ADVERTISEMENT

Just nothin going on in Dc. People never went

That reminds me of what I used to tell my director when they rated on the bell curve. I would tell him that if I was competing to climb a tree there was 2 ways about going about it. I could work real hard and climb to the to of the tree faster than my competition or I could wait until he's in the tree and use my chainsaw to cut it down and run out to the top while my competition is trying to figure out what happened. 🤣
qMhu8D.gif
 
Well I hope the decentralize a lot from DC. Put the EPA HQ in Kansas City. Transportation department in Houston, Education department in Tupelo, MS.

Bulldoze the Hoover building and replace it with a bunch of regional offices.
There is some merit to doing that. I actually think it could get bi-partisan approval, depending on what is actually proposed.

This has been something people on the left have been pushing for at least since I’ve been paying attention to politics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NPT
There is some merit to doing that. I actually think it could get bi-partisan approval, depending on what is actually proposed.

This has been something people on the left have been pushing for at least since I’ve been paying attention to politics.
following up, this article from 2016 makes a good case for it. I was looking for examples further back, but this gets the gist:

Move federal agencies to the Midwest
 
  • Like
Reactions: NPT and mcmurtry66
There is some merit to doing that. I actually think it could get bi-partisan approval, depending on what is actually proposed.

This has been something people on the left have been pushing for at least since I’ve been paying attention to politics.
We have to break the power center. There’s a reason 10 of the richest counties in the U.S. are D.C. collar counties

A 6 trillion dollar a year slush fund and they’re all feeding at the trough
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
I think that there is usually something more that can be found to do but most people generally have a set amount of productivity they are going to give you on any given day. Even your best employees are not giving you 8 hours. Anyone honest with themselves knows that they aren't dialed in 100% of the time that they are at work. There may be certain days or a stretch of days where that happens like as you approach the last few days before a deadline, but that is usually followed by a letdown the days following completion. They are still working and still giving their "8 hours" but it isn't like the 8 they were giving right before the deadline.

Yes. The carrot I mentioned. Your best employees will take what you assigned and instead of completing it in Z time will do it in Y time and then help you with tasks A,B,C as long as there is an incentive to go above and beyond. However, even your best employees will start to weigh the compensation against what they are being asked to do. The smaller your business, the less coworkers your superstar has to compare themselves to.

I find it odd that our biggest capitalists at times fail to recognize what motivates the basic employees. Each successive younger generation has become less loyal to the boss man and that trend down has followed what wages have done in comparison to productivity. "Well Crazy, robots and technology made people more productive..." Totally fair, so now people get more done in the 8 hours we have forced them to work since Ford was having them build the Model T but pay has not kept up. You will have periods where you have a highly motivated employee that you can keep motivated by the reason they are there. Money. However, eventually you run into a wall where you can't meet their expectation. Those who can will go find someone who will pay what they want and those who cannot will settle in after some point in time and do what you pay them for. If you have a bunch of employees that generally means they drop to just above average.

If we are being honest, that kind of attitude is kind of why employees check out. "Why are you approaching this transactionally?" asks the owner or CEO.

"Well boss, I am doing a good job right?"

"Yes, you are. One of the best I have."

"Great, it would mean a bunch for my work/life balance if I continue to be your best employee, my pay doesn't change, but I only stay in the office 7 hours a day instead of 8. I will do everything to make sure that I reduce time wasters in the day so my production won't fall...."

"No, no, I need you the 8. If you can get it done in 7 then there is even more I can get out of you. Why would I pay the same for less time? And if you don't former great employee, well look out for A.I."

Yeah, you're transactional too boss. We all are. We get paid by you to do a job. Nobody is working for free. You don't pay McDonald's prices and epect Michelin service. Laborers are capitalists too. When you hire a plumber to do a service, he charges for every thing he finds above and beyond the initial call. Owners expecting 100% from everyone without having a compensation structure that accommodates for that end up where I said they do. It is a very small percentage of people that will continue to be their absolute best when they lose the carrot to keep being that way.
I’ve never had a completely transactional employee who was great at anything. That attitude belies more than what you’ve discussed, in my limited experience.

There’s also an assumption here that if someone works fewer hours they’ll spend less time unproductively. Why wouldn’t they work at the same rate of productivity just for fewer hours? Again, there is no a priori answer here—it’s going to differ by person, employer, region, job type, etc.
 
I’ve never had a completely transactional employee who was great at anything. That attitude belies more than what you’ve discussed, in my limited experience.
I am being a bit hyperbolic to make a point. These people likely are not 100% transactional but most of them are transactional to a degree that likely is closer to 100 than it is zero. I think part of it can be in the type of work too. To some law is a "calling". You derive value out of being part of that. I don't think people are generally called to be an insurance adjuster or a customer service agent or insert any number of cubicle centered white collar jobs here. I like my job but if I hit a large enough lotto, I am out yesterday. If someone came along tomorrow and offered me $50,000 more a year, I am heavily weighing that in the new company's favor when doing my list of pros and cons.
There’s also an assumption here that if someone works fewer hours they’ll spend less time unproductively. Why wouldn’t they work at the same rate of productivity just for fewer hours? Again, there is no a priori answer here—it’s going to differ by person, employer, region, job type, etc.
Low performers are low performers. I am more talking your average and above type of employees. I think good employees still want to be good employees and would strive to meet whatever their defined goals are for the job. They would probably shoot to exceed them. But if you told them that they didn't have to stay for the whole 8, I bet there is a little less time spent on time wasters that even the best employees do every day.
 
I am being a bit hyperbolic to make a point. These people likely are not 100% transactional but most of them are transactional to a degree that likely is closer to 100 than it is zero. I think part of it can be in the type of work too. To some law is a "calling". You derive value out of being part of that. I don't think people are generally called to be an insurance adjuster or a customer service agent or insert any number of cubicle centered white collar jobs here. I like my job but if I hit a large enough lotto, I am out yesterday. If someone came along tomorrow and offered me $50,000 more a year, I am heavily weighing that in the new company's favor when doing my list of pros and cons.

Low performers are low performers. I am more talking your average and above type of employees. I think good employees still want to be good employees and would strive to meet whatever their defined goals are for the job. They would probably shoot to exceed them. But if you told them that they didn't have to stay for the whole 8, I bet there is a little less time spent on time wasters that even the best employees do every day.
I am stunned by the amount of managers that don't want to manage. Managing remote or even off hours work (overseas for instance) isn't some version of rocket surgery.

As to keeping employees the only way is to "overpay" them. Whether that be benefits, PTO/timeoff, flexibility, or just more money (I use incentives based on production and quality).

I have it a bit easier. Most of hte work i manage (insurance adjuster adjacent) is heavily tilted towards a production environment. Objective, clearly defined metrics. And I share all employee scorecarding results globally. No hiding.

And that's before we even get to the actual production metrics (also shared globally). I find that sharing htis stuff globally creates competition. People don't want to be in the bottom half in a month/quarter/year. And understanding shit employees is easy.

I have (knock on wood) very little turnover. Like, less than 5% a year. HR would say we overpay. Ok, whatever Jan.
 
  • Love
Reactions: mcmurtry66
I am stunned by the amount of managers that don't want to manage. Managing remote or even off hours work (overseas for instance) isn't some version of rocket surgery.

As to keeping employees the only way is to "overpay" them. Whether that be benefits, PTO/timeoff, flexibility, or just more money (I use incentives based on production and quality).

I have it a bit easier. Most of hte work i manage (insurance adjuster adjacent) is heavily tilted towards a production environment. Objective, clearly defined metrics. And I share all employee scorecarding results globally. No hiding.

And that's before we even get to the actual production metrics (also shared globally). I find that sharing htis stuff globally creates competition. People don't want to be in the bottom half in a month/quarter/year. And understanding shit employees is easy.

I have (knock on wood) very little turnover. Like, less than 5% a year. HR would say we overpay. Ok, whatever Jan.
Scorecarding…. In other words rank them motherfckrs!!!!! Show em!!!!
 
We ain’t doin real work. Phone calls. Zoom bullshit. Not farming like you. By the way. Clarkson’s Farm. Soooooo great
I've met those boys. Good kids. My son actually talked about doing that before Clarkson's, but I didn't encourage him enough. We wouldn't have been as entertaining. We would be like if Real Housewives and Clarkson's had a baby.

 
The patent office has had remote work for over 25 years. Examiners live in all 50 states plus Guam and Puerto Rico. They already have difficulty finding qualified people. Those 10,000+ employees are not going back to the office. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BCCHoosier
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT