General discussion

Locked

Time Wasted Survey

By marileev ·
Salary.com conducted a survey which says workers waste two hours a day cruising on the web and socializing. By one calculation employers spend $759 billion per year paying - http://www.salary.com/careers/layoutscripts/crel_display.asp?tab=cre&cat=nocat&ser=Ser374&part=Par555

The nature of my job is very collaborative, even if I take a minute off topic our department is still able to get their deliverables completed like this tips article http://www.essentialsecurity.com/Documents/article18.htm

Do you spend more than 2 hours a day "goofing-off?" Has goofing off ever negatively affected your job? I think taking a break gives you fresh eyes.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

46 total posts (Page 4 of 5)   Prev   02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Simple really

by jdclyde In reply to I don't know about that.. ...

without that order, the rest of the employees are out of a job. Peroid.

Class-envy will not change that one fact.

Collapse -

no jobs without rule-setters?

by jck In reply to Simple really

Then how did anyone ever start a company?

You're telling me that Henry Ford, Paul Allen, Steve Wozniak, Mark Cuban or Marc Andreesen all went out and made their huge money because...they hired executives? WOW...you are so smart! *cough cough sarcastic cough*

I guess they had to hire those rule-setters before they hired the labour, eh?

Talk about weird assertion...companies can't employ people without the rule-setting execs? Right...and I get to work with the engine of my car in the passenger seat too.

Class envy...no...it's fact.

Companies make profit based on the sale of a manufactured product...not a promise.

The market dictates what the demand for that product is...not the executive rule-setter.

The Sales and Promotion Department devises advertising that makes the product appealing...not the executive rule setter.

The labour makes the product that is advertised.


And if that still doesn't make sense to you, I'll make you a deal.

I'll start a company and hire myself to sell and provide a service as a computer tech.

You start your company by hiring yourself as an executive doing rule-setting and golfing and having meetings about having a computer tech.

I bet I'll make more money...then I'll buy you out!!! hahaha ]:)

Now THAT is funny...class envy...hahaha...you crack me up... ]:)

So...you gonna open a bottle of beer with a can opener too?

Collapse -

So it is the bottom laborer that makes all the money?

by jdclyde In reply to no jobs without rule-sett ...

So it is the bottom laborer that makes all the money?

Someone chosing a direction for the company didn't have an influence at all, huh?

Someone deciding which products to build, how much to build them, and how to build them, has less of an influince?

So figuring what materials, and what tools had little influince either?

Wow, you really have no idea how a manufacturing company works, do you? The floor worker comes in and does the parts he is told to do, as part of a process someone else has figured out.

And of course, as much as everyone hates salesmen, the salesman is the bread and butter of a company. If he is not successful getting orders, the floor laborer is out of a job waiting for orders to come in.

Go take a business management course somewhere to learn something about this.

And yes, this is all part of your petty class-envy, to think that the floor worker is worth as much to the company as the execs. There is a reason execs make so much more than people doing unskilled labor. You can have the greatest workforce in the world, but if they are not working on the right job at the right time, you are out of business with a warehouse full of inventory you can't move. That inventory is money that could have been used to pay the monthly bills, but instead it went to pay for materials and labor costs.

Collapse -

I think you just made my point for me

by jck In reply to So it is the bottom labor ...

Makes all the money? Another generalistic question.

You saw what I typed. Without the laborer who makes the end product, NO income comes into a company (unless of course, you're a scam like 1990s internet IPO or Enron and lie to the stockmarket selling a "box of bricks" to people).

Salesman <> rule-setting executive
Engineer (who designs the products) <> rule-setting executive
Purchaser (who acquires materials) <> rule-setting executive
Labourer (who builds product which is profit generator) <> rule-setting executive.

Thanks for making my point for me.

Oh and btw...I never said floor labour figured out what to make...did I? Nice try

Contrary to what you think, I have had a business course. I had it when I was a Computer Services Section Head. I do understand both how manufacturing works the business model as well as accounting, forecasting and trends, and asset management.

Oh...and...BTW...if you know anything about business, you'll know every company has a product line and development scheme before they even start operations...let alone hiring executives. It's called...a business plan. Business 101 for ya there. So, executives are not needed for that as you've proclaimed. QED

I could have been a CTO or Director by now. I chose not to do that. That's all the proof I need to provide you're wrong about me and my "class envy". Climbing the ladder isn't my modus operandi.

As for how much inventory to keep...if you're basing your company's business on the size of your warehouse and keeping it full...you are really putting your cart before your horse. The only thing you should worry about keeping your warehouse filled with is employees who are moving that product constantly.

No matter what you say, executives are truly nothing more than overpaid middlemen who get a check for being corporate gamblers using other peoples' money in making decisions that could be made by more competent people who work below them.

I've decided not to speel anymore here and bore people anymore with replying to your silly presumptions about me.

Now...go back to Friday Yuk. At least you mean to be funny there. ]:)

Collapse -

wasting time? or refreshing our minds

by tioedong In reply to Time Wasted Survey

You think it's bad in the tech industry, you should be a doc in an HMO that wants you to see people "efficiently" in ten minutes, and then spend five minutes writing every trivial detail so they get paid.
What's wrong with this picture?
Well, lots of people coming in for "colds" have other problems...alcohol, a teenager causing problems at home, questions about a symptom they are hesitant to bring up (e.g. ****** bleeding) so they come in for " a cold". If you don't "waste" time socializing, they may never bring these things up.
Similarly, often I would play solitare between patients, but my mind at another level was thinking and then eureka, I'd figure out the diagnosis.
Finally, "wasting" time in coffee breaks allow people to work together.
The emphasis on busy work dehumanizes us, which is why the Pope last week reminded us we need to be lazy once in awhile and relax.

Collapse -

only human

by marileev In reply to wasting time? or refreshi ...

Ditto, no matter what industry you work in, you can only run at 110% so long. After all, we're only human

Collapse -

automaton

by doc.two In reply to Time Wasted Survey

automaton
One entry found for automaton.
Main Entry: au?tom?a?ton
Pronunciation: o-'t?-m&-t&n, -m&-"t?n
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -atons or au?tom?a?ta /-m&-t&, -m&-"t?/
Etymology: Latin, from Greek, neuter of automatos
1 : a mechanism that is relatively self-operating; especially : ROBOT
2 : a machine or control mechanism designed to follow automatically a predetermined sequence of operations or respond to encoded instructions
3 : an individual who acts in a mechanical fashion

-There must be complete efficiency so that we can be viewed as doing our jobs- Some middle management type, circa the start of the Industrial Age

Collapse -

a simple solution to the goofing off problem

by ttocsmij In reply to Time Wasted Survey

I just came from a company that has the solution to this "spare" time problem ... they downsize on a regular basis until everyone is working 50 hours plus just to keep up. This solves the problem quite nicely (except for those of us downsized of course) although it doesn't do much for the health of those left. I am reminded of a poster seen once: "Beatings will continue until morale improves!" :-)

P.S. Where in heaven's name did you find a place where one can goof off for two hours a day?!?! I would like to submit a resume immediately! I am kidding of course; their present staff would kill me for working 8 hours and making them look bad.

Collapse -

8 hour days

by marileev In reply to a simple solution to the ...

Wow, I remember those and actually taking a lunch. Our ping-pong table in the front area can be a bit deceiving to those interviewing. While it gets lots of use - the 8 hour day for so many has gone the way of the rolodex.

Collapse -

ahhh, the good old daze

by jdclyde In reply to 8 hour days

of punching a clock in and out on a regular schedule........

When I get older and need to slow down, I guess I could cut back to only 8 hour days! B-)

Back to IT Employment Forum
46 total posts (Page 4 of 5)   Prev   02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums