04-10-2014 12:20 PM
91 1234
tools
  1. Timelessblur's Avatar
    Every "Go Getter" I have ever met is nothing more than a backstabber that lies and cheats to get ahead and becomes a cancer in the workplace.
    You know that is the most true part. The ones who claim work hard gets you up top. Almost all of them are generally the people I trust the least at work and will not spend my time working with as they will stab you in the back. Sadly they go to the top and you have this issue of employers not respecting their employees.

    Respecting does not mean charity.
    Mooncatt excuse that is politics/business n record profits and lay offs is BS. Sorry Moon but that is wrong. That is a proof of the fact employers no longer respect their employees. 30 years ago companies would work hard to protect their employees. Now if it means 1 more dollar of profit it is screw them.
    04-04-2014 06:58 PM
  2. NoYankees44's Avatar
    Read the comment section on a CNN article, was not disappointed. Took a second but I found the usual "It's Obama's fault" comment.

    Sent from my XT1060 using Mobile Nations mobile app
    After 5+ years of "it's Bush's fault" it will be a welcome change. For a while at least.
    04-04-2014 06:58 PM
  3. A895's Avatar
    After 5+ years of "it's Bush's fault" it will be a welcome change. For a while at least.
    "George Bush doesn't care about Black People"

    -Kanye West

    Sent from my XT1060 using Mobile Nations mobile app
    04-04-2014 07:18 PM
  4. DS1331's Avatar
    Didn't we just have that discussion about how it's unwise to use anecdotes to make sweeping generalizations? I don't know about McDonalds specifically, but it's often better to promote from within due to lower training requirements and the person already has an understanding about many relative parts of the company.

    Besides, I'd still wager my point works at all pay levels. Provide more value to the employer and you'll advance. Those with that kind of work ethic that aren't advancing will find other jobs that allow the kind of advancement they want. If you're stuck in a low paying job and don't seem to be going anywhere, that's largely in part to you. If you think you're making less than you're worth but aren't doing anything to change that, then you have set your worth at that low amount and have no one to blame but yourself.
    He is absolutely right, you have to work your *** off and show them you're a great employee and then you get raises and make more money that's how the world works. If you sit there and do the bare minimum of course your not gonna get a raise. Why would they give someone a raise who's not trying to prove themselves worthy of that raise

    Sent from my XT1053 using AC Forums mobile app
    04-04-2014 07:49 PM
  5. DS1331's Avatar
    Color me not surprise that you passed over the part about where your argument fails. If your argument held water you would not have over 50% at sup $20.
    You would not have record profits and lay offs going hand and hand.
    You would not have employers trying to pay their employees like they do.

    Sum it up and you have failed to address the simple fact minimum pay = minimum work.
    Respect is a 2 way street. Employers lost it a long time ago and they need to earn it back. They are reaping what you sow. You failed to address that part. You some how think low level low paying employees are going to be willing to much more if they can not see any chance for advancement / more pay.
    You also can not wrap your head around the fact how badly the deck is stack against employees these days.
    Try being on the receiving end being laid off when the companies then gets record profits. Changed my views to me myself and I come first, I am not going to my advancement ahead of the company. what I do extra means yes their better be something in it for me.

    No one has said anything to counter the part you need to put effort in first. But you failed to address the fact companies stop respecting their employees a long long time ago and then wonder why the employees are doing the same to them.
    If you work your *** off and prove yourself to be worthy of a raise and the employer doesn't give it to you then yes you should leave and find another job. But from my experience if you try hard and work your *** off that is usually rewarded one way or another.

    Sent from my XT1053 using AC Forums mobile app
    04-04-2014 07:53 PM
  6. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    The most I've ever made is $13.65/hr; I don't know about anyone else here. If you're making $20+ an hour, then good for you. But what, exactly, is the real agenda behind this thread? If any of you folks are here to try and pick on people because of what they make an hour, grow up. Seriously. Not all of us who have low-paying jobs are doing so by preference. In many (most?) cases, low paying jobs are all that's materially available.

    The rest of us are really not interested in hearing the Rush Limbaugh/Sean Hannity/Mark Levin/Laura Ingram (et al) playbook talking points here, which are already repeated ad nauseum everywhere else. (Thanks for helping Ron or Gary lose the elections in 2008 and 2012 and ensuring the further destruction of this country, though. That was darned thoughtful of you. Now kindly shut up and go away before you do any further damage.)
    04-06-2014 02:44 AM
  7. palandri's Avatar
    The most I've ever made is $13.65/hr; I don't know about anyone else here. If you're making $20+ an hour, then good for you. But what, exactly, is the real agenda behind this thread? If any of you folks are here to try and pick on people because of what they make an hour, grow up. Seriously. Not all of us who have low-paying jobs are doing so by preference. In many (most?) cases, low paying jobs are all that's materially available.

    The rest of us are really not interested in hearing the Rush Limbaugh/Sean Hannity/Mark Levin/Laura Ingram (et al) playbook talking points here, which are already repeated ad nauseum everywhere else. (Thanks for helping Ron or Gary lose the elections in 2008 and 2012 and ensuring the further destruction of this country, though. That was darned thoughtful of you. Now kindly shut up and go away before you do any further damage.)
    WOW! Where to start. I sense a lot of anger here.

    Let's start with, "... But what, exactly, is the real agenda behind this thread?..." I started this thread, so what do you think my real agenda was?

    The problem I see is our current structure of private enterprise/capitalism. In it's current structure, the more money you take in and the less you pay out the better. In it's current structure, some people get to start out with millions in their pocket that they didn't earn, just be born into a Dow, Dupont, Chase or Romney family. Look at the stock market, its legalized gambling. When we vote, we are voting for a dictatorship of the capitalist.

    There needs to be more equity between the top and the bottom and our current structure of capitalism needs more regulations like they have in Europe, not less which is what Libertarians preach.
    A895 likes this.
    04-06-2014 07:03 AM
  8. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    Whatever.
    DS1331 likes this.
    04-06-2014 10:53 AM
  9. toober's Avatar
    he problem I see is our current structure of private enterprise/capitalism. In it's current structure, the more money you take in and the less you pay out the better. In it's current structure, some people get to start out with millions in their pocket that they didn't earn, just be born into a Dow, Dupont, Chase or Romney family. Look at the stock market, its legalized gambling. When we vote, we are voting for a dictatorship of the capitalist.
    What changes would you suggest? Is their a way to modify the current system or should we scrap it in favor of something else?

    There needs to be more equity between the top and the bottom and our current structure of capitalism needs more regulations like they have in Europe, not less which is what Libertarians preach.
    Maybe we should do this by forcing people to work less. Maybe we could limit people to 40 hours a week and force employers to hire more people instead of just working existing employees more. We could also cap wages for those that are making too much. There is quite a gap in many companies between the guys just starting out and the ones that have been there for longer. If we raised the entry level pay and lowered the cap, it would level things out a good bit.
    04-06-2014 11:03 AM
  10. A895's Avatar
    What changes would you suggest? Is their a way to modify the current system or should we scrap it in favor of something else?
    We need tax reform if anything. But the way politics go, well get some watered down version to pass, that won`t do anything.


    Maybe we should do this by forcing people to work less. Maybe we could limit people to 40 hours a week and force employers to hire more people instead of just working existing employees more. We could also cap wages for those that are making too much. There is quite a gap in many companies between the guys just starting out and the ones that have been there for longer. If we raised the entry level pay and lowered the cap, it would level things out a good bit.
    Not a bad idea, but what about if someone wants to work overtime? This would require many companies to agree on rules and allow more government intervention on the business side.
    04-06-2014 11:08 AM
  11. toober's Avatar
    Not a bad idea, but what about if someone wants to work overtime? This would require many companies to agree on rules and allow more government intervention on the business side.
    Working overtime just allows some people to gain an unfair advantage on their coworkers. What about the guys that are happy with their 40 hour a week? They may get passed up for a promotion or denied a raise just because someone else is putting more hours. Besides, wouldn't that overtime pay be better spent on hiring someone else that is out of work?
    04-06-2014 11:17 AM
  12. Timelessblur's Avatar
    What changes would you suggest? Is their a way to modify the current system or should we scrap it in favor of something else?


    Maybe we should do this by forcing people to work less. Maybe we could limit people to 40 hours a week and force employers to hire more people instead of just working existing employees more. We could also cap wages for those that are making too much. There is quite a gap in many companies between the guys just starting out and the ones that have been there for longer. If we raised the entry level pay and lowered the cap, it would level things out a good bit.
    One thing I would suggest is ending the record profits an lay offs. There. should be a punishment for that.
    That is a massive example of the lack of respect from the employers to the employees.

    Claiming it is the current climate is bs. The climate is not to respect their employees.
    People think working hard makes this better. Sorry why should I work harder if I see nothing in it for me. Like the opportunity to earn more or advanced. In many of these lower level jobs there is nothing to gain by working harder.

    Btw make more then $20. I do work hard but at an in between it was at the lower level I knew worker harder gained me nothing. No extra pay. The chances to gain more eye never going to be there.
    It changes my philosophy on working big time. It is my goals come first and foremost. Now as long as the companies goals work with my goals the that is good but end result is my goals and values will always come first and I will not sacrifice them for the company. I got burned before when I sacrificed my goals for the good of the company. Their rewards for that was layoffs for record profits.
    No getting around the fact employers stop respecting their employees a long long time ago. Now they complain about employees doing it to them.
    Sorry you pay like crap you get crap. Do not offer the chance to move up same answer.
    One can not longer start at a company as a cashier and move up to the top. That ended a long time ago. Now they do not even let you've full time.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    Tall Mike 2145 likes this.
    04-06-2014 11:32 AM
  13. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Working overtime just allows some people to gain an unfair advantage on their coworkers. What about the guys that are happy with their 40 hour a week? They may get passed up for a promotion or denied a raise just because someone else is putting more hours. Besides, wouldn't that overtime pay be better spent on hiring someone else that is out of work?
    Someone willing to extra work being given a promotion over someone just doing the mandatory only? Oh the humanity!



    Now they do not even let you've full time.
    You have Obamacare regulations to thank for that.
    DS1331 likes this.
    04-06-2014 11:59 AM
  14. Timelessblur's Avatar


    You have Obamacare regulations to thank for that.
    I call bs on that. That is the latest excuse. What is your excuse about this happening since before year 2000. Damn those facts getting in the way of a good conservative lie.


    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    msndrstood and Tall Mike 2145 like this.
    04-06-2014 12:02 PM
  15. toober's Avatar
    Someone willing to extra work being given a promotion over someone just doing the mandatory only? Oh the humanity!
    That's what I'm saying. How dare they put any extra effort when those raises and promotions belong to everyone regardless of ability. If an employer isn't forcing it, there is no reason to work a minute over your 40. If there is enough work for someone to work more than 40 hours, it should be spent on someone that needs a job not someone that already has one. While we're at it, we need to do something about all the people working 2nd jobs. One is plenty and the government should make up the difference if your pay isn't enough on just one paycheck.
    04-06-2014 12:13 PM
  16. palandri's Avatar
    What changes would you suggest? Is their a way to modify the current system or should we scrap it in favor of something else?
    Less greed to start. Things like "real" profit sharing for employees and worker cooperative ran companies. One of the things that health insurance companies hated about the ACA was they have to spend 80% of the money paid into them for medical procedures, if they didn't spend 80% of the money on medical procedures it has to be refunded to the customer. In the past they would simply pocket it.


    Maybe we should do this by forcing people to work less. Maybe we could limit people to 40 hours a week and force employers to hire more people instead of just working existing employees more. We could also cap wages for those that are making too much. There is quite a gap in many companies between the guys just starting out and the ones that have been there for longer. If we raised the entry level pay and lowered the cap, it would level things out a good bit.
    Republicans have tried to eliminate overtime all together and replace it with comp time. Europe is way ahead of us. Electricians I've talked to in France work 6 hours a day, 5 days a week and make the same amount of money that I do working 40 hours here. Also in France, full-time workers get 5 weeks of paid vacation.
    04-06-2014 12:19 PM
  17. palandri's Avatar
    ....You have Obamacare regulations to thank for that.
    No, you have greedy companies to blame for that.
    Tall Mike 2145 likes this.
    04-06-2014 12:21 PM
  18. toober's Avatar
    I call bs on that. That is the latest excuse. What is your excuse about this happening since before year 2000. Damn those facts getting in the way of a good conservative lie.


    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    Me too. Everyone knows it's self checkouts and ATMs that are the cause just like Obama said. I blame technology. Think of all the jobs lost when people started ordering things online instead of actually leaving their homes and going to an actual store for what they wanted.
    04-06-2014 12:21 PM
  19. toober's Avatar
    Republicans have tried to eliminate overtime all together and replace it with comp time. Europe is way ahead of us. Electricians I've talked to in France work 6 hours a day, 5 days a week and make the same amount of money that I do working 40 hours here. Also in France, full-time workers get 5 weeks of paid vacation.
    That must be the life. Full time pay for part time work, it just don't get any better than that. Until you start to look at what they are paying for things, that is.

    Cost of Living in France
    Prices in France


    So their 30 hours a week doesn't buy anywhere near what your 40 hours buys here. You are, in essence, comparing apples to oranges.
    04-06-2014 12:50 PM
  20. A895's Avatar
    That's what I'm saying. How dare they put any extra effort when those raises and promotions belong to everyone regardless of ability. If an employer isn't forcing it, there is no reason to work a minute over your 40. If there is enough work for someone to work more than 40 hours, it should be spent on someone that needs a job not someone that already has one. While we're at it, we need to do something about all the people working 2nd jobs. One is plenty and the government should make up the difference if your pay isn't enough on just one paycheck.
    Now you are going too far.

    Posted via Android Central App
    04-06-2014 12:53 PM
  21. Mooncatt's Avatar
    I call bs on that. That is the latest excuse. What is your excuse about this happening since before year 2000. Damn those facts getting in the way of a good conservative lie.
    I'm taking about the new 28 hrs policies going into effect so they can skirt the insurance requirements.


    How dare they put any extra effort when those raises and promotions belong to everyone regardless of ability.
    Do you seriously believe that? You're saying someone who's less productive and less willing to work is just as deserving of a raise and promotion as me? In what reality does that actually work?

    If an employer isn't forcing it, there is no reason to work a minute over your 40. If there is enough work for someone to work more than 40 hours, it should be spent on someone that needs a job not someone that already has one.
    If the extra work is temporary, it makes no sense to hire more people unless absolutely necessary. What would you rather them do? Hire more staff, fully train them (at great expense and pushing into deadlines perhaps), employ them for a few weeks, then fire them? As an employee, that would be insulting to me. If I wanted a temp job, I'd see a temp agency.

    While we're at it, we need to do something about all the people working 2nd jobs. One is plenty and the government should make up the difference if your pay isn't enough on just one paycheck.
    Again, in what reality does this work? All you'll do is encourage people not to succeed.


    Me too. Everyone knows it's self checkouts and ATMs that are the cause just like Obama said. I blame technology. Think of all the jobs lost when people started ordering things online instead of actually leaving their homes and going to an actual store for what they wanted.
    Well, when the cost of technology is on par or less than wages for the same job, what do you expect? I'm not always a fan of that myself, and still use a manned checkout unless the lines are huge.
    A895 likes this.
    04-06-2014 12:54 PM
  22. Timelessblur's Avatar
    I'm taking about the new 28 hrs policies going into effect so they can skirt the insurance requirements.
    Same answer as before.
    This is again just the latest bs base lie.
    Again they have been doing this since before year 2000. So instead of a 30 hourish cut off it is now 28.

    So again the facts get in the way of the bs excuse. You care to try again?


    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    04-06-2014 12:57 PM
  23. toober's Avatar
    Now you are going too far.

    Posted via Android Central App
    You will have to elaborate on that a bit. Which part of the post in too far?
    04-06-2014 01:06 PM
  24. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Same answer as before.
    This is again just the latest bs base lie.
    Again they have been doing this since before year 2000. So instead of a 30 hourish cut off it is now 28.

    So again the facts get in the way of the bs excuse. You care to try again?
    My time at Wal-Mart was the late 90's and early 2000's, supposedly one of the worst offenders of what you're claiming. I was usually pulling in at least 35 hrs a week during school, more when I was on breaks. Only back then, the argument was how they considered 38 hrs a week (I think that was the number back then) to be full time. Meaning eligible for full benefits even if you didn't put in a full 40, while also giving them a window to help prevent paying overtime if you were held late one day. Call it what you want, but it was what it was back then.

    But again, maybe I was the rarity being able to get so many hours there. That darn work ethic getting in the way of a good complaint again, I guess.
    04-06-2014 01:31 PM
  25. Timelessblur's Avatar
    My time at Wal-Mart was the late 90's and early 2000's, supposedly one of the worst offenders of what you're claiming. I was usually pulling in at least 35 hrs a week during school, more when I was on breaks. Only back then, the argument was how they considered 38 hrs a week (I think that was the number back then) to be full time. Meaning eligible for full benefits even if you didn't put in a full 40, while also giving them a window to help prevent paying overtime if you were held late one day. Call it what you want, but it was what it was back then.

    But again, maybe I was the rarity being able to get so many hours there. That darn work ethic getting in the way of a good complaint again, I guess.
    You had a rare Walmart. Early 2000, I had a friend who worked at Walmart their policy was 33ish was the moving average cut off. I worked at Safeway and it was 30 moving average.

    Same point as before, they prevented you from going full time and leaving you trapped part time. So you kind of proved my point.
    All they started doing was making it harder to abuse part time workers.

    So thank you for proving my point. Companies prevent employees from going full time.

    You have again failed to address companies have been abusing and disrespecting employees for years. You got hit by that. They would not let you go full time.


    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    04-06-2014 01:41 PM
91 1234

Similar Threads

  1. How can I save voicemail from my Galaxy S3 (as an .mp3)?
    By steampunkpink in forum General Help and How To
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-11-2016, 11:50 PM
  2. an x above the phone icon
    By pablola in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-07-2014, 01:20 PM
  3. why do virtual assistants need an internet connection?
    By ahawkua in forum General Help and How To
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-03-2014, 11:59 AM
  4. Adding Google Drive to Choose an Action Options
    By sndinc in forum Google Nexus 7 Tablet (2013)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-02-2014, 10:12 AM
  5. [APP][FREE]Muzk - an online music database
    By artouiros in forum Developer Spotlight
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-01-2014, 11:44 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD