I wasn't arguing any different. By all means leave on time.
But this is part of why it is disrespectful. Look at nurses. If you are late, patients in a hospital can't just go without care. So that means the prior shift is asked to stay later. That's just one example.
Because others have to pick up your slack. Because others have to waste their time waiting around for you. Because it's unfair to other staff that wind up working longer than you.
Some jobs are more critical than others, sure, but it’s still disrespectful to make people constantly have to cover for you. Why does Brad constantly have to give you notes? What if both Brad and you are late?
I actually think I’m with the boomers on this one. You should strive to be on time. No need to make a federal case out of occasionally being a little late, but it’s wrong to be constantly late.
Slightly scummy on the first front, but then again, if I knew the better codes, I’d just use them rather than use a browser extension.
On the second front, that’s more the fault of companies not validating exclusive codes.
So the TL:DW version seems to be that honey changes or adds an affiliate link to get a commission on the sale. Similar programs like Capital One Shopping probably do the same thing.
Honestly, I don’t give a shit. I hate affiliate links no matter who gets them. They are the real scam.
Sounds link the real solution is to use it to identify potential coupon codes. Then clear cookies, resign in, and enter the code yourself. But it’s not like that yields a cheaper price, so I’m not even sure I care.
No affirmative action and we probably wouldn’t be stuck with Clarence Thomas. It’s not all bad.
Other CEOs that sit on governing boards set the compensation. It’s the same thing.
Sorry, I’ll never buy that it’s fair compensation, especially for a nonprofit charity.
Convenient the C-Suite sticks to a theory that massively benefits themselves. Sorry, it’s bullshit.
And there is ample evidence. Look no further than how every other employee is treated. Do you think they could get the best veterinarians by paying say, $300,000/year? Of course. But they don’t because they recognize the diminishing returns of thinking they have to have the best. But somehow the C-suite makes itself immune.
And that goes back to your example. As an engineer, I can tell you that construction trades are in HUGE demand. Same with civil engineers. Yet pay isn’t going up, at least not much.
Executive pay has gone up far faster than pay for regular workers. Sorry, I don’t buy the explanation that somehow they are the only group struggling to to find top candidates.
Depends on the job. But I make less than both those numbers. And the construction journeymen make more than me, actually.
Yes, they make less because they are less talented. I completely disagree with your assertion that these executives are more talented. I have yet to meet a business major that wasn’t an absolute moron.
What evidence do you have they are more qualified, besides some paradoxical “they must be because they are in the position” reasoning.?
But if you want a talented, experienced person to run your org, you have to consider what they could make if they worked for someone else.
That’s such bullshit reasoning. They make more than 99.9% of people. I get that not everyone is great, but you are saying 99.9% of people are all talentless hacks that couldn’t do a decent enough job to the extent that the salary savings would be worth it?
Guess my civil engineering degree and 18 years of experience is a worthless pile of shit.
And if no one is there?
I'm not saying everyone has to get mad over occasional tardiness. But when one employee decides his time is more important than mine because I always have to cover for them, and they are always missing when we start, fuck yes, I will be mad at them, not just as a boss, but as a fellow employee. Have some respect for your fellow workers.