On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Robert Merrill <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Merrill Oveson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Most of the time, people get treated as disposable assets. > > It is unfortunate but true, you just wrote the world's smallest book > on career management.
Of course we're disposable assets. Just as our employers are disposable to us. Is there anything wrong with that? If your employer stopped paying you, would you still work for them? What if they only halved your pay? Hopefully you have the good sense to kick them to the curb the moment you have a better offer. Likewise, if I suck at my job and my employer feels like they are getting ripped off due to my lack of ability, they shouldn't hesitate to show me the door. The same is true if my employer likes my work, but simply can't afford me. I don't understand this double-standard that we hold where the employer should bend-over backwards to be "loyal" to us, but we reserve the right to abandon them the moment we find a better offer, or simply feel like quitting to collect unemployment/welfare. Personally, I appreciate the clarity about the situation. If my employment contributes to my employer's success then hooray for us. If not, then they should fire me (sucks for me, hooray for them). If on the other hand, I find a better offer from another company, you better believe that I would jump ship without thinking twice (hooray for me, sucks for them). Neither one of us is "bad". We're just both looking out for our own self-interest respectively. Typically both our self-interests are best served by our current arrangement and thus I stay working for them, and they continue to send money to my bank account. Everybody wins. -Bryan /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
