At 23:00 24/09/98 -0700, you wrote: >michael perelman wrote, > >>A couple of days ago NPR had a story about Native Americans being poor >>employees because their family obligations are too strong. They are too >>prone to take time off to help a friend or family member in need. Yup. Key lines of accountability here run through family and social networks, not time clocks. This was a horrific problem for mining companies in the 20s and 30s -- largely indigenous workforces would up and leave for a week or two when their local home communities would have ritual annual festivals. A human resource managers nightmare. My wife's uncle used to type up payroll at one such company in the 30s -- he told amazing stories of how the company struggled to discipline labor, and break the savages of their pagan ways, so they might punch the clock with greater regularity. Previous commet has been from the perspective of those who work for others. I do this too -- and Mike Yates comment pretty much sums up my attitude. But I also have people who work for me. (I have 3 jobs just now.) About 5 people work under me in different capacities, some paid, others not (program assistants, volunteers in the union work, I coordinate a kids play circle, hiring the daycare person, etc.). MUCH of my "people management" work here is dealing with their need to help friends and family vs. my "need" to get work done. Here health, education, housing and general welfare require greater levels of human cooperation and daily intervention, during ofice hours. "Services", such as they are, are expensive and often not good -- i.e. money can't get you what you need. I admit to vaciliating between being understanding as a manager and a desire to see work move forward. But I can say this: the day one stops listening carefully, and starts forgetting the details of the predicaments related, is that day one starts to suffer a kind of social death. With such death, people become less cooperative, and your abilty to "do stuff" severly diminished. Note: the fianacial equivalent of this argument (unit of concern: money, not minutes) is that people share income among family members instead of saving. Time and money "squandered" instead of "invested". This is particularly notorious in "development" discussions of Africa and Latin America. Tom Tom Kruse / Casilla 5812 / Cochabamba, Bolivia Tel/Fax: (591-4) 248242 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
