Good Employee/Bad Employee?

Hello All,I'm right now waiting for my tomato sauce to boil on ths stove to make into a nice pizza sauce, so I am here to post and bother you all.Earlier this night, myself, along with other unnumbered and unnamed members, were debating what makes an employee worth his/her pay. Mainly, it was a debate over experience vs. knowledge. That is, some thought it was the experience--years worked, etc.--while others believed knowledge--number of things you can do--that made a great and worthy employee.My stance was that of the latter. I fully believe that a good employee is one who can/will do all things at his/her job, even if not required of that person. People who learn how to do things that they do not have to do are people who show a passion for their job. They show that they put heart into it, that they truly care, that they have an honest interest in their job. They may even be the person who works off the clock many-a-time. I feel that experience, or years worked, does--on its own--nothing to show the quality of an employee. Many employees can work at dead-end jobs for their entire lives and not learn the skills necesary to do all that would be required to keep their business running. An example would be a particular employee I work with. She has been in the same sort of dead-end job for most of her life--as far as I know. She can't opperate our cash register, she cannot properly take phone orders, has difficulty understanding promotional policies (like our punch-cards, coupons, etc.), and shows no interest in learning any of the aformentioned things. As proof of her ridiculious lack of knowledge, she thought until a few days ago, that there was no need to charge a customer for potatoes! As if we're the Give-Away-Food-Free Ranch! All this aside, she is a nice person, and gets along with fellow employees and customers very well... but that only goes so far.I hope the folks with whom I was debating this earlier will step forward to publically add their input, and I hope those who were not there will add their own position and reasoning to the topic.J0N

---

In considering the Origin of Species, it is quite conceivable that a naturalist... might come to the conclusion that each species had not been independently created, but had descended, like varieties, from other species. - Charles Darwin On the Origin of Species

Adaptability and endurance seem to be the most important elements to a "good employee".Of the two you mentioned I think experience ranks higher than knowledge, as knowledge is simply a type of experience which is not necessarily compatible with how the world really works. Edited by holmes, : removed s

---

holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode}
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

A better question - what makes a good employer? Not letting employees do this, for instance. You seem pretty adamant that your place of buisness doesn't give food away for free. But you don't seem to question it when your employees give away their time for free. Why is that? Because you benefit from the latter but not the former?

quote:

---

Earlier this night, myself, along with other unnumbered and unnamed members, were debating what makes an employee worth his/her pay. Mainly, it was a debate over experience vs. knowledge. That is, some thought it was the experience--years worked, etc.--while others believed knowledge--number of things you can do--that made a great and worthy employee.

---

I don't think there is a dichotomy.

quote:

---

My stance was that of the latter. I fully believe that a good employee is one who can/will do all things at his/her job, even if not required of that person. People who learn how to do things that they do not have to do are people who show a passion for their job.

---

That is neither experience nor knowledge, though.That is, as you say, passion and enthusiasm and motivation.

quote:

---

They show that they put heart into it, that they truly care, that they have an honest interest in their job. They may even be the person who works off the clock many-a-time.

---

I'd say that this would be a description of a good worker, but not always a good employee. Someone can be very passionate and enthusiastic and put in a lot of effort and still suck at the job.Believe me, I've worked with people like this.

quote:

---

I feel that experience, or years worked, does--on its own--nothing to show the quality of an employee. Many employees can work at dead-end jobs for their entire lives and not learn the skills necesary to do all that would be required to keep their business running. An example would be a particular employee I work with. She has been in the same sort of dead-end job for most of her life--as far as I know. She can't opperate our cash register, she cannot properly take phone orders, has difficulty understanding promotional policies (like our punch-cards, coupons, etc.), and shows no interest in learning any of the aformentioned things. As proof of her ridiculious lack of knowledge, she thought until a few days ago, that there was no need to charge a customer for potatoes! As if we're the Give-Away-Food-Free Ranch! All this aside, she is a nice person, and gets along with fellow employees and customers very well... but that only goes so far.

---

Well, I'd say that this person is merely a product of her employers.It is management's job to provide the resources for people to learn their jobs, to provide clear performance expectations, and rewards and consequences for meeting/not meeting those expectations.If nobody made it clear to her that that she is supposed to know how to run the register, take phone orders, etc., and doesn't provide her opportunities to learn any of it, then that is the fault of management. If she was told that she needed to learn to do these tasks and was given the training required but still does not perform adequately, then it is also the failure of management to carry out the consequences of poor performance.If someone who goes above and beyond what is expected of them and learns things on their own and is passionate about their job isn't recognized and rewarded for that extra effort, that is also a failure of management. An employer should never allow an employee to work significant hours (like, more than a few minutes) off the clock. Not only is it illegal, it is unethical.Both experience and knowledge are required in a good employee, but both are acquired over time. What cannot be aquired in this way is motivation to learn and then apply what has been learned. That is what the employee brings to this relationship; the willingness to take responsibility for the effectiveness of their training.Workers who are exceptional tend to look at some other workers in askance, wondering why they do or don't do certain things. They think, "It's so obvious."Well, it isn't "obvious" to everyone, and that doesn't make them stupid or bad or slackers. It just means that others may not see what you see due to their lack of experience, or they just don't think in the same way. People, in general, want to do the right thing.Maybe this woman hasn't ever wanted more responsibility. Maybe she only wants a job that she doesn't have to think much about, not a career.Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

Our union book explicitly states that there shall be no free work. Anyone caught doing this will be disciplined. Why would anyone work for free anyway? (Hint: To get in good graces with a Boss, maybe?)

Union Jobs are not always superior to non-union jobs. Many a lazy person can get away with being lazy---for years--and without getting fired.

​

On a non-union job such as yours, however, many a good worker like yourself will get pats on the head and verbal affirmations for years...only to get perhaps a $2.00 raise in five years. This is appauling!

What about trustworthiness?

---

Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber

quote:

---

On a non-union job such as yours, however, many a good worker like yourself will get pats on the head and verbal affirmations for years...only to get perhaps a $2.00 raise in five years. This is appauling!

---

I certainly agree that employers are ethically bound to reward employees for superior effort.However, if the employee in question has not been pro-active on their own behalf, pointing out their great performance and requesting a raise, it is partially their fault. If they DID do these things and were still not given a raise, then it is also their own fault for staying in that job.

there is a difference between seniority and experience, and you conflate this difference with a false definition of experience.seniority is how long you've been around.
experience is what you know after having been around that long.
knowledge is what you know.

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

People people get with the 21st century - if you want to be a "good employee" you need to create the perception that you add value, if you do or don't is neither here or there."hard work" is for mugs*, the smart worker is busy networking and picking up favours to play later. The people who I see crushed under the wheels of the market system because they think the amount of work they do will pay off...* unless you are working for yourself.. Then it's great.

Unless one is working hard to honour God in which case it does matter. But in a worldly sense you are spot on. Hard work is for mugs.

Trust is important as well, in my opinion. At my grocery store, they tend to hire a lot of people from halfway houses and out of prison...since they can get away with paying them $8.00 an hour without ever offering them an opportunity to make more.To be eligible for A.P.C. wages, one must pass a difficult cash register and produce recognition code test. The test is not impossibly difficult so much as it is boring and long and requires great memory and discipline (patience)Without that promotion, everyone is stuck at lower wages which cap out at $10.00 an hour.To me, however...this makes sense, because not everyone can make $15.00 an hour and have the company survive.I guess in a way I am supporting the same system I despise....where a few people make a lot of money and everyone else does not.Its the same only more so in non-union jobs, however. There is a chain of family owned vitamin stores in Denver known as Vitamin Cottage. When my former union employer, Cub Foods, closed I and a few of us applied for Vitamin Cottage and were paid at rates that were $5.00 or more an hour less than we were accustomed to making.This in and of itself was not bad, except that we soon found opportunity to advance limited. This place expected us to bust our butts for them and would never pay us anywhere near what we had made.Only a select few management..(mainly part of the family ownership) made large amounts of money---the same as any small business, I suppose. It made union jobs look a lot better for me, though, and when I went to the grocery store that I now work for, I was able to get prior experience wages thanks to the union.I guess I am a bit wishy washy concerning the union, however. While I accepted them promoting me in, I hesitate to allow them to allow every single other worker in the city who had previously been at a union job the same opportunity. REASON: My hours would get cut and I would make less.In conclusion, I will argue that I am a good worker who is not lazy and who deserves every nickel I make. I am a bit clannish, however, due to a survival instinct. Its a dog eat dog world.WWJD?

The head of the union in Colorado, Ernie Duran, was quoted as saying that seniority is the fairest system that there is.Without seniority, favoritism rules. Favoritism is exactly as it sounds--it favors not only the most ambitious employees and hardest workers so much as it favors those who know how to play inner office politics and/or who are attractive and "in".Seniority can be problematic if an old timer who is lazy stands in the way of young up and comers who want an opportunity to advance, yet seniority also protects those of us who would otherwise be fired based upon our top wages. Any corporation knows that it needs to control labor expenses, and turnover is advantageous for them.Consider the difference between the pay of a veteran worker and a new worker, both who work 30 hours a week:OldTimer: $15.96 an hour, 120 hours paid vacation+Holidays
and $800.00 a month company provided health insurance.(#1 issue)New Worker: $9.50 an hour, no paid days, no insurance.Is it any wonder that the corporations want to trim the fat? Hopefully they won't be able to trim the Phat! Edited by Phat, : clarification

I don't know why you're asking what my brother would do (what would jesse do). He'd say--screw the others. I think. On the other hand, he is violently liberal, which generally means more pay for everyone, but . . ..trust is important, but is it the deciding factor? I guess it depends on the store--wal-mart can afford employees taking stuff for free. REI doesn't have the same protection. But even then, trust isn't the deciding factor.

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

Only trouble with seniority-rules Phat is that it must compete with those businesses for whom willing-to-work-ass-off-wins rules. And the former must lose. Capitalism is like evolution - its the fittest who survive. Unionism is not conducive to survival. It may suit the worker however. But which business is in business for the worker?The goal of a business is to be profitable - not to protect workers lives

dead wrong.if you treat your workers like shit, you get treated like shit right back. If a company want to be profitable, it needs to take care of its workers.part of the success of a company is rooted in its public image. which company sells more--one who cares for the environment or one who doesnt?if the employer doesn't protect its employees, who will want to work for them? Take REI for example. 40 new positions or so open for this year. Over 700 applicants. But who wants to work at safeway, where you're benefits are shit?

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.