TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: More responsibilities, but no more $ From:Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:16:04 -0700 (PDT)
> I'm impressed with the level of analysis going on over this dilemma.
I'm a
> stickler for employer consistency, and interpret reneged promises as a
> violation of the work contract, but it's interesting to see how many
folks
> would not jump immediately to that judgment.
How then would you feel if a company made you uphold the same level of
ethics?
- You said you'd do something, and forgot - you're fired and a lawsuit
brought against you.
- You feel bad one day and decide to skip work - you're fired and your
paychecks withheld.
- You accidentally say the wrong thing to a client - you're fired and a
lawsuit brought against you.
- Your father/mother dies and you're having a tough time dealing with it -
tough sh*t, you promised to be here at 8am ever morning, show up or your
fired.
My point is, people often tend to have a double-standard when it comes to
employers. They expect their employer to follow every single rule in the
book, while the employee can selectively apply rules at will.
Would you want an employer to be lenient with you when you were going
through hard times? Then why can't you be lenient when the company is
going through bad times?
> I think in the long run, this behavior speaks negatively to the
company's
> basic philosophy. Integrity is an important ingredient in the work
> relationship, and where it does not exist, it undermines the basic
> credibility of the company. The willingness to tolerate bad-faith
promises
> signals a corporate culture where the ends justify the means, where
workers
> are expendable commodities, and where manipulating employees unfairly to
> achieve corporate ends is an accepted business tool.
I agree. Integrity is important. But integrity is often in the eyes of the
beholder. I have watched technical writers throw violent tantrums
insisting they are the most valuable member of a team and working hard.
Then a day later they are slipping out the door at 3:30pm to play golf
with their buddies while some intern is stuck doing the dirty work.
And if you confront these people they ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have some
intricate justification why they deserve a break and nobody else does.
Employees manipulate their employer just as much as companies manipulate
employees. How many times have you fudged the truth on being sick or
needing some extra time to get it done? HOw many times did you waste time
at work babbling with somebody about flowers or Palm Pilots when you
should have been working?
Its a two-way street that is constantly under construction.
> That said, most corporations have flaws and/or unethical executives, so
I
> can still agree with those members who suggest that you evaluate the
> motivations, look for alternative compensation, get legal counsel, and
find
> another job before you dump these doodoos.
Part of the problem with today's work ethic is the "f--- you, I have a
lawyer" attitude. Everybody assumes they are just entitled to being
treated like flipping royalty. Hey, you ought to be damn happy you HAVE a
job in today's market.
Its easy to sit in your Areon chair and point fingers at the greedy,
unethical corporate zombies as not loving you enough. Well what about the
flip side of that? What about the lothesome work-shirking twits who think
because they broke the glue seal on the FrameMaker box, they deserve a
raise and an all-expenses paid trip to TechCommunist 2001 so they can
overthrow the means of intelligence.
The original poster should either do one of two things to her boss:
1. "Well, this sucks, but I realize things are bad, I hope they get better
for us later and I can get a raise. I really like working here and I want
to help us make money and get more business...etc."
2. "This job isn't worth it, I quit."
That's it. Don't get a lawyer, don't call the state employment office, and
don't whine! Deal with it professionally - either accept this as the way
it is, or don't. Trying to weasel your way out of this will only make
people want to drop a piano on you.
I used to have a real a-hole of a boss a few years ago. I had a saying
"Either I accept Joe (not his real name) and work, or I don't and quit.
There is no in-between." Eventually, I could not accept him for who he
was any longer and I quit.
You can't have your cake and control the frosting production too.
Andrew Plato
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com
A landmark hotel, one of America's most beautiful cities, and
three and a half days of immersion in the state of the art:
IPCC 01, Oct. 24-27 in Santa Fe. http://ieeepcs.org/2001/
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.