It would however get you fired and slapped with a lawsuit.
Some companies might not care so much if the photos aren't of proprietary or confidential nature, but many businesses from upon it because their products ARE proprietary and they don't want uncontrolled information leaving their facility that could be obtained by competitors. Products could be reverse engineered through detailed photos (a company I used to work for has done this when replacement parts are no longer manufactured) of someone else's products.
Understandably not all companies have to be this strict, but it boils down to policy. The company has reasons whether we understand them or not that goes far beyond just being petty. If they have made the decision to not allow use of cell phones and you agreed to that upon hire, you are bound to follow those policies or face repercussions. They have the right to set policies (within the legal limits of the law) that allow their business to operate in the manner in which they feel is best.
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.
