Work issue with holidays

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Banterbus28 wrote: »

Easiest solution is instead of cramming every thing into 9-5. Do all the front of house customer and client facing stuff Mon-Fri 9-5. And then have admin monkeys do nightshift to do all the administration ��

or maybe do everything 9-5, and simply employ more to do the work during the hours, introduce policies that make sure the wealth created from these processes is actually more evenly distributed, and treat workers with a bit of respect and not like they current are, i.e. worker drones. humans are humans, and its well known, shift work is highly dangerous for humans in relation to their physical and mental health

Shift work suits me much better than Mon'Fri 9-5 like I do now.

I am nocturnal ðŸ˜‚

I dream of getting a job that's 4 on 4 off.

doolox

Many insurance companies spread their labour force across many time zones so that the customer facing stuff is done 9-5 in each local area and back room stuff is done by people in a different time zone at a 5 to 8 hr separation from the area whose data they are working on.

A company in Loughrea, Co. Galway and another one in Letterkenny, work on US east coast client base data in what are normal office hours for the Irish staff but are late evening for the US people.

This saves the company paying shift and unsocial hours premia and the cost of employment in remote rural areas of Ireland are somewhat cheaper than the US.

Banterbus28 wrote: »

Shift work suits me much better than Mon'Fri 9-5 like I do now.

I am nocturnal &#55357;&#56834;

even though i do understand where you re coming from, i have met some whereby shifts suit them and seem somewhat healthy enough on them, theres plenty of evidence to show, its generally extremely unhealthy for humans

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Banterbus28 wrote: »

Shift work suits me much better than Mon'Fri 9-5 like I do now.

I am nocturnal ��

even though i do understand where you re coming from, i have met some whereby shifts suit them and seem somewhat healthy enough on them, theres plenty of evidence to show, its generally extremely unhealthy for humans

There's always outliers in any data set

Tell me how

Wanderer78 wrote:

or maybe do everything 9-5, and simply employ more to do the work during the hours, introduce policies that make sure the wealth created from these processes is actually more evenly distributed, and treat workers with a bit of respect and not like they current are, i.e. worker drones. humans are humans, and its well known, shift work is highly dangerous for humans in relation to their physical and mental health

The working environment, for the vast majority (and dare I say it, everyone in Ireland) is exponentially better now than it was in the past.

What you say isn't necessarily untrue but it is idealistic. 99%+ of companies in Ireland are small to medium. They are full of people who have to work late because they simply cannot afford to hire someone else.

I spent 10 yrs as a manager and for a small number of people, if you gave them a 35 hr week, they'd complain that it wasn't 30 hrs and if they worked 30 they'd think it should be 25 (with same pay of course). That's a bit off a flippant example but I trust you understand my point.

There's an equal proportion of "chancers" in blue collar roles as white collar in my experience.

Of course, it would be great if there weren't any anywhere but that scenario simply doesn't exist.

Best example is Emergency services, they can only do shift work due to the nature of service delivery.

The high amount of sickness absence is due to stress whichbis due to not resting.

Tell me how wrote: »

The working environment, for the vast majority (and dare I say it, everyone in Ireland) is exponentially better now than it was in the past.

What you say isn't necessarily untrue but it is idealistic. 99%+ of companies in Ireland are small to medium. They are full of people who have to work late because they simply cannot afford to hire someone else.

I spent 10 yrs as a manager and for a small number of people, if you gave them a 35 hr week, they'd complain that it wasn't 30 hrs and if they worked 30 they'd think it should be 25 (with same pay of course). That's a bit off a flippant example but I trust you understand my point.

There's an equal proportion of "chancers" in blue collar roles as white collar in my experience.

Of course, it would be great if there weren't any anywhere but that scenario simply doesn't exist.

at some point in time, we actually have to start accepting, our working environments arent actually working for most, including employers. theres plenty of evidence to show, our planet is awash with wealth, but this wealth is becoming highly concentrated, we have to start addressing this or it could potentially cause catastrophic economic collapse. i know plenty of small business owners, the pressures to maintain their businesses is astonishing.

beauf

Banterbus28 wrote: »

Best example is Emergency services, they can only do shift work due to the nature of service delivery.

The high amount of sickness absence is due to stress whichbis due to not resting.

Its also an incredibly stressful job.

beauf wrote: »

Banterbus28 wrote: »

Best example is Emergency services, they can only do shift work due to the nature of service delivery.

The high amount of sickness absence is due to stress whichbis due to not resting.

Its also an incredibly stressful job.

It's a vocation not a job most go into it for a love of helping people, those that go into it as "just a job" don't last long and if they do hold out they are miserable.

Of course pulling dead kids from wrecked cars is going to be stressful but OH studies show that most are on sick due ti lack of rest.

Wanderer78 wrote: »

or maybe do everything 9-5, and simply employ more to do the work during the hours, introduce policies that make sure the wealth created from these processes is actually more evenly distributed, and treat workers with a bit of respect and not like they current are, i.e. worker drones. humans are humans, and its well known, shift work is highly dangerous for humans in relation to their physical and mental health

I'm a firm believer that the wealth created should be distributed fairly to the worker, company and of course the shareholder while the customer is charged a fair and reasonable price.

Income tax and corporation tax are the current stabs at further distributing the wealth created and that's proving to be largely successful currently.

There are countless example of activites that cannot occur on a 9 - 5 basis, policing, hospital A&E, care assistants, many manufacturing processes etc etc etc and of course a huge proportion of the service industry.

Banterbus28 wrote: »

It's a vocation not a job most go into it for a love of helping people, those that go into it as "just a job" don't last long and if they do hold out they are miserable.

Of course pulling dead kids from wrecked cars is going to be stressful but OH studies show that most are on sick due ti lack of rest.

vocation/job, whats the difference? most people require a job to survive. i have met many emergency services personal, astonishing human beings, most indeed do go into it for pure humanitarian reasons, sadly many end up leaving due to environmentally induced mental health reasons.

lawred2

Steven Seagal wrote: »

My boss’s boss, the woman who refused my PTO is the global manager of our team so the only other option was to say it to HR, and they told me only she can approve them now.

nice of her to just reject the request with giving you or anyone a reason...

some people are just dicks

Augeo wrote: »

I'm a firm believer that the wealth created should be distributed fairly to the worker, company and of course the shareholder while the customer is charged a fair and reasonable price.

Income tax and corporation tax are the current stabs at further distributing the wealth created and that's proving to be largely successful currently.

There are countless example of activites that cannot occur on a 9 - 5 basis, policing, hospital A&E, care assistants, many manufacturing processes etc etc etc and of course a huge proportion of the service industry.

the work of people such as joe stigliz and thomas piketty, amongst others, shows otherwise.

"Vocation" literally means "calling" (cf. "vocal"). It refers to work that one does because of a feeling of deep affinity, attraction and/or talent. ... Note that ideally "profession" and "vocation" overlap - a lawyer, by profession, will have much more job satisfaction if law is also her/his vocation.

A job in this example refers to somebody just converting time to money.

lawred2

Steven Seagal wrote: »

Thanks for all the replies, my immediate manager asked me this morning what I was going to do if I couldn’t get this approved and told him it would leave me no choice but to look for a new job. He wasn’t surprised and told me he would push as much as he could but not to be expecting good news.

what a coward - he approved it - he is the one that should be 'pushing' for it

Tell me how

Wanderer78 wrote:

at some point in time, we actually have to start accepting, our working environments arent actually working for most, including employers. theres plenty of evidence to show, our planet is awash with wealth, but this wealth is becoming highly concentrated, we have to start addressing this or it could potentially cause catastrophic economic collapse. i know plenty of small business owners, the pressures to maintain their businesses is astonishing.

Augeo wrote:

I'm a firm believer that the wealth created should be distributed fairly to the worker, company and of course the shareholder while the customer is charged a fair and reasonable price.

Income tax and corporation tax are the current stabs at further distributing the wealth created and that's proving to be largely successful currently.

Agree that wealth allocation is skewed. But, we in Ireland are still largely in at least the top 10% globally of the "haves".

Would we agree for it to be entirely equally distributed if it meant our standard of living dropped? Or do we just distribute more equally within our 10% grouping.

Would we accept paying 2-300% more for clothes? Or increased food prices?

Wanderer78 wrote: »

at some point in time, we actually have to start accepting, our working environments arent actually working for most, including employers. theres plenty of evidence to show, our planet is awash with wealth, but this wealth is becoming highly concentrated, we have to start addressing this or it could potentially cause catastrophic economic collapse. i know plenty of small business owners, the pressures to maintain their businesses is astonishing.

I tend to disagree.
Most people strive to improve their situation. Loads and loads of people enjoy what they do for a living. It can be tough at times and a challenge but as many thrive on that as don't.

I really doubt the plenly of small business owners who know would have things any other way and I also reckon your view from the outside looking in might well not be at all representative of reality, I'd also suspect you don't know plenty small business owners tbh.

Those that don't thrive have other options, admittedly lower paid in many cases.

Humans aren't like the lads in the The Lotos-Eaters Poem by Lord Tennyson, for the most part. Those that are so inclined are hugely in favour of the something for nothing and hard work is bad for you.

Tell me how wrote: »

............

Would we agree for it to be entirely equally distributed..........

I'm a firm believer that there is no need for this, as I said.... "Income tax and corporation tax are the current stabs at further distributing the wealth created and that's proving to be largely successful currently"

the folk shouting for more equal distribution want the "middle class " to further subsidise the welfare class in Ireland, they most definitely don't want all Irish folk encountering increased costs or further taxes to distribute "Irish" wealth internationally. I'd be more in favour of that than a further internal distribution in our nation, to be honest.

Augeo wrote: »

I'm a firm believer that there is no need for this, as I said.... "Income tax and corporation tax are the current stabs at further distributing the wealth created and that's proving to be largely successful currently"

again, theres mounting evidence to show, that the move of taxing capital less and taxing labour more is in fact not working for the majority. we have been lead to believe that this move would cause a 'trickle down' of wealth, but this in fact has been largely untrue, and that the only thing truly trickling down are the debts that have been created from these processes.

on a human level, one of the major problems this is causing is the rise of complex social problems such as mental health issues etc

Wanderer78 wrote: »

again, theres mounting evidence to show, that the move of taxing capital less and taxing labour more is in fact not working for the majority.............

Mounting evidence?
Where is it?
Please do provide a link to the evidence.
We are talking about Ireland btw.

Augeo wrote: »

Mounting evidence?
Where is it?
Please do provide a link to the evidence.
We are talking about Ireland btw.

theres plenty of well respected political and economic commentators writing about this now, ive previously included their names. please be aware, i also have a rather unorthodox method of research, providing links would simply clutter the thread with videos and audio from such commentators.

I'm sorry but what is the issue with with higher taxation of labour?

Is it not the worker that benefits from the fruits of this taxation?

I'm happy to be taxed a bit more to get the services I am entitled to, but then i'm up north an Medical is free.

"theres plenty of well respected political and economic commentators writing about this now"

That's opinion, not evidence.

Banterbus28 wrote: »

I'm sorry but what is the issue with with higher taxation of labour?

Is it not the worker that benefits from the fruits of this taxation?

I'm happy to be taxed a bit more to get the services I am entitled to, but then i'm up north an Medical is free.

we simply cannot keep taxing labour to provide us with all our social needs, its an unsustainable model

Augeo wrote: »

"theres plenty of well respected political and economic commentators writing about this now"

That's opinion, not evidence.

fair enough:rolleyes:

Banterbus28 wrote: »

I'm sorry but what is the issue with with higher taxation of labour?

Is it not the worker that benefits from the fruits of this taxation?

I'm happy to be taxed a bit more to get the services I am entitled to, but then i'm up north an Medical is free.

I feel wanderer is mindful that those who can't / don't work should benefit more from the fruits of others labour

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Banterbus28 wrote: »

I'm sorry but what is the issue with with higher taxation of labour?

Is it not the worker that benefits from the fruits of this taxation?

I'm happy to be taxed a bit more to get the services I am entitled to, but then i'm up north an Medical is free.

we simply cannot keep taxing labour to provide us with all our social needs, its an unsustainable model

No it's not... you are the service user so you pay for it, simple.

Augeo wrote: »

I feel wanderer is mindful that those who can't / don't work should benefit more from the fruits of others labour

i am in fact concerned for all humans and our planet, equally, labour cannot keep footing the bill for all our social needs