Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 70
Thanks Tree110Thanks

Thread: Boss Comes To Work Sick

  1. #41
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    15,458
    Thanks
    4150

    From
    Boise, ID
    Quote Originally Posted by orangecat View Post
    Why should the government force employers to pay people who aren't working? The deal is, if you show up and perform an agreed upon task, you get compensated. If you don't show up, someone else does the job and they are compensated.
    When I'm sick or take a vacation, there are zero other people who can come in and do any more than probably 20% of my job. That means my to-do list is absorbed by no one when I'm gone, my responsibilities don't decrease at all, I'm still expected to accomplish the same amount of work whenever it is that I return. It just accumulates. That's not my boss's fault, it's just the basic nature of the job. The work exists to be done and has to be done. The more time I'm gone, the more rushed I am, which affects quality, but my employer has no real alternative. Everyone is replaceable, but the transition and training period to do what I do is long, and difficult, and expensive. Lots of other jobs are like that. It's often not that easy to just pull someone in and have them do someone else's job. They're either qualified but unavailable (have their own other jobs), or they're not qualified.

    So decreasing my pay when I'm sick is pretty similar to paying out accrued sick leave at termination. I make more money overall if I take less sick time, and less money overall if I consume paid sick time.
    Thanks from orangecat

  2. #42
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    47,152
    Thanks
    29152

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Arkady View Post
    That's really interesting. I'd really like to see it done at the federal level, though, since once you move to telecommuting, the distinctions between states become even less consequential. For example, if I'm working for a Massachusetts-based company, by way of telecommuting, it hardly matters if I'm physically in Massachusetts or Maine or Florida. Federal-level rules also prevent companies from gaming things (by, say, ostensibly headquartering people in Washington, just for tax purposes, when they may have a more meaningful nexus with some other state).
    Thats an interesting point. My spouse did a bit of telecommuting for his company in Massachusetts and it ended up becoming full time. However, after two years, the company (fairly good sized one) decided telecommuting was no longer acceptable (many worked in NH and ME). They claimed both that it hurt Massachusetts communities because once one goes more than 6 months of telecommuting they pay income tax to their home state. The other reason they cited was a longing of "press the flesh" saying it was too impersonal as some employees hadnt even met each other. Kind of silly but thats what they claimed.

  3. #43
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    66,612
    Thanks
    34228

    From
    Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    People that get zero benefits know what they're signing up for before they decide to accept the job.
    Of course they (usually) know it. That does not mean they have a viable alternative.
    Thanks from Dangermouse and MaryAnne

  4. #44
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    66,612
    Thanks
    34228

    From
    Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    ... my employer has no real alternative.
    That is a rare situation to have, to say the least. In most cases, it is the other way around.
    Thanks from Dangermouse and jacobfitcher

  5. #45
    #walkaway orangecat's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    3,147
    Thanks
    633

    From
    oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Of course they (usually) know it. That does not mean they have a viable alternative.
    Should we legislate a right to viable alternatives now?

  6. #46
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    66,612
    Thanks
    34228

    From
    Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
    Quote Originally Posted by orangecat View Post
    Should we legislate a right to viable alternatives now?
    My point - which you apparently missed in the throes of ideology - was that "knowing what you are signing up for" is a meaningless distinction. If you do not have a viable alternative, then what difference does that "knowledge" make? None, obviously, so bringing it up is a waste of breath (well, keyboarding) as it answers no questions and solves no problems; it only gives expression to ideology.

  7. #47
    DEEP STATE CEO Blues63's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    9,946
    Thanks
    7431

    From
    SPECTRE HQ
    'Selfish Addle-Brained Plague Rat' ~ Brilliant!

  8. #48
    Veteran Member Dragonfly5's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2007
    Posts
    17,019
    Thanks
    13526

    From
    Houston, Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post
    I have taken 1 sick day in the last 2+ years and currently have 344 days of vacation in my bank but that is all about to change. I'm going to take a week off every month for the next 4 months just for the hell of it (and to go fishing). I will still have about 170 hrs left to get me to the end of the year. I am the guy you are describing above and the office would pretty well stop without me until recently. I get 5 weeks per year and usually carry over a couple hundred hrs and have decided to start using them.
    Sounds like you have it made. Back in the 1970's, I worked for a machine shop in Houston, Texas where you had to work there 10 years to qualify for 3 weeks vacation. Oh, and you couldn't carry days over. You used them or lost them. This was not uncommon either. Tough days and tough work. I loved it and I miss it so much! After a few years, retirement sucks.

  9. #49
    Nuisance Factor Yeti 8 Jungle Swing Champion, YetiSports 4 - Albatross Overload Champion, YetiSports7 - Snowboard FreeRide Champion, Alu`s Revenge Champion boontito's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    96,494
    Thanks
    74928

    From
    <-- "Meme Boy"
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    When I'm sick or take a vacation, there are zero other people who can come in and do any more than probably 20% of my job. That means my to-do list is absorbed by no one when I'm gone, my responsibilities don't decrease at all, I'm still expected to accomplish the same amount of work whenever it is that I return. It just accumulates. That's not my boss's fault, it's just the basic nature of the job.
    No. That is your boss's fault. That's a poor business model... okay, that's unfair. That MAY BE a poor business model. If he wants it that way and it's acceptable to him, that's fine. But the reason for any productivity drop when an employee uses their leave time that is part of their compensation package is completely the fault of the employer. That's where the responsibility lands and stays.
    Thanks from Dangermouse and One

  10. #50
    Nuisance Factor Yeti 8 Jungle Swing Champion, YetiSports 4 - Albatross Overload Champion, YetiSports7 - Snowboard FreeRide Champion, Alu`s Revenge Champion boontito's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    96,494
    Thanks
    74928

    From
    <-- "Meme Boy"
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    Thats an interesting point. My spouse did a bit of telecommuting for his company in Massachusetts and it ended up becoming full time. However, after two years, the company (fairly good sized one) decided telecommuting was no longer acceptable (many worked in NH and ME). They claimed both that it hurt Massachusetts communities because once one goes more than 6 months of telecommuting they pay income tax to their home state. The other reason they cited was a longing of "press the flesh" saying it was too impersonal as some employees hadnt even met each other. Kind of silly but thats what they claimed.
    I did read an article once, I'll try and find it, that explained that one of the down sides of telecommuting is that the "office" becomes impersonal and morale drops. People begin to assume things about their co-workers, like is the effort they put out equal to theirs, that they wouldn't if they interacted with them face-to-face. They also see less teamwork overall as some people don't step up to help out or pick up the slack of the co-worker they no longer have, or never developed, a personal bond with.

    Edit: Also the problem that you see on Facebook or even here where you don't hear the influx of someone's voice when all you read is their text and how that can cause communication and personnel problems too.
    Thanks from bajisima

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Taxed by the boss
    By michaelr in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 27th April 2012, 01:30 PM
  2. Meet the new boss...same as the old boss!
    By mjollnir in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 31st October 2009, 09:00 PM
  3. Work shuts down internet at work with Dansguardian...
    By Ronster in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 19th September 2007, 06:28 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed